Conservatives - born that way?

[bankside]

Wonderful observations - - if I had a point in posting this, it would be that good decisions are based on understanding and part of that understanding is knowing where our feelings of the topic are derived.

Can we be subjective if our rational fear of change is dampened or if our irrational fear of change is being heightened? Would knowing that we are going to fight change allow us to look beyond our fears to seek value. Would knowing that our openness to change allow us to look beyond our desire to assess the damage change causes?

How can the merits of an action be properly assessed if the judges are automatically prejudiced towards one side or the other? And, as you pointed out, is evolution saying that compromise is the best solution?

thank you for commenting - I do appreciate your thoughts,

do celebrate your life, please.

Rand

Fortunately (oh, and incidentally thanks Kulindahr for pouring the cold water of reason on our otherwise delightful sojourn into hyperbole and satire ), anyway, fortunately reason is immune to the instinctual reactions that might heighten or dampen fear responses.

To offer a culinary example: I have a pair of kitchen thermometers, one of which is calibrated for the temperatures likely to be found in the fridge or freezer (15° to -40°), the other is scaled for the oven (100° to 250°).

Neither of them is particularly suited to measuring room temperature: the temperature shows up but it isn't on the marked part of the dial, and presumably it's unmarked because they can't assure the calibration in that range. However between the two of them, if I leave them on the counter, I can interpolate what's going on with the temperature in my house.

Yes, I lead an exciting life.

Anyway, you can take that as a proxy for sensitivity to fear: in one case it falls below the range of detection, in the other case it registers strongly.

A conservative amygdala is just a fear sensor with a low detection threshold to produce a signal. That does not mean it is worthless. It just has to be kept in perspective...and out of public office....

 

[Rand]

While I used the comment to thank Bankside - I did note that I wrote "subjective" when I meant objective! But he was correct in that it was the satire and even irony that was meant to be elevated.

 

[Kulindahr]

Fortunately (oh, and incidentally thanks Kulindahr for pouring the cold water of reason on our otherwise delightful sojourn into hyperbole and satire ), anyway, fortunately reason is immune to the instinctual reactions that might heighten or dampen fear responses.

To offer a culinary example: I have a pair of kitchen thermometers, one of which is calibrated for the temperatures likely to be found in the fridge or freezer (15° to -40°), the other is scaled for the oven (100° to 250°).

Neither of them is particularly suited to measuring room temperature: the temperature shows up but it isn't on the marked part of the dial, and presumably it's unmarked because they can't assure the calibration in that range. However between the two of them, if I leave them on the counter, I can interpolate what's going on with the temperature in my house.

Yes, I lead an exciting life.

Anyway, you can take that as a proxy for sensitivity to fear: in one case it falls below the range of detection, in the other case it registers strongly.

Interesting analogy. It suggests that neither liberals nor conservatives are particularly well suited for dealing with reality unless they can put aside their subjective tendencies to see things in a certain range.

A conservative amygdala is just a fear sensor with a low detection threshold to produce a signal. That does not mean it is worthless. It just has to be kept in perspective...and out of public office....

A liberal amygdala is just a fear sensor with a high detection threshold to produce a signal. That does not mean it is worthless. It just has to be kept in perspective...and out of public office....

So conservatives get aggressive when there's really no danger (Iraq) while liberals trust when it doesn't make sense (Chamberlain).

Yay.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Until there's a cure, deportation is the only interim option.

 

[Kulindahr]

Until there's a cure, deportation is the only interim option.

North Korea seems to be the deportation destination of choice by liberals. So I suggest we deport liberals to Afghanistan -- it will give them a place to really care about.

 

[kallipolis]

So conservatives get aggressive when there's really no danger (Iraq) while liberals trust when it doesn't make sense (Chamberlain).

With respect to Neville Chamberlain, he certainly never trusted Hitler.

Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement to buy time for the United Kingdom to re-arm. While Hitler was building an enormous military force, the United Kingdom had been feeding its people with butter. Butter, before guns. Further, there was a very definite anti war mood throughout the United Kingdom, and The Empire as indeed there was in the United States, immediately prior Pearl Harbor.

 

[Kulindahr]

With respect to Neville Chamberlain, he certainly never trusted Hitler.

Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement to buy time for the United Kingdom to re-arm. While Hitler was building an enormous military force, the United Kingdom had been feeding its people with butter. Butter, before guns. Further, there was a very definite anti war mood throughout the United Kingdom, and The Empire as indeed there was in the United States, immediately prior Pearl Harbor.

So much for classic examples......