Left-Wing Brain, Right-Wing Brain
by Pamela LeaveyWhich wing is your brain?
Exploring the neurobiology of politics, scientists have found that liberals tolerate ambiguity and conflict better than conservatives because of how their brains work.
In a simple experiment reported todayin the journal Nature Neuroscience, scientists at New York University and UCLA show that political orientation is related to differences in how the brain processes information.
Previous psychological studies have found that conservatives tend to be more structured and persistent in their judgments whereas liberals are more open to new experiences. The latest study found those traits are not confined to political situations but also influence everyday decisions.
The results show “there are two cognitive styles — a liberal style and a conservative style,” said UCLA neurologist Dr. Marco Iacoboni, who was not connected to the latest research.
Participants in the study “were college students whose politics ranged from “very liberal” to “very conservative.”"
Based on the results, he said, liberals could be expected to more readily accept new social, scientific or religious ideas.
“There is ample data from the history of science showing that social and political liberals indeed do tend to support major revolutions in science,” said Sulloway, who has written about the history of science and has studied behavioral differences between conservatives and liberals.
Interesting. Of course it is fairly obvious to thinking people that liberals tend to be more open-minded than conservatives on social, scientific and religious ideas. I think most liberals figured that our a long, long time ago.
Filed under: In The News | Get Permalink or trackback |
I find it amusing that Liberals are touting this news that being Liberal is “better” and something to be proud of vs. being Conservative. IMO, it simply confirms much about the sickness of liberal thought. If this sick, debased (i.e., liberal) society is a good thing, I can’t wait to see what the future holds. How much lower can we go? There certainly isn’t any effort to elevate mankind. Oops! Sorry, the “liberal” politically correct (Marxist) police just smacked me. I meant humankind. Just trying to be liberal and think using brainwashed political correctness. As for Democrats supporting feminism. If equality occurs naturally, why does it have to be legislated into everything? Why legislate holding men down? It’s going to come back to bite you in the end.
Er … Barney, you really ought to go back to purple dinosauring, and leave off the trolling. The koolaid you’ve been drinking seems to have deranged you.
And, alas, the cited study doesn’t say anything about derangement, although if your thought processes are typical of conservatives, they really got it wrong about the “structured” part (although, again, they might be right about the “persistent” part).
[...] o, Anything They Say, JammieWearingFool, Balloon Juice, Obsidian Wings and The Democratic Daily Technorati Tags: Politics, Opinion, Republican, Democrat, Bush, [...]
More likely the earliest manifestations of the splitting of the species IMO.
Tom
Barney: Let me start by saying that the U.S. under BUSHCO is too bloodthirsty for my tastes.
That having been said, we are also the wealthiest, most powerful, and most educated (in terms of collective brain power) society in history. Your asking “how low can we go” simply ignores reality.
Let me guess. You’re a regular talk radio listener, aren’t you?