This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Are Liberals Driven By a Desire for Novel Pleasure and Conservatives by Fear of Pain? If So, How Does that Affect Investing, Politics and Happiness?
Preface: This essay slams partisan liberals and partisan conservatives. If
you think I'm unfairly criticizing "your" side, it might be because
you're falling into a self-destructive pattern of defending your narrow
worldview, which is the whole point of this discussion.
In addition, I would bet that the "conservatives" showing fear are not really conservatives, but
Republican party loyalists and authoritarians, and likewise the "liberals" showing a lack of
discipline are not true progressives but naive, unthinking Democratic party loyalists.
Indeed, some of the bravest people I've ever met are libertarians, and
some of the most disciplined people I've ever met are progressives.
Remember, poll
after poll shows that both national parties are deeply unpopular with
an electorate looking for something new and different. It is those who love one of the two mainstream parties who are the extremists.
Numerous studies have claimed to show that conservatives tend to be more fearful than liberals.
For example, Wired reported in 2008:
In
reflex tests of 46 political partisans, psychologists found that
conservatives were more likely than liberals to be shocked by sudden
threats.
Accompanying the physiological differences were deep
differences on hot-button political issues: military expansion, the
Iraq war, gun control, capital punishment, the Patriot act, warrantless
searches, foreign aid, abortion rights, gay marriage, premarital sex
and pornography.
"People are experiencing the world,
experiencing threat, differently," said University of Nebraska
political scientist John Hibbing. "We have very different physiological
orientations."
The study, published today in Science, has not yet been duplicated, but adds a potentially troubling piece to the puzzle of biology, behavior and politics.
Earlier studies have linked
reflexive responses to threats — which for testing purposes take the
form of loud noises and graphic images — with existing states of
heightened anxiety.
Though the Science study’s authors
cautioned against an overly broad interpretation of their findings, the
results suggest that fear leads to political conservatism.
***
Study co-author Kevin Smith, also a University of Nebraska political
scientist ... agreed that "people with stronger responses are more
sensitive to potential threats in their environment."
And the Telegraph reported last December:
Scientists
have found that people with conservative views have brains with
larger amygdalas, almond shaped areas in the centre of the brain often
associated with anxiety and emotions.
On the otherhand, they have a smaller anterior cingulate, an area at
the front of the brain associated with courage and looking on the
bright side of life.
The "exciting"
correlation was found by scientists at University College London who
scanned the brains of two members of parliament and a number of
students.
They found that the size of the two areas of the brain directly related to the political views of the volunteers.
However as they were all adults it was hard to say whether their brains
had been born that way or had developed through experience.
Prof Geraint Rees, who led the research, said: "We were very surprised
to find that there was an area of the brain that we could predict
political attitude.
"It is very surprising because it does
suggest there is something about political attitude that is encoded
in our brain structure through our experience or that there is
something in our brain structure that determines or results in
political attitude."
A Good Thing or a Bad Thing?
Only time will tell whether the above-described studies are accurate or not.
Assuming they are true for the purpose of this essay raises the question: is more fear a good thing or a bad thing?
On
the one hand, there are real dangers in the world, and Daddy and Mommy
won't always be there to deal with them. The government cannot fix all
of our problems ... we're going to have to deal with most of it for
ourselves.
Our fear instinct is there to protect us and to
spur us into appropriate action. If we never felt fear, we would get hit
by trucks or poisoned by food that's gone bad.
As the Wired article notes:
"Threatening
situations do indeed seem to increase people’s affinity for
politically conservative opinions, leaders, and parties," said New
York University psychologist John Jost.
So
there is an argument that conservatives are people who have had to face
dangers - perhaps early in life - and so have a more realistic view of
the world.
On the other hand, too much fear makes us stupid, and makes us easy prey to those who are trying to manipulate us.
As I've repeatedly noted, the government exaggerates the threat of terror for political purposes.
As the Wired article quoted above notes:
Study
co-author Kevin Smith, also a University of Nebraska political
scientist, demurred at making such a connection. "Historically speaking,
politicians have appealed to the ‘be afraid’ response in the
electorate in an attempt to mine votes," he said. "But in terms of
going from campaigning to what we did in the laboratory, that’s a large
leap."***
Asked whether the findings imply a
fearmongering strategy for conservatives, New York University
psychologist David Amodio responded, "Yes.
And some people believe that they are actively using this strategy."
The Bush administration has been accused of exploiting fears, though it’s hardly a new approach.
"The whole aim of practical politics," wrote journalist gadfly H.L. Mencken,
"is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins."
Jost condemned such tactics. "From an ethical standpoint, conservative
campaigns should not exploit feelings of fear in the general
population," he said.
Are Liberals Novelty-Seekers?
There is some evidence that liberals are more motivated by novelty. For example, the Telegraph article notes:
The
results, which will be published next year, back up a study that showed
that some people were born with a "Liberal Gene" that makes people
more likely to seek out less conventional political views.
The gene, a neurotransmitter in the brain called DRD4, could even be stimulated by the novelty value of radical opinions, claimed the researchers at the University of California
People
who are continually driven to seek novelty will make bad decisions, and
may be more likely to lose money on "novel" investment gambles, to
contract sexually-transmitted diseases, and to face other negative
consequences.
Get Smarter, and Be Happier and More Successful
We
make better decisions when we aren't driven to obsession by a desire
for novelty or scared out of our wits by our own shadows.
For
one thing, we become less susceptible to manipulation. For example, the
powers-that-be try to divide us and demonize the "other side" so that
we won't realize how much we all agree on. See this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this. We can fix our nation if we focus on what we all want.
Moreover, if we reduce the amount that yearnings or fear drive and control us, then we will have more control over our actions. For example, we will make better investing decisions.
And
we will feel better if we lessen our polarity of being either a
yearning-or-desire driven person. As Buddhist psychology has taught for
thousands of years (and as several western psychiatrists have
confirmed), the things that make us most unhappy are:
- Yearning for things we want but can't have
- Trying to avoid things we are afraid of but can't get away from
- And trying to space out and avoid being present in our lives so as to avoid reality
We will be happy to the extent we:
- Let go of the things we want but can't have, and instead appreciate what we do have
- Accept the scary things which we can't avoid
- And are present to the events and people around us
(And see this.)
- advertisements -
No, GW, the status quo MUST go on. We must embrace the two-party system with yet more vigor through complete and blind servitude. Only by doing so, will this turn out well. <vomits up blue pill>
Exactly. +2100, or somewhere around there..
Thanks for shitting out another douchy HuffPo experience.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/government-and-big-business-are-gaming-social-media#comment-975799
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/government-and-big-business-are-gaming-social-media#comment-975855
I would have thought that most conservatives have an enlarged part of the brain called the Shanana globen - the part that yearns them to be back in the 1950s.
As for too many libs - their just fucking granola loony.
The most novel thing liberals can come up with is endless new tax to siphon from your wallet.
I see that you are a creative thinker! Us liberals are tired of working 50+ hour work weeks to maintain less-than status quo. Hey, count your blessings Mr. conservative and be thankful this isn't 800 years ago where I would just crush your skull and take everything from you.
One of the reasons we conservatives own guns is to blast off parasite losers whose only way of living is robbing from others. So are you trying to present us a live shooting practice or what?
you sound more like a nazi then a conservative. just sayin...
Let's see, so those who live by sucking from others are praised as 'liberals' and yet those who are willing to protect own belongings are dismissed as 'Nazis'.
A bizarre and perverted liberal world we live in, ain't it?
"those who live by sucking from others are praised as 'liberals'"
I thought most banksters and Warren Buffett were conservatives?
Great pseudonym. Buffet supported the Dims lately, and also went on about what a farce it is that his secretary pays more taxes (in percent) that he does personally. But all that is probably just good for business, you know, deflecting lib anger towards non-Buffet rich people.
This would be the research of liberal researchers?
GW, you need a job. You have WAY too much free time.
he s the charlie sheen of ZH. is tyler courting aol????
He has a job........He's being paid by the hour by Tyler to cut & past just to create more hits. Why else would he spend 12-14 hours a day blathering away like this.................
and you get paid nothing because you aren't good enough
This sort of thing fits into the same category as Myers-Briggs personality theory. "SJ" wants traditional while "SP" want experiences. It is kind of hard wired into us.
Yes but most people are moderates, who are socially liberal and politically conservative so this 'study' only reflects the attitudes of a small minority who are very strongly biased in 1 or the other direction
Actually, most people are delusional. There's the rub.
Take opinions on Social Security or Medicare. Even "tea partiers" poll as believing these programs must be untouchable, and naturally lefties poll they should be made more generous and available. And yet these massive programs are unsustainable even with all other governement functions zeroed, which isn't going to happen.
Just leverage the fuck outta yourself and BTFD and you'll be able to buy anything.