Spiders, Maggots, Politics - Biology's Impact on Political Beliefs

[Werewolf]

A recent study indicates fairly strongly that there may be a biological factor to political beliefs.

Personally I find this interesting and if true it explains a lot. The study looks at how people respond to threatening images. Conservatives respond to a greater extent than liberals. The scientist who conducted the study said:

You often hear that the right is great at "mobilizing their base." Could this be because the right is more sensitive to threats?
I think that's one conclusion. It may also explain why it's self-apparent to people who hold [what are now right-wing positions] that they're really important, and frustrating why it isn't obvious to the other side. It's like, "What part of the difference between a spider and a bunny don't you understand."

... emphasis mine.

That goes a long ways towards explaining/validating a belief I've had for a long time about liberals: They just don't comprehend that in real life bad things can and do happen and that they need to be prepared for it and depend on themselves when bad things happen.

Complete Article: Spiders, Maggots, Politics

[MechAg94]

So it is saying that liberals have lost their natural reactions to threats?  Interesting. 

[MechAg94]

I guess it doesn't surprise me a great deal that biology and instinctual reactions have a hand in your thinking.  I hadn't really thought about how or why that might fit in.  It is an interesting read. 

I do disagree with the notion about the "right" being so great at mobilizing its base.  I don't the right as any better at that than the left most times. 

[roo_ster]

So it is saying that liberals have lost their natural reactions to threats?  Interesting. 

Devolution?

[hardwarehacker]

I am new to this forum -- followed the link from THR.  The article referenced in this thread was interesting enough to make me register and add my $.02 worth.

Looking at the study as a bit of interesting science, I am left wondering why nobody thought to look at this before.  The results raise two questions:

1.  Is this an on/off type gene?  Are people black or white about this, or is there a 'normal' distribution with most people somewhere between the extremes?

2.  Are the strong reactions to 'threatening' images appropriate or are those people moving in the direction of panic?  I hesitate to call either group right or wrong, more like over- and under-reacting to something which is hypothetically threatening.

Thinking of some of the threads on THR, there are always some who seem to genuinely feel that they are surrounded by a world full of strangers who are likely to attack them.  They feel that their very survival literally depends on having enough armament handy at all times to fend off multiple attackers at any moment.  It would be interesting to know if these folks would be the ones who react strongly to the pictures of spiders and maggots.

Going one step further, are people who don't see any difference between a spider and a warm/fuzzy bunny the sorts who find the topics discussed on THR scary and avoid them entirely?  Are they really short on survival instincts?  Do they have other self-preservation responses, such as running and hiding?

In any case, a very interesting article.  Glad I happened to cruise this forum today.

[MechAg94]

I have no idea if it is on/off.  If it is devolution, then it is due to a lack of natural selection or lack of environmental pressure.

They are measuring physical reactions.  I wouldn't think they would be able to tell the difference between hard, measured reaction to a threat and panic without a lot more than just a slide show.  Sweaty hands and such are not panic or fear reactions necessarily.  Dampness can enhance grip and sweat is a reaction to the heat of adrenaline.

The complete lack of reaction I am not sure about. 

[Werewolf]

The complete lack of reaction I am not sure about.

1) Too stupid to be afraid?
2) Blissninny seems to fit i.e. worldview is that of someone living in a pink sky, blue bunny world never having been exposed to threats in the environment?
3) Just plain don't care?

[Iain]

So it is saying that liberals have lost their natural reactions to threats?  Interesting. 

Alternatively, and I'm sure liberals see it this way - conservatives overreact to pictures, the pant-wetters.

Interesting that a study about how people form their political beliefs could be interpreted in different ways.

[longeyes]

Liberals are still around because they are protected by the kindly ministrations of those less liberal than themselves.  All this is fine and good in generally peaceful and prosperous times.  Those are ending, and those who are blind to peril can expect not to leave much DNA for the gene pool.