well wtf... are they not going to show us the results in the article?

FTA, it's more like "not blinking when you're being shouted at".

tgregory: well wtf... are they not going to show us the results in the article?

The abstract here should be a non-subscription link; full article is linked from there but might be.

so, democrats aren't concerned with spiders on their faces? That sure makes me want to trust them with my security.

HEY!!!!

This kind of research has been going on for quite some time. It isn't at all a new idea that our evolution, our biology affects the way we think and the way we perceive the world, and there is a large amount of scientific research that confirms it. What most research these days is trying to figure is how our biology influences us in the decisions we make and how our biology interacts with our environment to influence us.

More probable was that political outlook and startle responses were affected by differences in brain activity, possibly in the amygdala region, which processes emotions such as fear and disgust. "Amygdala activity is also crucial in shaping responses to socially threatening images, and may be connected to political predispositions," they said.

I wouldn't be surprised if they also find increased activity in the hypothalamic and hippocampal regions associated with those responses and decreased activity, or no change in activity, in a lot of the neocortex.

people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views.

This might get ugly.

And here we find the biological basis for the Republican politics of fear versus the progressive politics of hope:

"This would fit with the hypothesis that people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

Translation: conservatives are chickenshiats who are easily manipulated by scary images.

SherKhan: "people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

This might get ugly.

It sounds about right to me, but I woke up early and have the grumps.

captain_heroic44: And here we find the biological basis for the Republican politics of fear versus the progressive politics of hope:

"This would fit with the hypothesis that people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

Translation: conservatives are chickenshiats who are easily manipulated by scary images.

Of course you realize someone could turn this around on you and say that liberals can't see trouble coming their way before it's too late?

Hey, kind of ironic.

If you're going to try to say that you're biology is right and the other person's biology is wrong, you're an idiot. You're both alive, and both biologies have resulted in a rather high success rate.

Pro-active vs. re-active.

SherKhan: Reform * Prosperity * Peace

no NO NO NO

I Said: STAND BACK!

We're doing SCIENCE!

It's funny. When I read that article I thought "that's interesting, I hope people use this to better understand where people are coming form when they disagree."

Then I come to fark. Remember, it's best to demonize your opponent rather than come to understand that a perfectly reasonable person can have logical reasons for disagreeing with you and not be a mongo.

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

It's early for this much stupid

NYZooMan: Pro-active vs. re-active.

Coward vs Measured

NYZooMan: Pro-active vs. re-active.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection.

Thinking is a form of emasculation. (new window)

/That link always comes in handy.

SherKhan: Reform * Prosperity * Peace

Blech.

I'm from Texas and have seen a few spiders in my day (the rabid wolf spiders are the worst, their babies chill on their backs after hatching in a writhing mass of spider), but that thing on yer face looks like an alien larva just crawled out yer nose.

It's time for change!

SherKhan: Reform * Prosperity * Peace

Kill it with fire!

GhostFish: If you're going to try to say that you're biology is right and the other person's biology is wrong, you're an idiot. You're both alive, and both biologies have resulted in a rather high success rate.

Yeah, I think people will look at the results and try to make cheap shots at the other side's expense... But the broader implications are kind of astounding. From an evolutionary perspective, we might always have two markedly different ideologies that will be difficult to appease/compromise with on all major issues. And who's to say one 'deserves' to be right (and perhaps in the long term, to survive) more than the other?

I know this thread won't have any real discussion and will quickly devolve into "McGopher is afraid of his own shadow" and "Obama isn't afraid of brown people because he is one lol," but if there were ever something that would be worth discussing on Fark, this is it. It could reveal some deep and fundamental truths about the state of politics today.

Please keep in mind that had the fear response never evolved, most (if not all) species of animal would not have survived very long. The fear response is adaptive in many circumstances. And since there is massive variation in the expression of genetic traits, variation itself being adaptive for the species, it stands to reason that there would be a group of people who are neurologically predisposed to be more fearful.

Perhaps it is the combined cooperation of those who react strongly and those who aren't as afraid that has gotten us this far.

That explains the chickenhawks in the GOP.

"Yes...we need a war...I just am too busy scared to fight it myself"

FTFAThose with "markedly lower physical sensitivity to sudden noises and threatening visual images" tended to support liberal positions, while those with strong responses tended to be more conservative.

So... Republicans are wussies?

Arbitrator:

I think people will look at the results and try to make cheap shots at the other side's expense



There is no try, only do.

Gah! There's a Jedi on my back! Getitoff, getitoff, getitoff!

Accolade: Perhaps it is the combined cooperation of those who react strongly and those who aren't as afraid that has gotten us this far.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

We've got a winner!

DarnoKonrad:


Ablejack: I want it. But not on my face.

GhostFish: captain_heroic44: And here we find the biological basis for the Republican politics of fear versus the progressive politics of hope:

"This would fit with the hypothesis that people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

Translation: conservatives are chickenshiats who are easily manipulated by scary images.

Of course you realize someone could turn this around on you and say that liberals can't see trouble coming their way before it's too late?

Hey, kind of ironic.

Not being afraid of potential trouble isn't quite the same thing as not being able to see trouble coming. It's more comparable to being able to see trouble coming, and being able to respond rationally.

Arbitrator:

Yeah, I think people will look at the results and try to make cheap shots at the other side's expense... But the broader implications are kind of astounding. From an evolutionary perspective, we might always have two markedly different ideologies that will be difficult to appease/compromise with on all major issues. And who's to say one 'deserves' to be right (and perhaps in the long term, to survive) more than the other?

I know this thread won't have any real discussion and will quickly devolve into "McGopher is afraid of his own shadow" and "Obama isn't afraid of brown people because he is one lol," but if there were ever something that would be worth discussing on Fark, this is it. It could reveal some deep and fundamental truths about the state of politics today.

No! Logic!!! A Farkers... ONE... weakness!!!!

I'm afraid of spiders on faces, but am otherwise pretty liberal. Am I a maverick?

Darconix: So Democrats are sheep willing to be slaughtered by ignoring loud noises and suppressed reactions to stimuli. That explains a lot about you libs.

You're reaching.

Libs ARE much more prone to win Darwin Awards, however. So... we got that going for us.

El_Dan: GhostFish: captain_heroic44: And here we find the biological basis for the Republican politics of fear versus the progressive politics of hope:

"This would fit with the hypothesis that people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

Translation: conservatives are chickenshiats who are easily manipulated by scary images.

Of course you realize someone could turn this around on you and say that liberals can't see trouble coming their way before it's too late?

Hey, kind of ironic.

Not being afraid of potential trouble isn't quite the same thing as not being able to see trouble coming. It's more comparable to being able to see trouble coming, and being able to respond rationally.

I'd say being irrationally unresponsive is the counterpoint to being irrationally responsive.

But don't let me stop you from patting yourself on the back.

Darconix: So Democrats are sheep willing to be slaughtered by ignoring loud noises and suppressed reactions to stimuli. That explains a lot about you libs.

+$.25

Also, your post compared with the one just above it makes a hilarious contrast. You do not come off well.

DarnoKonrad: NYZooMan: Pro-active vs. re-active.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection.

Thinking is a form of emasculation. (new window)

/That link always comes in handy.

What a great article! Now, if someone argues that the Bushiates aren't really fascists, I can point to this link.

More gasoline!

(2.99 gallon...on sales...non-arab source!)
Liberal and Conservative (pops)

GhostFish: captain_heroic44: And here we find the biological basis for the Republican politics of fear versus the progressive politics of hope:

"This would fit with the hypothesis that people who have more fearful responses to perceived threats are more likely to be conservative, while those who have weaker responses develop more liberal views."

Translation: conservatives are chickenshiats who are easily manipulated by scary images.

Of course you realize someone could turn this around on you and say that liberals can't see trouble coming their way before it's too late?

Hey, kind of ironic.

If you're going to try to say that you're biology is right and the other person's biology is wrong, you're an idiot. You're both alive, and both biologies have resulted in a rather high success rate.

No..It would be more like being calm so your are able to have rational thought about what is happening instead of a knee-jerk reaction.

JimStarkBand: Darconix: So Democrats are sheep willing to be slaughtered by ignoring loud noises and suppressed reactions to stimuli. That explains a lot about you libs.

You're reaching.

Libs ARE much more prone to win Darwin Awards, however. So... we got that going for us.

Don't say Darwin!

alwaysmilin: No..It would be more like being calm so your are able to have rational thought about what is happening instead of a knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought isn't the counterpoint to knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought is the middle ground.

Because a test on 46 people in Nebraska can be extrapolated to all of humanity.

/ta da!

So Republicans are driven by fear, and WHARRGARBLing isn't persuasive to Democrats.

The full findings are published in the scientific journal 'Duh'.

GhostFish: alwaysmilin: No..It would be more like being calm so your are able to have rational thought about what is happening instead of a knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought isn't the counterpoint to knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought is the middle ground.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-knee-jerk-reaction.htm

"Thinking through problems before reacting impulsively is the opposite of a knee-jerk reaction."

alwaysmilin: GhostFish: alwaysmilin: No..It would be more like being calm so your are able to have rational thought about what is happening instead of a knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought isn't the counterpoint to knee-jerk reaction.

Calm and rational thought is the middle ground.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-knee-jerk-reaction.htm

"Thinking through problems before reacting impulsively is the opposite of a knee-jerk reaction."

I was thinking that too. A middle grounder wouldn't care one way or the other and would jerk something else.

Finally, scientific evidence to support my contention that conservatives base most of their decisions on the fact taht they are great big pussies. Kinda like how Justice Scalia never bases his decisions on any legal precedent, but soley on "the tewwowists want to hurt me!"

Funny how the findings show conservatives are more scared of spiders, and that liberals aren't as startled by loud noises.

i.e.,subby is a neocon who can't even RTFA to see that liberals aren't oblivious, rather neocons are just pansy-ass to everything.

GhostFish
I'd say being irrationally unresponsive is the counterpoint to being irrationally responsive.
But don't let me stop you from patting yourself on the back

Not being outwardly emotionally responsive isn't the same as being unresponsive. Unless you think that acting like a hysterical woman is considered the only possible response.

Believe it or not, liberals predicted 9-11 scenarios long before you blind neocons did, and that's why neocons like you were so ready to overreact afterward.

jeffwashingdc: Funny how the findings show conservatives are more scared of spiders, and that liberals aren't as startled by loud noises.

i.e.,subby is a neocon who can't even RTFA to see that liberals aren't oblivious, rather neocons are just pansy-ass to everything.

partisan whore.