This article is basically about right-wingers getting angry about The Odyssey while the film has done very well at the box office.
Maybe some right-wing people just like getting angry when there’s really not much reason to get angry.
This article is basically about right-wingers getting angry about The Odyssey while the film has done very well at the box office.
Maybe some right-wing people just like getting angry when there’s really not much reason to get angry.
With like two minutes of training, anyone can identify political affiliation almost instantly from a brain scan, with over 70% accuracy…
This is because of three things.
Someone with a larger prefrontal cortex has more empathy and critical thinking, they’re the progressive ones.
Someone with a large amygdala has a larger fight/flight reaction, those are conservatives.
Roughly 30% of Americans don’t vote, they’re the ones whose political affiliation can’t be determined from a brain scan.
What’s important is those brain differences aren’t innate, and one of my personal favorite studies on London Taxi drivers showed that these types of changes can happen even well into someone 60s.
So practically no one is a lost cause.
The (should be clear) downside, is we stopped teaches kids the shit that grows a pre-frontal cortex decades ago, so we’re going to keep getting fresh waves of conservatives until like a decade after we fix public education.
Tldr:
The more people get angry, the larger their amygdala grows.
The larger the amygdala grows, the guicker they are to anger.
They’re literally addicted to getting pissed off. Oligarchs have to keep giving them imaginary things to be mad about, or they might get mad at the oligarchs. And if they do, the oligarchs are fucked.
Makes sense. Surely political views are most of the time just a product of someone’s life circumstances. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that billionaires are conservatives who want to lower taxes on rich people. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that people who face particular struggles in life (low income, discrimination, dangerous work, health problems) often support left-wing politics.
Leftists are angry literally all the time, and I spend like 90% of my life either in fight or flight, or avoiding and dissociating to avoid the fight or flight of anxiety.
I’m not a conservative.
Your interpretation kinda feels like it may be somewhat reductive. Possibly.
What you think of as a “leftist” is likely just a relatively small but very vocal subculture. Plenty of normal people with no mental illness or unresolved trauma vote for left-wing parties.
It’s not opinion…
It’s verifiably true…
Theres a reason experts always contextualize their statements and explain the nuance and limitations of their research. If thats what the experts are doing, maybe treating every possible interpretation of that research as a “verifiably true” take is not a particularly scientific approach. Especially when the researchers themselves explicitly warn against this EXACT reductive interpretation.
You will notice that the article written on the research and the quotes from the researchers who did the research are infinitely tamer to a point of not being entirely the same claims anymore. Including explicitly telling people not to interpret their research in reductive ways.
(Bold/italicized emphasis mine)
What the original commenter said is a reductive interpretation of the research that extrapolates the findings beyond what the researchers ever would, and is in fact explicitly at odds with the way the researchers told people the research should be interpreted.
Nevermind that the provided source can’t actually tell us much about scientific consensus, nor does it evaluate the quality of the experimental design. And if you ever talk to actual scientists, they generally don’t go around calling anything “verifyably true”, even when there actually is fairly strong scientific consensus.
The results of a paper tell you that THAT experimental design, produced THOSE statistical outputs, and may support the interpretations the researchers put forward. Thats the only thing thats “verifiably true”. Everything past that is essentially layperson narrative crafting, until you get to things like systematic reviews, or meta analysis which can start to communicate scientific consensus, and even then its only the interpretations actually in the paper that have strong evidence, not just any old way you might interpret their findings.
Ok, so either the problem was you didn’t read this:
Or you didn’t understand the verbiage I used?
Either way buddy, you’re not being anywhere near polite enough for me to keep sinking time into trying to help you understand this.
Like, do you understand the problem here?
You’re mad at me trying to explain this in layman’s terms, but you seem to not even understand what the word “innate” means, so obviously the issue is I’m not simplifying this enough for you.
And it’s always pretty much impossible to resolve something like this.
If I do what you ask,you’ll understand even less. If I don’t do what you ask, you’ll get mad because you can’t understand it…
There’s just no path here I can see to explaining this in a way that will make sense to you. I’m afraid I’m going to have to throw in the towel and accept you won’t get this regardless of how much of my time I sink in this.
Some of that is fair, going back and rereading your first comment I think I misunderstood certain aspects of your position from having waded through the pile of discussion from people not just including you
Believe it or not I’m actually a reasonable person, who isn’t angry at you at all. Nor was I really impolite at all at any point frankly. Like, even a little bit. Thinking you might be overstating or extrapolating the research into somewhat sweeping conclusions isnt rude, its just not sharing your exact position.
But I do understand that when you’re arguing with a pile of people on the internet it does change the way you experience what people say and will put you in a headspace where things read as attacks
Have a nice day
I have cptsd, autism and ADHD. Prefrontal cortex issues. I’ve also spent 2/3 of my life in fight or flight, larger amygdala. I have hyper empathy, compassion and decent critical thinking skills. If I can do it, everybody can. Somewhere along the way people choose to be selfish and continue to make that choice all their lives. Don’t give them a pass.
Yep, that’s why it’s a statistical tendency, not a straight-up determining factor. Also, your lifelong suffering gives you more compassion for those who also suffer, another well-studied phenomenon.
That makes sense
Same here, hyper-amygdala because of fibromyalgia (brain is broken), probably hyper-empathy from doing as ton of lsd years back. Not American… Where do people like us fit?
I’m not giving anyone a pass, nor would I be able to if I wanted…
https://www.psypost.org/political-ideology-linked-to-subtle-differences-in-brain-structure-study-finds/
It’s science, whether you agree with it or even understand it, it’s real.
If someone talks about something you don’t know about, they’re almost always going to be willing to answer questions if you ask.
Get upset at what they say and spout uninformed opinions and personal ancedotes at them…
They might block you before even replying so they don’t waste time trying to help you understand things later.
Don’t make other people write you off as a lost cause.
I literally have a degree and years of experience in explaining things to people with issues like you say you’re facing. There’s a very real chance no one else on the fediverse is more equipped to explain shit to you bro.
But just in general, with anyone, if they say something you w never heard that doesn’t make sense, give them the benefit of doubt for at least one reply, ask them what they’re talking about, even mention your own personal experience seems to conflict with it if you think that matters.
Just don’t do what you just did if you actually want to learn shit.
Oh, a degree, well that definitely makes me think you know everything, fine, let’s all bow down to the ultimate authority here.
Fuck you, dude.
Removed by mod
928 Dutch college students hardly comprises a definitive sample. It’s perhaps an interesting question to explore further, but the unwarranted authoritative, arrogant explanation given by OP is wild lmao.
60% of the time, it works every time! Ahhh I just can’t deal with this nonsense, why must the dumbest people always be the loudest?
Yes, but what about the shape of their skull?
Some well-placed taps with a dead blow mallet will take those dents right out.
Ah, a fellow retrophrenologist.
Horseshite, he has the problems, you do not. You are not qualified to make an opinion and also, from your language you sound like, in full circle, you are talking horseshite…
Oh…
I forgot the only people with issues are the ones that randomly claim to have them on social media.
And since I didn’t say I have any in my last comment, clearly I’m just normal as fuck over here.
This whole comment just ignored what he said…
Looks like phrenology is back.
Neat!
I get to link a third academic study about this.
https://news.uwgb.edu/phlash/mediacoverage/09/27/a-grey-matter-nature-nurture-and-the-study-of-forming-political-leanings-the-guardian/
For other studies:
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24987459
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24989298
Hopefully that explains it in a way you can understand. I won’t be available to answer any more of your questions, and despite the first study on this being 15 years ago, I’ve never seen anyone else being it up…
So really, best of luck finding someone else willing to help you understand this.
Love to watch someone bust out the calipers when they talk politics.
I hear the low sloped forehead and close-set eyeballs are a clear indication of Paleo-Libertarianism. Meanwhile, if your second toe is longer than your big toe, there’s a good chance you voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2008 primary.
The only thing more addictive is medicalizing your ideological beliefs.
Poking someone with a stick, shouting “Why are you mad, tho? Why are you mad?!”, and then calling them Trump voters when they take a swing at you. Maybe calling in a body-language expert to do a riff on the Chris Rock bit - “Does anyone notice how Democrats walk like THAT but Republicans walk like THIS?”
Absolute bottom-of-the-barrel eugenics-tier propaganda.
Of course you’d say that, you have the brainpan of a stagecoach tilter!
Or, just look it up.
Flipping through my copy of The Bell Curve smugly
Lemmy is literally one giant amydala…
A lot of days I feel like Cornell Sanders from The Waterboy over here…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu7A8LIzL1o
Too many people just don’t want to actually think, if it doesn’t match their opinions they not only refuse to believe it, they insist on telling everyone they don’t even understand it.
Wake up, babe! New phrenology just dropped.
The great part about so many studies being done on this, is I can just go grab a different peer reviewed academic study every time someone doesn’t believe it…
I already linked someone else what I was talking about.
So I’ll give you a different study where they studied people with lesions in either area, and discovered once again that the size/health/ability of those regions correlates to political leaning.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rstb/article/376/1822/20200137/31478/Toward-a-neuropsychology-of-political-orientation
What ill never understand, is why people think literal physical changes to the brain wouldn’t correlate to political reasoning…
What do you think pushes people to one side of the aisle or the other besides differences in our brains?
Ok, so first, I’ve read it but not any of the citations or any other follow up work… but that study is about people with lesions in their brain, what about people with healthy brains? Can you identify conservatives with just a scan if they don’t have a brain injury? I still doubt it, much less ‘anyone with two minutes of training’. Or maybe you mean that half (if not more) of the world population suffers some kind of brain lesion or disorder? And that sample size seems also quite small and, without really being able to actually tell, not very random (the groups with lesions are overwhelmingly white, while the control group isn’t…).
Don’t get me wrong, I do think that conservatism is a disease/disorder. But a social, memetic one. That can’t be diagnosed or cured like physical or mental problems.
Anyway, it doesn’t convinced me, but it doesn’t matter cause I don’t really have any use for that information since I can’t scan people’s brains, modify them, or cure injuries. But I’m sure the fascists taking ahold of the world will be (are?) very interested on this bullshit, and I won’t be surprised if they end up putting anyone with a functional prefrontal cortex down.
Well, I literally said it was in another comment already…
https://lemmy.world/post/49973823/24987459
Now, personally if someone said that, and I didn’t see it…
I would assume it was because for some reason I couldn’t see the comments from the other person.
So I would sign out, and then be able to see the comments.
If you still have questions after reading that comment and that study, no worries
Take a deep breath, remember I’m not arguing with anyone, I’m explaining scientifically repeatable experiments, and ask your questions.
I was just taking a look at that. Well, not the article but the actual study it links…
Don’t get so sassy, I think asking someone not only to read a scientific article to answer to your comment but also to go to the other comments to read another is a bit too much to ask. But I’ve done it anyway… and now I’m doubting that you did read them. From this second article:
So you take a deep breath and read more carefully what you post before making bullshit assertions like ‘With like two minutes of training, anyone can identify political affiliation almost instantly from a brain scan, with over 70% accuracy…’.
Correct, this very much sounds like pseudo-science. I don’t even need to read the studies, all I know is that any self-respecting academic/scientist would call this out for the horseshite it is. If I didn’t know better, it’s a facist in a trenchcoat.
Well, that was obvious already…
Yeah I don’t read psuedo-horseshite. Let me come back sober and I’ll read it and deconstruct it. But I really can’t be fucked because again, you’re talking shit out of your arse…
Weird…
Personally I think it’s an entitled opinion to ask the same question some one else already has and expect a bespoke answer…
Agree to disagree I guess
Best of luck finding someone else to answer your questions. Frankly, it doesn’t matter to me that much if you understand, I was just trying to help you, and clearly you don’t want any help.
And don’t forget, you started with:
I gave you plenty of chances to learn
Why are you acting like this? No one is asking you for your long-winded explanations. It feels like the only reason you’re giving them is so you can tell everyone else how stupid they are for not having the specific degree and experience you do.
“I gave you plenty of chances to learn”?? You sound like a supervillain.
Why am I upset that people refuse to believe science when it disagrees with their pre-concieved notions and quickly devolve the conversation to junior high level personal insults?
To quote Angelica Pickles:
deleted by creator