Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Liberals are more emotional study finds

#1
Magical Realist Offline
"In line with previous scientific knowledge on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs, the first three studies illustrate that induced emotions have a greater influence on leftists' positions than on rightists' positions, even though the experimental manipulations affected levels of emotion similarly for all participants. Even the third study, in which a negative emotion was induced, led to changes in policy support only among leftists, as was the case with empathy in the first two studies. Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists, whereas induced despair (study 3) decreased support for conciliatory policies only among leftists.

Studies 4 through 6 looked at real-world scenarios, and found that Jewish-Israeli leftists' policy support was more related to both empathy and anger than rightists', at times of both peace efforts (study 4) and war (study 5). The final study found the same pattern of results with regard to fear among a different population, demonstrating that the interactive effect of ideology and emotion on policy support is not limited to a given population nor to emotions typically associated with leftist ideology.

Ms. Pliskin and her colleagues believe that these results may apply to other cultures, including liberals and conservatives in the U.S. "We would expect to find similar results among rightists and leftists in other cultures, including conservatives and liberals in the U.S., because of the cross-cultural similarities in the superstructure of ideology and the needs associated with rightist versus leftist ideology--and because of how these factors relate to emotional processes and their outcomes." But Ms. Pliskin does caution that more research would need to be done to determine if there are cultural factors that may limit or increase observed left-right differences."====http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2...110314.php

I would stipulate that the study is incomplete because it emphasized primarily empathic emotions. I think negative emotions play a bigger role among conservatives--emotions like anger, disgust, fear, and moral blame. The teapartiers fear big government. The gun nuts fear being a victim of a crime or government tyrrany. The nativists judge illegal immigrants as immoral and inferior. The anti-gay groups harbor disgust and hatred against people due to their sexual orientation. The nationalists fear other nations like China and Russia. Capitalists fear poverty and socialism. It's still emotions here, only not those of compassion and altruism.
#2
Yazata Offline
(Nov 9, 2014 10:43 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: "In line with previous scientific knowledge

Calling this kind of stuff "scientific knowledge" just verifies my growing skepticism about the so-called 'social sciences'.

Quote:on the relative rigidity of rightist ideological beliefs

What is a "rightest ideological belief"?

Belief in individual liberty? Opposition to top-down statism, and hence support for small-government that doesn't try to regulate every imaginable aspect of life? Belief that soverignty ultimately resides in the people themselves, and not in the supposedly superior elites who desire to be their rulers?

If so, then I think that it will be hard to make a convincing case for their relative 'rigidity'. (The reverse is more often the case.) If not, then I suspect that 'rightest' is probably being defined in such a way that it's something of a hostile caricature.

Quote:Induced empathy toward both Palestinians (study 1) and asylum-seekers (study 2) led to increased support for conciliatory and humanitarian policies among leftists

Doesn't that already stack the deck? Palestinians and asylum-seekers are already darlings of the left. Suppose these examples were replaced with small business people, gun-owners, middle-class taxpayers or even (horrors!) Southern Baptist clergymen, wouldn't it suddenly be the 'conservatives' who are displaying more conciliation and sympathy?  

Quote:I would stipulate that the study is incomplete because it emphasized primarily empathic emotions. I think negative emotions play a bigger role among conservatives--emotions like anger, disgust, fear, and moral blame.

Try smoking a cigarette or using a plastic bag. And God (oops! that's another one) help you if the moral watchmen think that you're a 'racist' or a 'sexist' or even worse, a 'Republican'. Moral blame is what motivates the left, it's what they live for.

Condemning civilization as it currently exists (unequal! exploitive! biased!) is what justifies all the top-down social-change schemes that promise to create a new utopia on Earth, the secularized vision of God's promised Kingdom (except without the God guy).

In the meantime, the belief seems to be that anything that isn't regulated by some government agency somewhere will go straight to perdition. Every permissible behavior must carefully defined by law. If the little people were to be given their heads, given the right to conduct their own lives as they themselves see fit, then they would immediately go berserk. 

There's a fundamental fear there, a basic distrust of humanity itself.
#3
Magical Realist Offline
Quote:In the meantime, the belief seems to be that anything that isn't regulated by some government agency somewhere will go straight to perdition. Every permissible behavior must carefully defined by law. If the little people were to be given their heads, given the right to conduct their own lives as they themselves see fit, then they would immediately go berserk.

We see what happens when corporations and the masses are left to themselves. They trample on the rights of the minorities and the weak and the disadvantaged. And this is all lauded by conservatives in the name of some sort of natural selection process. The strong survive because they are strong. The weak get weeded out because they are weak. Is the system slanted toward the powerful and the wealthy? Ofcourse it is. Thus we need another agency (the government) to balance this all out. We need laws and regulations to ensure corporations don't pollute our air and water and make carcinogenic products. We need laws to protect nonsmokers from smokers who don't give a shit about forcing other people to inhale their smoke. We need laws to keep people from discriminating against other races, sexes, ethnicities, religious beliefs, and sexual orientations because the masses WILL discriminate if left to their own devices. Human behavior, particularly of the materialist oriented, is selfish, greedy, and opportunistic. It doesn't care how it gets its money, even if other people are hurt or oppressed in the process. That's why we need government regulation. And history bears this out. Were it not for unions and government regulations we'd all be working at the age of 12 in unhealthy sweat shops for 12 hours a day at below minimum wage without benefits. That's the way of capitalism afterall. Money money money, with no consideration for the needs of the workers.


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Fossil research affected by significant colonial bias, study finds C C 1 99 Jan 8, 2022 02:56 AM
Last Post: Syne
  Angry politicians make angry voters, new study finds C C 0 63 Jul 20, 2021 03:29 AM
Last Post: C C
  People more afraid of catching COVID-19 are more judgemental, study finds C C 1 129 Jun 9, 2021 04:21 AM
Last Post: Syne
  Emotional correctness: Runaway fragility of student psyche threatens academic quality C C 0 660 Aug 14, 2015 04:22 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)