Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible?

Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

MmeGigs -> Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 2:57:47 PM)
I posted this to a thread a while back, but I came in late and I think that everyone had wandered off to other arguments. Some rather nasily partisan posts lately got me wanting to bring it up again. Confirmation Bias and Political Groupthink They hooked some partisan folk - an equal number of Ds and Rs - up to MRI to see what was going on in their brains in response to political stimuli and found that the emotional centers of their brains were very active while the reasoning centers were pretty quiet. They found that people who strongly identified with a party get an emotional pay-off from criticizing the other side and letting their own side off the hook. "Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones," It kind of shook me up when I read about this just before the 2006 election. I started thinking about it when I found myself getting wound up about political stuff - that when that happened I was running on emotion, not reason, and it was time to step back and take another look at the issue. I've considered myself an independent for a long time, but feel even less connection with any party now that I've started picking things apart. There isn't any party out there that has a platform that I can really get on board with, and the strong supporters of every party really turn me off. Finding this information gave me a different point of view about the anger and ugliness that a lot of strongly partisan folk of any stripe display. I've always been dismayed and a bit embarrassed when someone expresses a point of view I basically agree with in a combative and ugly way. I don't want my opinion to be dismissed because some jerk shot his/her mouth off. After reading this study, I've become more frustrated when the folks I disagree with on an issue are combative and ugly. I don't want to write folks who disagree with me off as idiots, which is easy to do when their volunteer spokespeople post angry rants. I want to hear what the reasonable folks who disagree with me feel should be done to address the issue, but they are drowned out by the voices of the irrational partisans. So what do you folks think when you see these ugly, angry political posts? You can see the emotional pay-off thing working in many of these threads. There are folks who are obviously getting off on the stimulation of their orbital frontal cortex and ventral striatum. Do you find these posts repulsive? Informative? Entertaining? Convincing? Do you avoid them like the plague? Do you feel differently about those that are from "Us" than those that are from "Them"? What do you think can be done to encourage more rational discussion? I'm honestly not trying to be snarky here - I'd just really like to see more positive, results-oriented discussion. I think that a lot of folks with ideas about issues don't participate in the discussion because of the partisan crapola, and I think that's a shame.

Crush -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 3:09:00 PM)
Definitely....it isn't about discussion, debate and conversation...

popeye1250 -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 3:15:03 PM)
Of course they're incompatable. You can't be a "partisan" and also have an open mind.

Irishknight -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 6:26:26 PM)
It is easier to oppose the other side than to listen to them. It is easier to blame them when something goes wrong than to work to make it right in the first place.

TheHeretic -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 7:47:27 PM)
I saw that article a few days ago. I thought about starting a thread with it, but figured I'd just get called a neocon, again...

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 9:22:51 PM)
Basically, MmeGigs, yeah. Completely incompatible. How can one engage in a rational dialogue with those who support Intelligent Design, deny GCC, are anti-stem-cell research, deny White Privilege, believe the solution to all problems is to cut taxes, dismantle government (except for the military), invade sovereign nations, export jobs to Laos, and let business police itself (Polly want a peanut?)? It simply isn't possible. It's in the Bible. [8D] The Obama administration is finding out that trying to reach across the aisle is a more useless, futile activity than carrying beer to germany in one's luggage. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/13/obamas-bipartisanship/ This in the comments to the aforementioned article: "Like I said the other day, just as it takes two to fight, it also takes two to work together. The Rethuglic party attitude since Newt Gingrich and his ‘contract’ in ‘94 is this: Democrats are the enemy, enemies can not be negotiated with, they can only be destroyed. Rethugs have sewn the wind with this policy, let them reap the whirlwind." Go to NPR, there's an audio of an interview with Joe Biden wherein, right at 30 minutes in, he describes what it was like trying to work with the Newts. The Repubs effectively disenfranchised cloes to half of the US population, solely to establish and keep "a permanent Republican majority". It's never been about what is good for the country, or what works; it's all about creating a Right-wing USSR.

kdsub -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 9:39:58 PM)
Does this news surprise anyone? I would think it obvious to any fair minded thinking person. Any time a deeply held view is attacked we don't waste time analyzing the opposing view...we attack back...it is in our nature. But I think what the article fails to say is most people do absorb reasonable arguments. Later, without the heat of argument, we may change our way of thinking. Butch

OneMoreWaste -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 10:29:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs You can see the emotional pay-off thing working in many of these threads. There are folks who are obviously getting off on the stimulation of their orbital frontal cortex and ventral striatum. Totally [:-] The "Two Party System" is all about creating the us-vs-them, go-team-go mentality. I truly believe that if most Party cheerleaders on either side sat down and really looked at what "their team" has done for them lately, they'd burn all their team jerseys (and FINALLY take the fucking 2004 election bumper stickers off their cars... I mean, holy shit, guys). Truly understanding the issues facing a modern Republic, and how so many of those issues are inter-related, is sadly beyond the average person (partly because they just don't have the time). "I'm on the Blue team, and we hate the Red team!", on the other hand, is what we've all been conditioned to relate to from childhood. No contest, really.

MarsBonfire -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 10:38:42 PM)
OTOH, it's always good to get the emotional crap out of the way, then move onto the constructive arguments. If being partisan is a lower form of irrational thinking, then in CDC terms, there are a good many posters on here who are "carriers." (at times, myself included.) If you really, really wanted to make Collar Me a good and happy place, the management would simply ban political threads outright. Other forums I belong to have done so, and no one is the worse off. There ARE forums specifically set up to cater to those who have the uncontrolled NEED to spout off about whatever talking points that have been handed to them by some radio host. Sorry, but this IS a sex oriented forum, and frankly the political vitrol serves no purpose here other than to cause members to bitch at each other. The opinions expressed here on these subjects changes no one's minds, and inform no one of any new, verifiable facts. If the CM admin announced tomorrow that all political BS was verbotten, I'd be perfectly fine with that! Maybe then we can all get back to talking about how great it is to get tied up, and lick someone's boots... (you know, the GOOD things in life!)

MrRodgers -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 11:00:18 PM)
Yes, the emotions in partisanship breeds cynicism, cynicism that...reinforces partisanship.

TheHeretic -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/13/2009 11:01:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire Sorry, but this IS a sex oriented forum, and frankly the political vitrol serves no purpose here other than to cause members to bitch at each other. LOL! And the folks around here don't bitch at each other about those topics? Sex oriented? What about those who insist WIITWD isn't about sex at all? Frankly, I think the studies findings would be just the same if they hooked the "twue" up to the same instruments and measured them against the bedroom kinksters.

corysub -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 2:21:55 AM)
I think the passion shown here reflects the frustration many of us feel with a government that has always been bloated but over the past ten to twenty years has become more and more dysfunctional. We have politicians that squander the debt rating of Americans to borrow money for adventures that lead to polarization whether it be a war, social engineering, or just outright stupid projects that go well beyond their constitutional rights, in my opinion. For eight years it was the hysterical rantings of the liberals who would critique and blame George Bush for all of their disappointments in life. Now, the liberals are no longer the critics, they are the ones in power, and "neocons" like me will be ranting about Obama and how he has put the country on the path to economic ruin and social upheaval, aided by Pelosi and Reid. Some of the commentary from the left has been over the top. I am sure over the next four years, liberals or those that disagree, will find that comments from people like me will be perceived the same way. The internet is actually the only true democracy left in this country, a place where anyone with a two hundred dollar pc or access to a pc in the library has a voice on a level playing field. There are no disadvantaged people here...only mentally challanged people. Sorry, could not resist. [:)]

ScooterTrash -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 3:52:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire OTOH, it's always good to get the emotional crap out of the way, then move onto the constructive arguments. If being partisan is a lower form of irrational thinking, then in CDC terms, there are a good many posters on here who are "carriers." (at times, myself included.) If you really, really wanted to make Collar Me a good and happy place, the management would simply ban political threads outright. Other forums I belong to have done so, and no one is the worse off. There ARE forums specifically set up to cater to those who have the uncontrolled NEED to spout off about whatever talking points that have been handed to them by some radio host. Sorry, but this IS a sex oriented forum, and frankly the political vitrol serves no purpose here other than to cause members to bitch at each other. The opinions expressed here on these subjects changes no one's minds, and inform no one of any new, verifiable facts. If the CM admin announced tomorrow that all political BS was verbotten, I'd be perfectly fine with that! Maybe then we can all get back to talking about how great it is to get tied up, and lick someone's boots... (you know, the GOOD things in life!) BUT, BUT, BUT....if we spout political crap on here, we are doing it among those who at least partially like-minded. If we had to do this on a political forum, we would have nothing in common....lmao.

TNstepsout -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 8:46:50 AM)
I think the article is absolutely correct. That's why I distrust any person or group that encourages people to be loyal to an ideology, philosophy, religion, group, nation or culture at the expense of reason and truth. Blind devotion to anything is extremely dangerous.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 9:31:29 AM)
FR: Rain. Parade. Please read the longish response to the article by the poster: Posted by: WiSH Author Profile Page \| July 6, 2006 9:29 PM Some extracts: Read that again; it does not mean we can tell anything about Bush supporters, or Kerry supporters, or Republicans or Democrats. ... we still have to wait until we can see the data to draw even the tiniest conclusion: ... What does "strong" mean? This is one of the few things Westen appears to have controlled for. And yet, did Westen et al take any measures of the "strength" of the support (amount of money given to candidates, time spent campaigning, etc.)? Out of curiosity, did they all even vote? ... One must be very careful about drawing conclusions about "function", even from functional magnetic resonance imaging. fMRI, a fabulous technology, basically measures blood flow; its images represent increased metabolic activity. This does not mean that you are looking at brain function; it means that you are looking at increased blood flow, which likely correlates with brain activity, which likely relates with brain function. ... In short, this study appears at best flawed, and at worst may be a load of rubbish. But why is this all politically bogus? Because the study gets generalised: at this point, I hope from the criticisms above you will see that we need a ton more information before we could possible assess its generalisability. But clearly, people are already generalising. ... Westen's study appears to be neither a critique of the problem nor an explanation of it, but a symptom of the problem. Firm

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 2:31:44 PM)
I love it when someone posts, and then becomes a point of fact about the discussion. Your comments are good examples of what the OP states. quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster Basically, MmeGigs, yeah. Completely incompatible. How can one engage in a rational dialogue with those who support Intelligent Design, deny GCC, are anti-stem-cell research, deny White Privilege, believe the solution to all problems is to cut taxes, dismantle government (except for the military), invade sovereign nations, export jobs to Laos, and let business police itself (Polly want a peanut?)?

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 7:46:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MarsBonfire If you really, really wanted to make Collar Me a good and happy place, the management would simply ban political threads outright. Other forums I belong to have done so, and no one is the worse off. There ARE forums specifically set up to cater to those who have the uncontrolled NEED to spout off about whatever talking points that have been handed to them by some radio host. I strongly disagree. I favor a separate forum for "heavy" stuff like politics, religion, philosophy, and science. That way those of us who enjoy such things stay out of the way of those who just want to have fun. [:D] quote: Sorry, but this IS a sex oriented forum, and frankly the political vitrol serves no purpose here other than to cause members to bitch at each other. The opinions expressed here on these subjects changes no one's minds, and inform no one of any new, verifiable facts. If the CM admin announced tomorrow that all political BS was verbotten, I'd be perfectly fine with that! OK, then get rid of the Polls and the " If you were a tree, what would you be?" threads. Very few of them are about sex, either.

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 7:47:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf I love it when someone posts, and then becomes a point of fact about the discussion. Your comments are good examples of what the OP states. quote: ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster Basically, MmeGigs, yeah. Completely incompatible. How can one engage in a rational dialogue with those who support Intelligent Design, deny GCC, are anti-stem-cell research, deny White Privilege, believe the solution to all problems is to cut taxes, dismantle government (except for the military), invade sovereign nations, export jobs to Laos, and let business police itself (Polly want a peanut?)? I know. Horrible of me, ain't it? [8D]

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/14/2009 8:03:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY... One must be very careful about drawing conclusions about "function", even from functional magnetic resonance imaging. fMRI, a fabulous technology, basically measures blood flow; its images represent increased metabolic activity. This does not mean that you are looking at brain function; it means that you are looking at increased blood flow, which likely correlates with brain activity, which likely relates with brain function. Firm Hmmm, I always thought that Nuclear (as in nucleus; the word was dropped because people freak when hearing it) Magnetic Resonance Imagery measured a: the number of signal peaks, which indicates how many protons in differing chemical environments exist in a molecule; b: the bonding environment (chemical shift) of each proton in the molecule, and c: the relative number of each kind of proton in a molecule. Yes, blood flow can be imaged, but that is hardly the only information that can be obtained. NMR is a form of spectroscopy, and an MRI is basically a spectrographic image. PET scans are also a form of spectroscopy.

FullCircle -> RE: Partisanship and Rational Thought - Incompatible? (2/15/2009 5:51:34 AM)
Partisan is an insult in its own right, you hardly have to conduct a brain study on someone who you'd label partisan to realise they can't reasoned with. I'm happy the scientists found out something important with this critical study but I feel I could have saved them some money. The problem is no one likes to think of themselves as partisan only the people they argue against and hit a brick wall because they can't convince them. It would be sad if people were put off by aggressive posting but unless you have a crystal ball or have conducted a survey as to why people who don't post don't post that's not something you can say for sure is happening. What is a reasonable discussion who is the supreme judge of this?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125