How the brain works

[highnote]

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/17/the_most_depressing_discovery_about_the_brain_ever _partner/

Kahan conducted some ingenious experiments about the impact of political passion on people’s ability to think clearly. His conclusion, in Mooney’s words: partisanship “can even undermine our very basic reasoning skills…. [People] who are otherwise very good at math may totally flunk a problem that they would otherwise probably be able to solve, simply because giving the right answer goes against their political beliefs.”

This doesn't happen to Paceadvantage members who post in off-topic. Everyone here is perfectly rational. :D

[BlueShoe]

This doesn't happen to Paceadvantage members who post in off-topic. Everyone here is perfectly rational. :D
Every conservative here is perfectly rational. Rational liberal is an oxymoron.

[hcap]

Every conservative here is perfectly rational. Rational liberal is an oxymoron.Also a communist :)

[Tom]

Mary votes twice in Ward 1, three times in Ward 2, and Twice in Ward 3.
How many times did Mary have to show photo ID?
a. 7
b. 3
c. 5
d. Mary don't need no stinking ID

[DJofSD]

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/17/the_most_depressing_discovery_about_the_brain_ever _partner/
This doesn't happen to Paceadvantage members who post in off-topic. Everyone here is perfectly rational. :D

In other words, say goodnight to the dream that education, journalism, scientific evidence, media literacy or reason can provide the tools and information that people need in order to make good decisions. It turns out that in the public realm, a lack of information isn’t the real problem. The hurdle is how our minds work, no matter how smart we think we are. We want to believe we’re rational, but reason turns out to be the ex post facto way we rationalize what our emotions already want to believe.

Every one would like to believe their internal logic is sound.

The difference between liberals and conservatives is the liberals let the low level emotional feeling function of the brain hijack the higher level albeit slower rational functions.

[Dave Schwartz]

I think it is only fair to say that both sides of the political spectrum seem to be afflicted with the same mind-numbing behavior (according to the article).

The bad news is that even the author seems to be afflicted as he added this comment at the end of his article:

In the entire history of the universe, no Fox News viewers ever changed their minds because some new data upended their thinking.

Why did he choose Fox? Why not MSNBC?

Clearly, his personal beliefs lay to the left of center.

I really think that the best to be gleaned from this article is what is to be found between the lines. That is, that people of our society have become so polarized in their personal beliefs as to be able to ignore REALITY.

I wish people could come to understand that as soon as you have shown a strong committment to left or right, you have given up your claim to impartiality. In other words, if you BELIEVE STRONGLY in the left or right point of view, you have (efffectively) become a SLAVE to that point of view.

It also means that you have lost your credibility with any free thinker who does not serve such masters.


Horse players SHOULD understand this. You cannot fall in love with a horse and expect to make an unbiased value decision about the animal.

It's like taking your kid to the car lot to buy his first car. What is the first thing you tell him? (Right after you say, "Shut up and let me do the talking?") You say, "Don't tell the salesman which car you really love!"

Of course, the kid can't help himself. As soon as he sees the car he all but wets himself. All the salesman has to do is reel you in.


Same thing with political decisions. You must remain objective. And in order to do that you must be detached.


Just my opinion. If you are very left or very right you WILL disagree.

[highnote]

Spot on, Dave. :ThmbUp:

I think it is only fair to say that both sides of the political spectrum seem to be afflicted with the same mind-numbing behavior (according to the article).

The bad news is that even the author seems to be afflicted as he added this comment at the end of his article:



Why did he choose Fox? Why not MSNBC?

Clearly, his personal beliefs lay to the left of center.

I really think that the best to be gleaned from this article is what is to be found between the lines. That is, that people of our society have become so polarized in their personal beliefs as to be able to ignore REALITY.

I wish people could come to understand that as soon as you have shown a strong committment to left or right, you have given up your claim to impartiality. In other words, if you BELIEVE STRONGLY in the left or right point of view, you have (efffectively) become a SLAVE to that point of view.

It also means that you have lost your credibility with any free thinker who does not serve such masters.


Horse players SHOULD understand this. You cannot fall in love with a horse and expect to make an unbiased value decision about the animal.

It's like taking your kid to the car lot to buy his first car. What is the first thing you tell him? (Right after you say, "Shut up and let me do the talking?") You say, "Don't tell the salesman which car you really love!"

Of course, the kid can't help himself. As soon as he sees the car he all but wets himself. All the salesman has to do is reel you in.


Same thing with political decisions. You must remain objective. And in order to do that you must be detached.


Just my opinion. If you are very left or very right you WILL disagree.

[Robert Goren]

I think it is only fair to say that both sides of the political spectrum seem to be afflicted with the same mind-numbing behavior (according to the article).

The bad news is that even the author seems to be afflicted as he added this comment at the end of his article:



Why did he choose Fox? Why not MSNBC?

Clearly, his personal beliefs lay to the left of center.

I really think that the best to be gleaned from this article is what is to be found between the lines. That is, that people of our society have become so polarized in their personal beliefs as to be able to ignore REALITY.

I wish people could come to understand that as soon as you have shown a strong committment to left or right, you have given up your claim to impartiality. In other words, if you BELIEVE STRONGLY in the left or right point of view, you have (efffectively) become a SLAVE to that point of view.

It also means that you have lost your credibility with any free thinker who does not serve such masters.


Horse players SHOULD understand this. You cannot fall in love with a horse and expect to make an unbiased value decision about the animal.

It's like taking your kid to the car lot to buy his first car. What is the first thing you tell him? (Right after you say, "Shut up and let me do the talking?") You say, "Don't tell the salesman which car you really love!"

Of course, the kid can't help himself. As soon as he sees the car he all but wets himself. All the salesman has to do is reel you in.


Same thing with political decisions. You must remain objective. And in order to do that you must be detached.


Just my opinion. If you are very left or very right you WILL disagree.Because nobody on the left watches MSNBC. What few viewers they have are also FOX News viewers. They only watch so they can ridicule the left for the nonsense that MSNBC puts on the air and then they bitch because no liberal will respond to them. Of course no liberal has any idea what they are talking about because again no liberal watches MSNBC.

[Tom]

Every one would like to believe their internal logic is sound.

The difference between liberals and conservatives is the liberals let the low level emotional feeling function of the brain hijack the higher level albeit slower rational functions.

Excellent observation.
I would add that liberal are not good at connecting the dots - they tend to see things as mutually exclusive events and and do not see how thing inter-relate. If A makes you feel god and B makes you feel bad, they will choose A and ignore B, even if the two event are tied together.

[Robert Goren]

The last election blew apart the theory that all conservatives were rational. The only people who believed Romney had much of a chance were Fox News viewers. Several posters were so sure they were correct that they said they would stop posting if Obama won. True to their word, they no longer post here. :eek:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Because nobody on the left watches MSNBC. What few viewers they have are also FOX News viewers. They only watch so they can ridicule the left for the nonsense that MSNBC puts on the air and then they bitch because no liberal will respond to them. Of course no liberal has any idea what they are talking about because again no liberal watches MSNBC.

Goren's been on a roll lately with some pretty good posts down here. :lol:

[mostpost]

Every conservative here is perfectly rational. Rational liberal is an oxymoron.
On the matter of global warming or climate change, I base my opinion on studies conducted by researchers who work for scientific institutions funded by public money. Their studies are published in scientific journals and peer reviewed. You base your opinion on studies conducted by researchers who work for companies that would be financially affected if they had to take steps to reverse global warming. Their studies are not peer reviewed and are published in journals supported or owned by those same companies. Which of us is rational and which is not rational.

On voter suppression, I base my opinion on the total lack of cases of any person voting in place of another person and the ineffectiveness of a few people doing so. You base your opinion on the fact that black people vote Democratic. Who is rational and who is not rational.

On the economy, I base my opinion on the fact that money in the hands of the consumer is more effective than money in the hands of the supplier and money in the hands of the consumer becomes money in the hands of the supplier. You base your opinion on your belief that products available will always become products purchased without considering if potential buyers have available funds. Am I rational or are you.

On health care, I base my opinion on my belief that I would prefer to pay a few dollars more to provide everyone with insurance than to pay thousands more for their visit to an emergency room. You would rather they go without insurance and not be allowed in the emergency room. I am rational; you are not.

[DJofSD]

On the matter of global warming or climate change, I base my opinion on studies conducted by researchers who work for scientific institutions funded by public money. Their studies are published in scientific journals and peer reviewed. You base your opinion on studies conducted by researchers who work for companies that would be financially affected if they had to take steps to reverse global warming. Their studies are not peer reviewed and are published in journals supported or owned by those same companies. Which of us is rational and which is not rational.

On voter suppression, I base my opinion on the total lack of cases of any person voting in place of another person and the ineffectiveness of a few people doing so. You base your opinion on the fact that black people vote Democratic. Who is rational and who is not rational.

On the economy, I base my opinion on the fact that money in the hands of the consumer is more effective than money in the hands of the supplier and money in the hands of the consumer becomes money in the hands of the supplier. You base your opinion on your belief that products available will always become products purchased without considering if potential buyers have available funds. Am I rational or are you.

On health care, I base my opinion on my belief that I would prefer to pay a few dollars more to provide everyone with insurance than to pay thousands more for their visit to an emergency room. You would rather they go without insurance and not be allowed in the emergency room. I am rational; you are not.
Oh, I see, you have cornered the truth.

OBTW, there are scientist working for publicly funded institutions which don't subscribe to anthropmorphic causes to climate change.

[TJDave]

Mary votes twice in Ward 1, three times in Ward 2, and Twice in Ward 3.
How many times did Mary have to show photo ID?
a. 7
b. 3
c. 5
d. Mary don't need no stinking ID

Not Mary

Maria

[mostpost]

OBTW, there are scientist working for publicly funded institutions which don't subscribe to anthropmorphic causes to climate change.
Very few, and an even tinier percentage are climatologists or meteorologists.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm

Scientists need to back up their opinions with research and data that survive the peer-review process. A Skeptical Science peer-reviewed survey of all (over 12,000) peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' and 'global warming' published between 1991 and 2011 (Cook et al. 2013) found that over 97% of the papers taking a position on the subject agreed with the consensus position that humans are causing global warming

A survey of all peer-reviewed abstracts on the subject 'global climate change' published between 1993 and 2003 shows that not a single paper rejected the consensus position that global warming is man caused (Oreskes 2004). 75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment either way (focused on methods or paleoclimate analysis).

Subsequent research has confirmed this result. A survey of 3146 earth scientists asked the question "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" (Doran 2009). More than 90% of participants had Ph.D.s, and 7% had master’s degrees. Overall, 82% of the scientists answered yes. However, what are most interesting are responses compared to the level of expertise in climate science. Of scientists who were non-climatologists and didn't publish research, 77% answered yes. In contrast, 97.5% of climatologists who actively publish research on climate change responded yes. As the level of active research and specialization in climate science increases, so does agreement that humans are significantly changing global temperatures.

Do you understand what the above paragraph means. It means that the people who are experts in the field are of the opinion that there is climate change and it is caused by human activity. The people who are least knowledgeable think what Fox News tells them to think.

27 national and international scientific societies have endorsed the view that humans are causing the significant climate change that is occurring.

That is rational.

[Robert Fischer]

This doesn't happen to Paceadvantage members who post in off-topic. Everyone here is perfectly rational. :D

:lol:

Partisanship can be a way to organize and get things done, but it can also be a form destabilization.
Intentional, or not.

[Dave Schwartz]

I am rational; you are not.

Thank you for proving the point.

But I will give you one more chance at escape anyway.

Name for me 5 things that Obama and the Democratic party have screwed up royally in the current era (i.e. since Obama has been elected).


Then name 5 things which the Bush and the Republicans screwed up in the Bush years.

[Tom]

Obama screw ups

Affordable Health Care Act that is a total disaster
Benghazi, allowing it to happen, failing to act, and then lying about it
Targeting Conservatives with IRS attack dogs
Destroyed faith and respect of USA over Syria
Divided the country with racist remarks repeatedly

Bush screw ups

The two border guards he turned his back on
Failed to persevere in Iraq once there, costing us many lives and much treasure needlessly
Repubs, with both all of congress and the WH failed to pass anything of any substance to improve this nation
Backed down to dem pressure too many times - let conservative down by being gutless at times
Bailouts at the end of his term

[hcap]

Very few, and an even tinier percentage are climatologists or meteorologists.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm


Do you understand what the above paragraph means. It means that the people who are experts in the field are of the opinion that there is climate change and it is caused by human activity. The people who are least knowledgeable think what Fox News tells them to think.

27 national and international scientific societies have endorsed the view that humans are causing the significant climate change that is occurring.

That is rational.You are wasting your time. Unless you can convince conservatives that Fat Al did not brainwash you, me and the scientific community, or bribe every world government, university, and scientific organization existing today.

Good luck! :)

[DJofSD]

Big and little ice age, the year without a summer, etc., all caused by mankind.

[JustRalph]

Bush screw ups

The two border guards he turned his back on
Failed to persevere in Iraq once there, costing us many lives and much treasure needlessly
Repubs, with both all of congress and the WH failed to pass anything of any substance to improve this nation
Backed down to dem pressure too many times - let conservative down by being gutless at times
Bailouts at the end of his term
**That gross prescription drug plan bullshit.........costing billions

[Tom]

I thought about that one, but he did come to town here to talk about it, and I waved at his car when he drove by.....so I gave him a pass.

[Tom]

Look into my eyes..........

[jerry-g]

I also shook a hand outside the KMOX-TV building in St. Louis Missouri,
that pardoned Richard (tricky dick) Nixon. On the one hand they are
big shit celebrities and the other, they are just cold turds warmed over. :D

[BlueShoe]

Also a communist :)
Okay, if every liberal is a communist, how then could they possibly be rational, since communism is completely irrational and against nearly every natural human instinct? :confused:

[Dave Schwartz]

The point of the 5 L & R screw ups is that the nut case L/R crowd actually believe that their guy walks on water; never makes a mistake.

That is why people like Most have no credibility. Ever.

Their opinions have no merit.

Not because they aren't SOMETIMES right but because they believe their guys are NEVER wrong. Only the OTHER guys are wrong.