Brain Activity of Democrats, Republicans Decreases When Talking Politics

elprincipe

elprincipe

CAGiversary!
Feedback
60 (100%)
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11009379/from/RS.1/

The test subjects on both sides of the political aisle reached totally biased conclusions by ignoring information that could not rationally be discounted, Westen and his colleagues say.

Notably absent were any increases in activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain most associated with reasoning.
Click to expand...

Can't say I'm surprised. Too many partisans with their minds made up regardless of the facts! Discuss!
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']I don't think anyone on this board needed a study to prove that point.[/QUOTE]


Yea, we pretty much just needed to read one of your posts to find that out.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I wanna be tested.[/QUOTE]

Get on the wrong side of the Metal Boss and he'll test your patience.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Again with the damned logical fallacy of affirming the consequent! Discuss!

(I'd have more to say, but the Sierra Nevada Pale Ale had interfered).[/QUOTE]

:lol:
 
[quote name='mykevermin']damned logical fallacy of affirming the consequent![/QUOTE]
I'm not quite sure how that fallacy applies to the article. What if/then function is being used and played in reverse?
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']I'm not quite sure how that fallacy applies to the article. What if/then function is being used and played in reverse?[/QUOTE]

I had a drink last night. Shaddup.

Truth be told (and having looked at the article), it does have some applicability. Given that the study discusses how people on both sides ignore away unfalsifiable truths and debate the contentious points of the matter, it could be that, since people come into a debate with a self-identified label (conservative, liberal, fence-sitter) that having an arsenal of conclusions in mind prior to the debate (conclusions that mimis the party line) help in creating scenarios where people ignore reality in order to get their point across.

We've all had discussions with people like that - the person who has something to say and says it anyway, despite its complete irrelevance to the topic at hand or the fact that it was previously proven false in the discussion. So, while I was just being smarmy, I think that it has some utility here.
 
Obvious.

People feel attacked when someone else disagrees. They shut off their reason centers & activate the adrenaline.

It's a defense mechanism.



NOW, what we need to learn to do is NOT view debate as an argument, but just a friendly conversation. Two (or more) friends sharing their ideas. Nobody's right or wrong..... just discussing.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']What the fuck is a "reason center," twit?[/QUOTE]
QUOTE article: "...dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain most associated with reasoning." I'm sorry to see you are illiterate and can not read the Original Article.

Also sorry to see no one told you name-calling "twit" to other people is not acceptable manners. That's truly sad.
 
[quote name='electrictroy']QUOTE article: "...dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain most associated with reasoning." I'm sorry to see you are illiterate and can not read the Original Article.[/QUOTE]
?? Where do they use the term 'center'?
 
Given the kinds of discussions you have tried to make before, I figured you were just making shit up again, or just overgeneralizing to a degree that makes discourse useless.

Instead, you've taken some physiological characteristic of the brain, and made up shit around it. Suggesting that people "shut down" the dorsolaterla prefrontal cortex implies a conscious attempt to prevent reasoned thinking. In addition, your assertion that adrenaline kicks in is completely baseless, and suggested absolutely nowhere but in your mind, which claims it is "obvious."

And, I call you a twit because your conversations consist of frightening overgeneralizations, a clear lack of understanding of what political parties stand for individually, fleeting moments of insight as to how government functions, interspersed with longer periods of complete and utter incorrectness.

Shall I go on?
 
I don't waste my time with people who use name-calling like "twit" in their arguments.

If you want to rephrase your point, this time focusing on FACTS, and not insults, I'll listen. Otherwise forget it. You need to learn to grow up.
 
Not necessarily. I don't need to debate with a five-year old. I don't need to treat everyone's thoughts as equal and valid, and I do so if you offer something that has a basis in reality and fact, something your posts rarely accomplish, and those that do are likely to do so accidentally.

So, if you want to ignore me and live in your simpleton world where it's a brilliant idea for people who don't use public transportation to not pay for it, and in turn making bus fares shoot up 500% or more (that's probably a frighteningly conservative estimate, considering the percentage population of a given metropolitan area that takes the bus rather than drives), causing the poor to suffer even more, then so be it. Go live in that genius world where cutting taxes will increase revenue. After all, if we ignore the trillions that Reagan sent us into debt (a record acheived in 8 years of Reagan, and broken in 5 years of Bush Jr.), then trickle-down economics is just *awesome*.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Not necessarily. I don't need to debate with a five-year old. ....... So, if you want to ignore me and live in your simpleton world.... [/QUOTE]
Thank you for confirming you have nothing worthwhile to hear. Insult. Insult. Insult. That's all you are currently contributing, and I don't need that trash.

If you want to discuss FACTS and ideas, like an adult, then I will. Otherwise, forget it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top