This AM's interesting read. Political but not!

and then you have real-world evidence...

of who rely on emotionalism, questionable motivation, etc., e.g., the Occupy Movement... go figure!:wink2:
 
It would be a nice explanation...

of why, allowing for a very broad interpretation of the definitions, politics across the world tends to divide itself along the liberal/conservative continuum. It would also explain why, given the enormous complexity of individual genetics and individual experience there is such a fine grain of differences within the two main categories-even to the point where in-category differences may be greater in many cases than between-category differences (example: Jon Huntsman is more like Obama than he is like Sarah Palin) All that said, the whole issue is fraught with enormous ambiguity, starting with the defintion of Conservative vs. Liberal and emotion and intuittion vs. rationality. It is easy to see the forest(or two forests) from a long way off but a bit difficult down amongst the trees. That is my rationally intuitive opinion at any rate:)
 
Another AM read...

this one by Niall Ferguson on the 'decline' of the West and the rise of the Rest. There are a number of objections that can, and have, been made to his thinking, but the piece, it's cute computer analogy notwithstanding, is still pretty interesting. Ferguson gained fame several years back with books on the First World War and the banking system in Europe; sunce then he has moved into this sort of broad commentary embedded in historical perspective.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswe...american-civilization-can-avoid-collapse.html
 
There will be a reckoning, I reckon...

Occupiers - using their critical thinking/problem solving skills - turn to violence...though, they do "tend toward unpredictability. They don’t mind change, and in fact, they prefer it. They seek it out. This personality type would likely choose “change” over “stability” just because they tend to be more novelty-seeking by nature. The fact that they have a more prominent ACC helps them to deal with radically changing situations, still find the salient points, all without the emotion getting in the way."

http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/05/chaos-video/
 
Last edited:
More "liberal thinking" on display...

Ctgkv.gif


Another example of how a liberal "would be likely to engage in more flexible thinking, working through alternate possibilities before committing to a choice."

Liberal Jean Quan, mayor of Oakland, collaborates with the Obama-endorsed Occupiers:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/282280
 
Last edited:
Knock it off

No more of this 'Obama this and Obama that' Please!! For cryin' out loud Colonel, what does it take to get you off this stuff? If you want to talk politics at least try to do it at some concept or priciple level so there is something to say in return that isn't just an argument. TLR's post was just that and now you are using it as a soapbox for one more Obama bashing, Hyde Park Corner speech.
 
laugh out loud funny passage quoted therein...

"So—for liberals to make a case for an idea or cause, they come armed with data, research studies, and experts. They are convinced of an idea if all the data checks out–basically they assign meaning and value to ideas that fit within the scientific method, because that’s their primary thinking style. Emotion doesn’t play as big of a role in validation. Not to say that liberals are unfeeling, but just more likely to set emotion aside when judging an idea initially, and factor it in later. Checks out scientifically = valuable. Liberals can get just as emotionally attached to an idea, but it’s usually not the primary trigger for acceptance of an idea.

Conservatives would be less likely to assign value primarily using the scientific method. Remember, their thinking style leads primarily with emotion. In order for them to find an idea valuable, it has to be meaningful for them personally. It needs to trigger empathy. Meaning, they need some kind of emotional attachment to it, such as family, or a group of individuals they are close to in some way."


Doesn't seem to be a rational explanation for the way liberals place a much higher value on intentions, rather than on results.
 
Interesting take, Gandini...

I see this puts you in the same class as Mr. Ron Bryn**rt. Google him and feel proud.

Happy Hunting!
 
Last edited:
Looked up this Ron B. guy...

gosh, I like him already and only read two sentences about him.:woot:
A loud mouthed, tenacious, lefty muck raker. What's not to like?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top