4 ms·

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. If political belief is caused by personality traits (e.g. orderliness) and brain structure (e.g. amygdala size), is it re

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. If political belief is caused by personality traits (e.g. orderliness) and brain structure (e.g. amygdala size), is it really a choice?

inglor_cz 6y ago
True. I do not really feel to have much latitude in what I believe. I only have choice to pretend X or Y.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  If you're interested in improving your ability to grow and change based on feedback, that is a skill that can be worked on.
  - hntrader 6y ago
    A conservative can shrink their amygdala in response to verbal feedback? A conservative can become low-orderliness when they've been high-orderliness since childhood? This is gay-conversion therapy territory.
    - TameAntelope 6y ago
      I am honestly struggling to come up with a constructive response to, "People's beliefs are determined by biological factors at birth." What you seem to have said here is, on its face, so obviously wrong, it's hard to take seriously. I mean no disrespect, I just don't know how to continue engaging with you.
      - hntrader 6y ago
        Political beliefs are caused by brain structure and personality traits, in an interaction with environment/identity/self-interest. You saying people can just change their political beliefs when there are scientifically known biological causes of said beliefs is akin to proponents of gay-conversion therapy. If you think personality and brain structure aren't part of the picture, then you're not aligned with current scientific knowledge - your faux outrage and strawmanning notwithstanding.
        TameAntelope 6y ago
        > when there are scientifically known biological causes of said beliefs This is false, at least to the degree of accuracy, potency, and certainty as you present it here. They are "part of the picture", but one small part, not the overriding majority of how people make choices about what to believe. > then you're not aligned with current scientific knowledge Yes I am. You are not. You misrepresent the degree to which the things you've mentioned impact the things you claim they impact, and I'm beginning to think it's a malicious choice to do so.
        hntrader 6y ago
        "one small part" This is an inaccurate (or at best presumptively overconfident) portrayal of extant science. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038932/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038932/ "not the overriding majority" That's another strawman. My claim is that it's a non-trivial cause, not that it's an exhaustive explanation of all the causes or that it explains an "overriding majority" of the variation. Even if it explains just 25 percent of the variation, the assertion that people can change their political views despite that biological underpinning is akin to thinking that gay-conversion therapy can work.
        TameAntelope 6y ago
        I... think you need to read the abstract you just cited. It agrees with me, not you. And I never said holistically what you claim was, so it cannot be a strawman. I simply (and accurately) said that you are overstating the degree to which biology impacts political affiliation. 25% is not even remotely accurate, and in fact laughably wrong. As your own cited paper explains: > "The combined evidence suggests that political ideology constitutes a fundamental aspect of one’s genetically informed psychological disposition, but as Fisher proposed long ago, genetic influences on complex traits will be composed of thousands of markers of very small effects and it will require extremely large samples to have enough power in order to identify specific polymorphisms related to complex social traits.". Additionally, specifically to your claim that what I was saying wasn't in line with current thinking in the field, again your own citation proves you wrong: > "However, these findings have not been widely accepted or incorporated into the dominant paradigms that explain the etiology of political ideology." You need to re-read the single study you cited. You clearly do not understand what they're claiming, and are pinning a large part of your worldview on something you don't understand. Finally, the idea that people can change their political ideology has absolutely nothing to do with gay conversion therapy. This continued false assertion is tantamount to trolling. You know it's false, I know it's false, but you keep saying it because it's inflammatory.
  - inglor_cz 6y ago
    That sounds like a very empty platitude. Can a libertarian grow and change into a committed fascist who does not give a iota about personal freedom and measures everything by the interests of the State? If so, why didn't Mussolini convert everybody in Italy into committed fascists by peaceful means? It would have been easier than any suppression by force, not to mention less dangerous.
    - TameAntelope 6y ago
      Mussolini's behavior I can't explain, but absolutely a person can change, and many often do, in dramatic and diametric ways. I am having a hard time engaging with this line of thinking, it's so counter to some pretty basic systems the scientific community has long considered about as close to certain as that community can come to on those topics. Are you seriously suggesting that behavior is chiefly determined by biology, and the entire concept of personal responsibility is not accurate?
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - inglor_cz 6y ago
        You are the one who talks about behavior. I was talking about beliefs. There is a difference between behavior, which can be modified, even though biology plays a huge role there (see heritability of alcoholism, even in adopted children who grew up in dry homes), and belief. I can definitely pretend that I believe in a particular deity, or Critical Race Theory for that purpose, if I am intimidated enough by my peers to be afraid to tell the truth. That is behavior and it is modifiable at will. But I cannot really start believing it sincerely. Beliefs, especially in people over 30, are pretty fixed. There are interesting exceptions, but most people who do a 180 in their political beliefs do so in early life.

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. If political belief is caused by personality traits (e.g. orderliness) and brain structure (e.g. amygdala size), is it really a choice?

inglor_cz 6y ago

True. I do not really feel to have much latitude in what I believe. I only have choice to pretend X or Y.

TameAntelope 6y ago
If you're interested in improving your ability to grow and change based on feedback, that is a skill that can be worked on.
- hntrader 6y ago
  A conservative can shrink their amygdala in response to verbal feedback? A conservative can become low-orderliness when they've been high-orderliness since childhood? This is gay-conversion therapy territory.
  - TameAntelope 6y ago
    I am honestly struggling to come up with a constructive response to, "People's beliefs are determined by biological factors at birth." What you seem to have said here is, on its face, so obviously wrong, it's hard to take seriously. I mean no disrespect, I just don't know how to continue engaging with you.
    - hntrader 6y ago
      Political beliefs are caused by brain structure and personality traits, in an interaction with environment/identity/self-interest. You saying people can just change their political beliefs when there are scientifically known biological causes of said beliefs is akin to proponents of gay-conversion therapy. If you think personality and brain structure aren't part of the picture, then you're not aligned with current scientific knowledge - your faux outrage and strawmanning notwithstanding.
      - TameAntelope 6y ago
        > when there are scientifically known biological causes of said beliefs This is false, at least to the degree of accuracy, potency, and certainty as you present it here. They are "part of the picture", but one small part, not the overriding majority of how people make choices about what to believe. > then you're not aligned with current scientific knowledge Yes I am. You are not. You misrepresent the degree to which the things you've mentioned impact the things you claim they impact, and I'm beginning to think it's a malicious choice to do so.
        hntrader 6y ago
        "one small part" This is an inaccurate (or at best presumptively overconfident) portrayal of extant science. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038932/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038932/ "not the overriding majority" That's another strawman. My claim is that it's a non-trivial cause, not that it's an exhaustive explanation of all the causes or that it explains an "overriding majority" of the variation. Even if it explains just 25 percent of the variation, the assertion that people can change their political views despite that biological underpinning is akin to thinking that gay-conversion therapy can work.
        TameAntelope 6y ago
        I... think you need to read the abstract you just cited. It agrees with me, not you. And I never said holistically what you claim was, so it cannot be a strawman. I simply (and accurately) said that you are overstating the degree to which biology impacts political affiliation. 25% is not even remotely accurate, and in fact laughably wrong. As your own cited paper explains: > "The combined evidence suggests that political ideology constitutes a fundamental aspect of one’s genetically informed psychological disposition, but as Fisher proposed long ago, genetic influences on complex traits will be composed of thousands of markers of very small effects and it will require extremely large samples to have enough power in order to identify specific polymorphisms related to complex social traits.". Additionally, specifically to your claim that what I was saying wasn't in line with current thinking in the field, again your own citation proves you wrong: > "However, these findings have not been widely accepted or incorporated into the dominant paradigms that explain the etiology of political ideology." You need to re-read the single study you cited. You clearly do not understand what they're claiming, and are pinning a large part of your worldview on something you don't understand. Finally, the idea that people can change their political ideology has absolutely nothing to do with gay conversion therapy. This continued false assertion is tantamount to trolling. You know it's false, I know it's false, but you keep saying it because it's inflammatory.
- inglor_cz 6y ago
  That sounds like a very empty platitude. Can a libertarian grow and change into a committed fascist who does not give a iota about personal freedom and measures everything by the interests of the State? If so, why didn't Mussolini convert everybody in Italy into committed fascists by peaceful means? It would have been easier than any suppression by force, not to mention less dangerous.
  - TameAntelope 6y ago
    Mussolini's behavior I can't explain, but absolutely a person can change, and many often do, in dramatic and diametric ways. I am having a hard time engaging with this line of thinking, it's so counter to some pretty basic systems the scientific community has long considered about as close to certain as that community can come to on those topics. Are you seriously suggesting that behavior is chiefly determined by biology, and the entire concept of personal responsibility is not accurate?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - inglor_cz 6y ago
      You are the one who talks about behavior. I was talking about beliefs. There is a difference between behavior, which can be modified, even though biology plays a huge role there (see heritability of alcoholism, even in adopted children who grew up in dry homes), and belief. I can definitely pretend that I believe in a particular deity, or Critical Race Theory for that purpose, if I am intimidated enough by my peers to be afraid to tell the truth. That is behavior and it is modifiable at will. But I cannot really start believing it sincerely. Beliefs, especially in people over 30, are pretty fixed. There are interesting exceptions, but most people who do a 180 in their political beliefs do so in early life.