emotions not reasoning rule in politics

[cmotherofpirl]

Democrats and Republicans Both Adept at Ignoring Facts, Study Finds
By LiveScience Staff

posted: 24 January 2006
10:03 am ET



Democrats and Republicans alike are adept at making decisions without letting the facts get in the way, a new study shows.

And they get quite a rush from ignoring information that's contrary to their point of view.

Researchers asked staunch party members from both sides to evaluate information that threatened their preferred candidate prior to the 2004 Presidential election. The subjects' brains were monitored while they pondered.

The results were announced today.

"We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," said Drew Westen, director of clinical psychology at Emory University. "What we saw instead was a network of emotion circuits lighting up, including circuits hypothesized to be involved in regulating emotion, and circuits known to be involved in resolving conflicts."

Bias on both sides

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.

Then, with their minds made up, brain activity ceased in the areas that deal with negative emotions such as disgust. But activity spiked in the circuits involved in reward, a response similar to what addicts experience when they get a fix, Westen explained.

The study points to a total lack of reason in political decision-making.

"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged," Westen said. "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."

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

The tests involved pairs of statements by the candidates, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry, that clearly contradicted each other. The test subjects were asked to consider and rate the discrepancy. Then they were presented with another statement that might explain away the contradiction. The scenario was repeated several times for each candidate.

The brain imaging revealed a consistent pattern. Both Republicans and Democrats consistently denied obvious contradictions for their own candidate but detected contradictions in the opposing candidate.

"The result is that partisan beliefs are calcified, and the person can learn very little from new data," Westen said.

Vote for Tom Hanks

Other relatively neutral candidates were introduced into the mix, such as the actor Tom Hanks. Importantly, both the Democrats and Republicans reacted to the contradictions of these characters in the same manner.

The findings could prove useful beyond the campaign trail.

"Everyone from executives and judges to scientists and politicians may reason to emotionally biased judgments when they have a vested interest in how to interpret 'the facts,'" Westen said.

The researchers will present the findings Saturday at the Annual Conference of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

[Sojourner]

That's a fascinating study ... I've definitely personally seen that in action on the local level.

What amazes me are the explanations people (including myself, I'm sure) come up with to rationalize positions.

[Azriel]

Great article, Mom. Says a lot about human nature.

[cmotherofpirl]

I hope everyone here keeps this in mind esp. on the debate board.

[philothea]

This is... news? :

Good article. Of course, it will be lost on people whose view it contradicts.

[Fidei Defensor]

I'd be interested in having a study about use of reason among Christians when It comes to things that contradict their belief (i.e. Catholic beliefs vs. certain protestant sects that contradict)

[Didacus]

Modern 'Democracy' is nothing more than a popularity contest, hence why I am a papist.

[Paladin D]

That is why I don't play partisan politics! Unfortunately, this is becoming a growing problem on Phatmass.

[Desert Walker]

This is something I've known about politics ever since I stopped listening to Rush Limbaugh.

[jezic]

haven't we always known this?

[frozencell]

The solution? Listening to Michael Savage. While not the most charitable person on Earth, he is equally harsh and critical of both sides' stupidity and failures.

[frozencell]

The statement that was here has since been retracted.

[sidemunch88]

NO THEY DO NOT

[infinitelord1]

This is what i think.......forgive me if this has nothing to do with the topic cuz i havent started reading the previous posts yet........i think that all human being are subjective. Or one might say.....liberal. Throughout our lives we learn things.......facts, lies, whatever it might be. But there is a truth to everything, and no human being knows all truths. Therefore, conservative or liberal, we all form opinions with fact or no fact. One might say that we are all conservative and liberal to some degree.

[kdewolf2]

Personally, I think the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are both stereotypes, and are only interesting for people who like taking sides without thinking things through, as shown in the article, or who derive some kind of personal security from having a cut-and-dried stereotype they can identify with, hence the emotional reactions. Don't be a liberal or a conservative; think for yourself.

[kdewolf2]

Personally, I think the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are both stereotypes, and are only interesting for people who like taking sides without thinking things through, as shown in the article, or who derive some kind of personal security from having a cut-and-dried stereotype they can identify with, hence the emotional reactions. Don't be a liberal or a conservative; think for yourself. I'd add that people like Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh are masters of stereotype and propaganda; and I 'd rather shoot myself in the head than listen to them for even one minute. I think it'd be less dangerous to my soul.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]emotions not reasoning rule in politics[/quote]

Emoticons, on the other hand, are entirely capable of defining American politics...

[praying4patience]

[quote name='Desert Walker' post='873014' date='Feb 2 2006, 11:54 AM']
This is something I've known about politics ever since I stopped listening to Rush Limbaugh.
[/quote]

He wasn't always wrong either.

[Josie07]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='869745' date='Jan 29 2006, 10:47 PM']
I'd be interested in having a study about use of reason among Christians when It comes to things that contradict their belief (i.e. Catholic beliefs vs. certain protestant sects that contradict)
[/quote]
that would be something that would catch my intrest, I have always wondered what would be going on in the other persons mind when a "theoliacal smack down" is involved

[quote name='kdewolf2' post='909435' date='Mar 12 2006, 01:48 PM']
Personally, I think the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are both stereotypes, and are only interesting for people who like taking sides without thinking things through, as shown in the article, or who derive some kind of personal security from having a cut-and-dried stereotype they can identify with, hence the emotional reactions. Don't be a liberal or a conservative; think for yourself.
[/quote]

of course you can pick what is good from each party, but you can never be 100% liberal or 100% conservative, and be a devote Catholic

[goldbug16]

You have to be ORTHODOX.