Post by the Scribe on Jun 5, 2020 5:17:03 GMT
Why We Divide into Liberals and Conservatives
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201812/why-we-divide-liberals-and-conservatives
Each has something to offer in the game of life.
Posted Dec 13, 2018
People divide into those with liberal leanings and those with a conservative slant. Biological theories emphasize differences in brain biology. Why might such differences have evolved?
Political Orientation and Personality
At least some of the differences between conservatives and liberals are attributable to brain biology. This impression is supported by research in several branches of psychology and political science.
The earliest evidence indicated that the degree to which children relied upon rules to govern their lives was predictive of conservative, or liberal leanings in adulthood. More flexibility predicted liberal orientation in later life whereas young Republicans preferred to stick to the rules.
Around half of the differences in right wing authoritarian scores – a measure of conservatism – were attributable to genetic variation (1).
Subsequent research pinned down some of these differences to specific genes, such as those affecting the NIMH receptor in the brain.
Comparison of liberals and conservatives in various societies found several reliable personality differences. In addition to being more rule-oriented, and more respectful of civil and religious authority, conservatives were less attracted to people of different races and traditions. Conversely, liberals were more open to diverse peoples (xenophilic) and more open to new experiences more broadly (1).
Conservatives see the world as a more threatening place that necessitates a strong military defense against foreign threats. Brain research also found that their limbic systems are more active in processing fear.
The presence of reliable genetically-based differences in political personality implies that there are two different types of political adaptation. The fact that both are present in approximately equal numbers suggests that natural selection could not reach a conclusion on which of these approaches made our ancestors more successful. In other words, either orientations may help the individual to survive and reproduce under certain conditions (i. e., political orientation comprises a balanced polymorphism).
The Evolution of Openness
Openness to experience is studied for animal populations in terms of willingness to leave safe areas and explore their surroundings.
Prey animals are generally much more cautious if they inhabit places where predators are plentiful. If the environment is safer, it makes sense to move around and explore new opportunities to find food or seek a mate.
In dangerous environments, it pays to play it safe and limit movement away from a secure area such as a burrow. Conversely, in more favorable environments the payoff is greater for taking risks and exploring opportunities.
While these ideas might seem remote from politics, there are some fascinating practical applications. For instance, when the economy enters a downturn, populations become more politically conservative whereas liberalism prospers as the standard of living rises (2,3). When resources are plentiful, it is easier to take care of the less fortunate.
Of course, the Great Depression spawned socialist movements as well as fascism but both extremes are highly authoritarian that is a conservative trait.
Obedience to Authority and Resource Availability
A key aspect of conservatism is obedience to civil and secular authorities and respect for senior family members. From early childhood, conservatives emphasize adherence to rules whereas liberals are more willing to operate outside of socially-imposed restrictions.
There are several reasons that being close to family members might favor reproductive success. One is that senior family members may control resources, such as land, or property, that go preferentially to children who stay close by. Investing in near relatives is also beneficial to reproductive fitness because seeing four nieces and nephews come into the world is equivalent to having a child of one's own in the currency of gene representation in future generations.
The clearest advantage of staying close to parents is that their assistance favors survival into adulthood. This is because they provide food and shelter and offer social support and protection against enemies.
Generally speaking, in a difficult environment where critical resources are in limited supply, humans, and other species stay close to home. A tough job market facing younger people today, and low wage prospects, often forces them to stay living at home into their thirties rather than striking out on their own.
Consistent with their greater focus on family and emphasis on conformity to authority, conservatives see the world as a more dangerous place, as outlined in an earlier post. They also emphasize the need to compete so as to survive and prosper.
Tolerance of Inequality
In a highly competitive world as conservatives see it, success is interpreted as the result of a combination of talent and hard work.
article continues after advertisement
For this reason, they are opposed to the redistributive processes that characterize welfare states. They also reject progressive taxation under which the high earners pay much higher rates, effectively subsidizing poorer segments of the population who earn less.
Whereas liberals see the poor and destitute as largely being victims of misfortune, such as the unlucky fate of being born to poor minority parents, conservatives emphasize the role of personal defects, such as drug dependency, and unwillingness to work.
These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality. Liberals see it as a social problem that government must relieve. Conservatives are more comfortable with inequality and accept the Biblical assertion that the poor will always be among us.
Whether it is the threat of a dangerous world, or empathy for the sufferings of others, political orientation has a strongly emotive basis. Each perspective can be interpreted as an adaptive response to different environments whether it is the world we grew up in that affects brain biology, or the current environment. In each case, how we respond is affected by our genotype that is a product of our evolutionary history.
Sources
1 Tuschman, A. (2013).Our political nature: The evolutionary origins of what divides us. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
2 Inglehart, R., and Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3 Zuckerman, P. (2008). Society without God: What the least religious nations can tell us about contentment. New York: New York University Press.
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201812/why-we-divide-liberals-and-conservatives
Each has something to offer in the game of life.
Posted Dec 13, 2018
People divide into those with liberal leanings and those with a conservative slant. Biological theories emphasize differences in brain biology. Why might such differences have evolved?
Political Orientation and Personality
At least some of the differences between conservatives and liberals are attributable to brain biology. This impression is supported by research in several branches of psychology and political science.
The earliest evidence indicated that the degree to which children relied upon rules to govern their lives was predictive of conservative, or liberal leanings in adulthood. More flexibility predicted liberal orientation in later life whereas young Republicans preferred to stick to the rules.
Around half of the differences in right wing authoritarian scores – a measure of conservatism – were attributable to genetic variation (1).
Subsequent research pinned down some of these differences to specific genes, such as those affecting the NIMH receptor in the brain.
Comparison of liberals and conservatives in various societies found several reliable personality differences. In addition to being more rule-oriented, and more respectful of civil and religious authority, conservatives were less attracted to people of different races and traditions. Conversely, liberals were more open to diverse peoples (xenophilic) and more open to new experiences more broadly (1).
Conservatives see the world as a more threatening place that necessitates a strong military defense against foreign threats. Brain research also found that their limbic systems are more active in processing fear.
The presence of reliable genetically-based differences in political personality implies that there are two different types of political adaptation. The fact that both are present in approximately equal numbers suggests that natural selection could not reach a conclusion on which of these approaches made our ancestors more successful. In other words, either orientations may help the individual to survive and reproduce under certain conditions (i. e., political orientation comprises a balanced polymorphism).
The Evolution of Openness
Openness to experience is studied for animal populations in terms of willingness to leave safe areas and explore their surroundings.
Prey animals are generally much more cautious if they inhabit places where predators are plentiful. If the environment is safer, it makes sense to move around and explore new opportunities to find food or seek a mate.
In dangerous environments, it pays to play it safe and limit movement away from a secure area such as a burrow. Conversely, in more favorable environments the payoff is greater for taking risks and exploring opportunities.
While these ideas might seem remote from politics, there are some fascinating practical applications. For instance, when the economy enters a downturn, populations become more politically conservative whereas liberalism prospers as the standard of living rises (2,3). When resources are plentiful, it is easier to take care of the less fortunate.
Of course, the Great Depression spawned socialist movements as well as fascism but both extremes are highly authoritarian that is a conservative trait.
Obedience to Authority and Resource Availability
A key aspect of conservatism is obedience to civil and secular authorities and respect for senior family members. From early childhood, conservatives emphasize adherence to rules whereas liberals are more willing to operate outside of socially-imposed restrictions.
There are several reasons that being close to family members might favor reproductive success. One is that senior family members may control resources, such as land, or property, that go preferentially to children who stay close by. Investing in near relatives is also beneficial to reproductive fitness because seeing four nieces and nephews come into the world is equivalent to having a child of one's own in the currency of gene representation in future generations.
The clearest advantage of staying close to parents is that their assistance favors survival into adulthood. This is because they provide food and shelter and offer social support and protection against enemies.
Generally speaking, in a difficult environment where critical resources are in limited supply, humans, and other species stay close to home. A tough job market facing younger people today, and low wage prospects, often forces them to stay living at home into their thirties rather than striking out on their own.
Consistent with their greater focus on family and emphasis on conformity to authority, conservatives see the world as a more dangerous place, as outlined in an earlier post. They also emphasize the need to compete so as to survive and prosper.
Tolerance of Inequality
In a highly competitive world as conservatives see it, success is interpreted as the result of a combination of talent and hard work.
article continues after advertisement
For this reason, they are opposed to the redistributive processes that characterize welfare states. They also reject progressive taxation under which the high earners pay much higher rates, effectively subsidizing poorer segments of the population who earn less.
Whereas liberals see the poor and destitute as largely being victims of misfortune, such as the unlucky fate of being born to poor minority parents, conservatives emphasize the role of personal defects, such as drug dependency, and unwillingness to work.
These differing perspectives generate very different views of inequality. Liberals see it as a social problem that government must relieve. Conservatives are more comfortable with inequality and accept the Biblical assertion that the poor will always be among us.
Whether it is the threat of a dangerous world, or empathy for the sufferings of others, political orientation has a strongly emotive basis. Each perspective can be interpreted as an adaptive response to different environments whether it is the world we grew up in that affects brain biology, or the current environment. In each case, how we respond is affected by our genotype that is a product of our evolutionary history.
Sources
1 Tuschman, A. (2013).Our political nature: The evolutionary origins of what divides us. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.
2 Inglehart, R., and Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3 Zuckerman, P. (2008). Society without God: What the least religious nations can tell us about contentment. New York: New York University Press.