Conservative vs. Liberal Thinking

I have often wondered about the disconnect between the liberal and conservative political viewpoints and according to this research, just wondering about such things makes me a liberal. It seems like when discussing political topics in this forum, it is as if both sides might as well be speaking different languages. I think that the study below goes a long way to explaining why. I’m not going to value judge which way of thinking is better or worse because both have their advantages and disadvantages.
I was initially interested in this topic because of a situation in my wife’s office with one of her research associates. He is young and very conservative and my wife is middle of the road liberal. Since he started working for her, he has often questioned why something had to be done, why things were necessary, and why they were important at all. After about a year, he came into her office and said that he finally sees how all the pieces are fitting together. In other words, it took him a while to see the big picture. All he could see in the beginning was the pieces. As the study suggests, “conservatives have less tolerance for ambiguity” and “conservatives have a greater desire to reach a decision quickly and stick to it, and are higher on conscientiousness, which includes neatness, orderliness, duty, and rule-following.”
I think if we keep our differences in mind, we would go much further in understanding each other’s perspectives.

Why have Conservatives been shown to be more fearful, ignorant, and narrow-minded than Liberals?
As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics.

The most comprehensive review of personality and political orientation to date is a 2003 meta-analysis of 88 prior studies involving 22,000 participants. The researchers—John Jost of NYU, Arie Kruglanski of the University of Maryland, and Jack Glaser and Frank Sulloway of Berkeley—found that conservatives have a greater desire to reach a decision quickly and stick to it, and are higher on conscientiousness, which includes neatness, orderliness, duty, and rule-following. Liberals are higher on openness, which includes intellectual curiosity, excitement-seeking, novelty, creativity for its own sake, and a craving for stimulation like travel, color, art, music, and literature."

"The study's authors also concluded that conservatives have less tolerance for ambiguity, a trait they say is exemplified when George Bush says things like, "Look, my job isn't to try to nuance. My job is to tell people what I think," and "I'm the decider." Those who think the world is highly dangerous and those with the greatest fear of death are the most likely to be conservative.

Liberals, on the other hand, are "more likely to see gray areas and reconcile seemingly conflicting information," says Jost. As a result, liberals like John Kerry, who see many sides to every issue, are portrayed as flip-floppers. "Whatever the cause, Bush and Kerry exemplify the cognitive styles we see in the research," says Jack Glaser, one of the study's authors, "Bush in appearing more rigid in his thinking and intolerant of uncertainty and ambiguity, and Kerry in appearing more open to ambiguity and to considering alternative positions."

Studies show that people who study abroad become more liberal than those who stay home.

People who venture from the strictures of their limited social class are less likely to stereotype and more likely to embrace other cultures. Education goes hand-in-hand with tolerance, and often, the more the better:

Professors at major universities are more liberal than their counterparts at less acclaimed institutions. What travel and education have in common is that they make the differences between people seem less threatening. "You become less bothered by the idea that there is uncertainty in the world," explains Jost."

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/…

 

Gee, given the title of the "study" do you think there's a chance it just may be a bit biased?

The answer to this question is the simplest way to distinguish between conservatives & liberal:

Who do you believe controls & is ultimately responsible for what you achieve in your life? You or the gov't?

If you accept responsibility for everything that comes your way & firmly believe you control your own destiny you are probably a conservative. If you look to the gov't to give you a hand up (out?) and to "level the playing field" you are probably a liberal.

 

So does every liberal live on their own mountain of superiority, or is it just you? Personally, I think the person who is so insecure that they need criticize others to make themselves feel better is the one who is fearful, ignorant, and narrow minded. What's the matter Moen? Have the recent elections shaken your confidence so badly that you needed to post this garbage in order to boost your self esteem.

And you are not fooling anybody with your little intro that promotes understanding between the two groups. The completely biased (and inflammatory) article that you posted tells us all we need to know about your real motive. Now get back to clown school and let the republicans make the decisions.

 

A defensive negative reaction isn't really what I was interested in. But then again, at least I understand why you are that way.

It doesn't seem like I have as much of a superiority complex as you have an inferiority complex judging by your hostility. If this is your only opinion...Noted! Now I'd like to hear from some of the more thoughtful members.

 

If you make a negative post, you should expect a negative response. You call it defensive, I call it proportional. The entire post was designed specifically to elicit the exact type of response I gave you. But you want to pretend that this thread is an intellectual exercise. Give us a ****ing break! At least Tomclown is genuine. He is a clown of the first order, but he doesn't pretend to be something that he isn't. You on the other hand are the most egotistical and deceitful person on this forum. The fact that you think you are superior to anybody on this forum other than Tom is hysterical. So you decided that you could no longer hack it in the real world and decided to tuck tail and hide in academia. By academia, we mean a job at a University that we can't confirm is even accredited since you won't divulge the name, and a job that may have nothing at all to do with higher education since you admitted that you are not a professor.

You probably believe the crap in that article as it helps you understand the dynamics of this forum. It begs the question, why do you need to read an obviously biased article to figure out this place? Why can't you think for yourself and come to your own conclusions? The people on this forum are not speaking different languages because of some disconnect between opposing viewpoints. The real problem is that just about every regular member of this forum is an a-hole and none of them are the least bit interested in what the people on the other side have to say. In this case, you are the

LEAVE OUT THE CHILDISH NAME CALLING THERE WAS NO NEED FOR IT

who devised an excuse to post an article that bashed conservatives and praised liberalism while preaching some bull**** about bipartisan understanding.

 

Yes, yes, Yes...Next please.

 

I don't know why you or anybody else (including myself), bothers to engage this idiot. You post is biased but nonetheless quite true, I think.

 

Read the following assessment of liberal vs. conservative, spoken to college graduates.

“Now, I realize that most of you consider yourselves Liberals. In fact, you are probably very proud of your liberal views. You care so much. You feel so much. You want to help so much. After all, you're a compassionate and caring person, aren't you now? Well, isn't that just so extraordinarily special. Now, at this age, is as good a time as any to be a Liberal; as good a time as any to know absolutely everything. You have plenty of time, starting tomorrow, for the truth to set in. Over the next few years, as you begin to feel the cold breath of reality down your neck, things are going to start changing pretty fast .. including your own assessment of just how much you really know.

So here are the first assignments for your initial class in reality: Pay attention to the news, read newspapers, and listen to the words and phrases that proud Liberals use to promote their causes. Then compare the words of the left to the words and phrases you hear from those evil, heartless, greedy conservatives. From the Left you will hear "I feel." From the Right you will hear "I think." From the Liberals you will hear references to groups --The Blacks, The Poor, The Rich, The Disadvantaged, The Less Fortunate. From the Right you will hear references to individuals. On the Left you hear talk of group rights; on the Right, individual rights.

Liberals feel. Liberals care. They are pack animals whose identity is tied up in group dynamics. Conservatives and Libertarians think -- and, setting aside the theocracy crowd, their identity is centered on the individual.

Liberals feel that their favored groups, have enforceable rights to the property and services of productive individuals. Conservatives think that individuals have the right to protect their lives and their property from the plunder of the masses.

In college you developed a group mentality, but if you look closely at your diplomas you will see that they have your individual names on them. Not the name of your school mascot, or of your fraternity or sorority, but your name. Your group identity is going away. Your recognition and appreciation of your individual identity starts now.

If, by the time you reach the age of 30, you do not consider yourself to be a libertarian or a conservative, rush right back here as quickly as you can and apply for a faculty position. These people will welcome you with open arms. They will welcome you, that is, so long as you haven't developed an individual identity. “

 

You are by far the dumbest person on this forum and you are calling someone else an idiot. Hey, did you notice that my post was edited? Guess the moderator is fair after all. Perhaps you owe him and apology. Now go buy a box of tissues cry baby!

 

You seem to be a very angy person which ironically is consistent with what the research indicates. Keep posting, you may only be one conservative but you certainly provide a lot of evidence for the validity of the study.

Three researchers across three universities with 22,000 participants but you are convinced that your opinion is the last word on the subject. Are you sure that you weren't one of the 22,000 people in the study? You certainly fit the mold.

 

I didn't read the entire study. I read the little article you posted which is biased crap. Hell, even Tomclown admitted that it was biased. Your little study uses the term narrow minded. Go back and read your posts academia boy. You are one of the most narrow minded individuals ever to grace this forum.

I am not angry but I am not about to just let you post this bs without strong opposition. Besides, where in your little article does it say that angry people are conservatives? Anger is an emotion. Liberals are not immune to anger. The fact that someone is angry in itself proves nothing. But nice little spin session. I guess that was an advanced class in clown college huh?

 

...easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable..." You can stop playing the victim here any time.

 

Your post was obviously biased and totally offensive to anyone who considers themselves a conservative. I was indecisive when I blasted your ridiculous post. I certainly don't fear you are any other clown on this pathetic forum. As for the rest, just more spin from top clown candidate number 2.

I notice that you avoid the subject completely when we talk about your fictitious university job at the imaginary school. Given your record of deceit on this forum, my guess is that your wife supports your unemployed ass. So tell us Dr. Bozo, what college employs a guy who spends most of his day on something as pointless as this forum?

 

Nope. No anger issues there at all.

 

Says the guy who is angry at the world.

 

Actually just you and people like you, their ignorance and your political party..not the whole world Sparky.

 

Dr moen & tomc obviously are so filled with hate and partisan propaganda they can not debate the differences between the two sides objectively. But, hey, it is good to see them back together again.

 

OK victim boy you keep saying the article that references the study is biased but you never quite say how it is biased. Calling something biased doesn't make it so, thats more of an opinion. Specifically, how is it biased? Give me details not just your opinion. All you say is "obvious bias" but lets say it isn't obvious to me. Go ahead and convince me.

 

JTH made a great point a few posts back. He noted that conservatives and liberals start their thinking from different points. Liberals start from "feelings," while conservatives start from "thinking." Not that I'm saying that liberalism is illogical. It's logical if you buy into its starting point. Just like conservatism. If you buy into its starting point, it makes sense. But you (and a lot of people on this forum on both sides of the aisle) don't want even to concede that logic may at all be present (however flawed left or the right (or both) may be) on the other side. You challenge him to convince you, and then have a history of not allowing any validity to points that may interfere with your preconceived notions.

Your study is flawed and biased. I've spent enough time in academia (and the mainline church) to know that you can get your sources to say anything you want them to. As Twain once noted, "Their are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics."

 

Well KLJ at least you don't have to resort to childish playground name calling and anger like Lehigh to make your points, even if I don't agree with them, I can respect your civility. The truth however is that there is nothing that proves that Liberals start their thinking from the point of feelings nor that conservatives start their thinking with thinking. However you want to interpret that it is just a little too simplistic to have any real meaning.
What this rather expansive study concluded was that liberals consider far more than conservatives do when approaching a problem because “conservatives have less tolerance for ambiguity” and rush to a conclusion much faster and then are unable to change their minds. They are just far more uncomfortable with ambiguity. In other words, they can’t see the big picture. As a matter of fact, the data concluded that liberals are "more likely to see gray areas and reconcile seemingly conflicting information” thus coming to a more informed decision. They do see the big picture while conservatives ended the thinking process and locked in their conclusion.
The liberal thought process if often described by conservative as more feeling based because conservatives can’t see beyond the black and white answer. Liberals can vacillate their conclusions when considering a problem as new information enters into the equation while conservatives make snap judgments based on incomplete information and are unable to incorporate that new information because their thought process has concluded.
This really has nothing to do with feelings vs. thinking. It’s more a difference of the 100 foot perspective vs. the 10,000 foot perspective. The big picture vs. the narrow focus. The absolute soothes the conservative.