|
Post by Fingerplucked on Sept 21, 2013 6:15:17 GMT -5
"I like you and all, but that book . . . I just don't know how you're ever going to make it up to me." Maybe with a better recommendation. Have you tried the book of Leviticus? It's gripping. <fingers in my ears> la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la
|
|
|
Post by Supertramp78 on Sept 22, 2013 1:39:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Sept 22, 2013 7:09:31 GMT -5
Interesting graph, Tramp. Lot of stuff packed into that.
Some of it looks like whoever made it was just trying to assign the opposite attribute to one already assigned. For instance, Rs have "Don't Interfere With." That sounds about right. But then Ds have "Interfere With?" Really? Democrats like to be interfered with? I'd say nobody likes to be interfered with.
I got the same with Ds Idealism vs Rs Pragmatism. I think Ds get overly idealistic at times. But Rs have their own weaknesses and are no more likely to be pragmatic than Ds. (Think gov't shutdown and credit default.)
By the time it gets to the bottom with the "votes for" section, it's a total mess. But overall I think it's a pretty good summary, it just could have used more work or more input from others.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 22, 2013 11:58:35 GMT -5
First impression of the infographic: It maps not actual traits of "left" and "right" but aggregations of not-entirely-thought-through cliches about those inadequate labels, filtered through the popular press and internet meme-swapping.
And again: the crucial oversimplification is that there is a simple X/Y axis along which socio-poltico-economic opinions and attitudes can be located. To use my own opinion set as a counter-example, I am emphatically not a utopian; am strongly guided by the past (including being aware of its delusions); detest governmental intrusions into private life; am anti-authoritarian and anti-sentimentality; am a conscientious objector; am not a pacifist; have no religion whatsoever and think that yours is your business; and would remove Scientology from the list of tax-exempt religious organizations in a heartbeat.
So where do I fit on the infographic?
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 22, 2013 12:03:38 GMT -5
First impression of the infographic: It maps not actual traits of "left" and "right" but aggregations of not-entirely-thought-through cliches about those inadequate labels, filtered through the popular press and internet meme-swapping. agree.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 22, 2013 12:30:36 GMT -5
First impression of the infographic: It maps not actual traits of "left" and "right" but aggregations of not-entirely-thought-through cliches about those inadequate labels, filtered through the popular press and internet meme-swapping. And again: the crucial oversimplification is that there is a simple X/Y axis along which socio-poltico-economic opinions and attitudes can be located. To use my own opinion set as a counter-example, I am emphatically not a utopian; am strongly guided by the past (including being aware of its delusions); detest governmental intrusions into private life; am anti-authoritarian and anti-sentimentality; am a conscientious objector; am not a pacifist; have no religion whatsoever and think that yours is your business; and would remove Scientology from the list of tax-exempt religious organizations in a heartbeat. So where do I fit on the infographic? Don't know. How tall are you? On a 22" screen I couldn't read the picture.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 22, 2013 14:12:05 GMT -5
I'm either a rather short human or a rather tall, very mangey orange tabby cat.
Since my usual vocalization comes out as either Ack! or Thptpth!, I have my own suspicions as to which.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 22, 2013 14:37:55 GMT -5
I'm either a rather short human or a rather tall, very mangey orange tabby cat. Since my usual vocalization comes out as either Ack! or Thptpth!, I have my own suspicions as to which. I can't be the only person who wishes he could make that sound the roadrunner makes just before he runs off. Maybe I can.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Sept 22, 2013 14:40:05 GMT -5
Once again based on who gets to do the definition of left and right. What the media and people here call the right is just left to a tiny bit less than Karl Marks.
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Sept 22, 2013 17:06:29 GMT -5
First impression of the infographic: It maps not actual traits of "left" and "right" but aggregations of not-entirely-thought-through cliches about those inadequate labels, filtered through the popular press and internet meme-swapping. agree. You guys are a little tougher on the chart maker than I would have been. The chart definitely has some inaccuracies. With or without them, I just don't think there's much you can do with the chart. It could be useful to an alien though, one who's wondering what all the fuss is about. I like Haidt's approach better. He tries to find the underlying, innate values that manifest themselves as some of the symptoms shown on Tramp's chart: • The Care/harm foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of caring for vulnerable children. It makes us sensitive to signs of suffering and need; it makes us despise cruelty and want to care for those who are suffering. • The Fairness/cheating foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of reaping the rewards of cooperation without getting exploited. It makes us sensitive to indications that another person is likely to be a good (or bad) partner for collaboration and reciprocal altruism. It makes us want to shun or punish cheaters. • The Loyalty/betrayal foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of forming and maintaining coalitions. It makes us sensitive to signs that another person is (or is not) a team player. It makes us trust and reward such people, and it makes us want to hurt, ostracize, or even kill those who betray us or our group. • The Authority/subversion foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of forging relationships that will benefit us within social hierarchies. It makes us sensitive to signs of rank or status, and to signs that other people are (or are not) behaving properly, given their position. • The Sanctity/degradation foundation evolved initially in response to the adaptive challenge of the omnivore’s dilemma, and then to the broader challenge of living in a world of pathogens and parasites. It includes the behavioral immune system, which can make us wary of a diverse array of symbolic objects and threats. It makes it possible for people to invest objects with irrational and extreme values—both positive and negative—which are important for binding groups together. Those were the first five. Haidt later went back and added a sixth that addressed a void in conservative values: Liberty/oppression Liberals value the first two and ranked the remaining four low much, much lower. Conservatives ranked all six more or less equally. ![](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/files/2011/12/viewer.jpg) The above graphs the results of the original surveys without Liberty/oppression. (I think it'd track along with loyalty, authority and sanctity.) Note that these are aggregate results. You can be a liberal or a conservative and not fit the profile. That doesn't make the profile invalid. Also note that the differences are less pronounced as you move away from the left or right toward the middle.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Sept 22, 2013 17:19:46 GMT -5
Biologically 1 and 5 make sense. But biologically for 2,3 & 4. These make more sense and biology wins. And even #1 falls to the biological concept of "me and mine"
• The Fairness/cheating foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of being able to figure out who you fight straight up and who you sneak up on and bash in the back of the head. • The Loyalty/betrayal foundation evolved in response to the enemy of my enemy is my friend (for now) • The Authority/subversion foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of the guy with the biggest club wins.
But then I'm a population biologist and tend to see everything with a biology hammer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2013 17:23:58 GMT -5
Once again based on who gets to do the definition of left and right. What the media and people here call the right is just left to a tiny bit less than Karl Marks. No it isn't and it's <Marx> *sigh* Doug, at least learn to spell your enemy.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 22, 2013 17:53:02 GMT -5
The graph makes it easy to see why liberals are always easily taken advantage of (pardon the grammar). Everyone left of Conservative lives in a fairly caring world that does not exist in this part of the galaxy now and probably never will. The conservative apparently looks at all aspects before forming an opinion on things because he values all aspects equally. The market for unicorns appears to start just left of slightly conservative. All in how I read the diagram of course so all IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Sept 22, 2013 19:29:42 GMT -5
The graph makes it easy to see why liberals are always easily taken advantage of (pardon the grammar). Everyone left of Conservative lives in a fairly caring world that does not exist in this part of the galaxy now and probably never will. The conservative apparently looks at all aspects before forming an opinion on things because he values all aspects equally. The market for unicorns appears to start just left of slightly conservative. All in how I read the diagram of course so all IMHO. That's one way of looking at it, and viewed from that perspective, you'd think you'd have the better outlook. I probably pay more attention to Loyalty/betrayal than most liberals. But I don't spend much time worrying about Authority/subversion, Sanctity/degradation, and Liberty/oppression. If you ask me, people like you are dedicating way too much effort to issues that are relatively unimportant. I prefer to focus on the stuff that matters.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 23, 2013 5:00:54 GMT -5
The graph makes it easy to see why liberals are always easily taken advantage of (pardon the grammar). Everyone left of Conservative lives in a fairly caring world that does not exist in this part of the galaxy now and probably never will. The conservative apparently looks at all aspects before forming an opinion on things because he values all aspects equally. The market for unicorns appears to start just left of slightly conservative. All in how I read the diagram of course so all IMHO. That's one way of looking at it, and viewed from that perspective, you'd think you'd have the better outlook. I probably pay more attention to Loyalty/betrayal than most liberals. But I don't spend much time worrying about Authority/subversion, Sanctity/degradation, and Liberty/oppression. If you ask me, people like you are dedicating way too much effort to issues that are relatively unimportant. I prefer to focus on the stuff that matters. Maybe that's the difference. I know what I wish would happen but then I have to consider all the things that might get in the way of it happening, have a plan to deal with them and a backup plan so I don't get surprised and in the end lower my expectations for the outcome. I learned, by experience, many years ago that the world in general is neither fair nor caring. We may wish it otherwise but it isn't. So, instead of obsessing over it I just learned to deal with it and live with it. That's why a neo-con was defined as a liberal who had been mugged by reality.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 23, 2013 10:35:17 GMT -5
Re: sentences two and three of the above. That describes my approach to life as well. And apparently I'm a liberal (or so I'm told). I'm guessing that any number of Soundholers who have reached middle age in decent financial and psychological condition share these attitudes. All neo-cons? Or just kidding themselves? Or maybe the correlation between prudence and political opinion is vastly exaggerated?
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 23, 2013 14:39:45 GMT -5
"I know what I wish would happen but then I have to consider all the things that might get in the way of it happening, have a plan to deal with them and a backup plan so I don't get surprised and in the end lower my expectations for the outcome. I learned, by experience, many years ago that the world in general is neither fair nor caring. We may wish it otherwise but it isn't. So, instead of obsessing over it I just learned to deal with it and live with it."
I agree with all of that, Bruce. It doesn't lead to any particular political orientation. The most liberal friend I have would agree with all of that.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 23, 2013 18:03:43 GMT -5
"I know what I wish would happen but then I have to consider all the things that might get in the way of it happening, have a plan to deal with them and a backup plan so I don't get surprised and in the end lower my expectations for the outcome. I learned, by experience, many years ago that the world in general is neither fair nor caring. We may wish it otherwise but it isn't. So, instead of obsessing over it I just learned to deal with it and live with it." I agree with all of that, Bruce. It doesn't lead to any particular political orientation. The most liberal friend I have would agree with all of that. Sounds like you and Russell don't agree with Jim's, or whoever's it is, diagram then.
|
|
|
Post by Supertramp78 on Sept 23, 2013 18:35:54 GMT -5
I posted it and I don't agree with it.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 23, 2013 18:56:53 GMT -5
You guys are a little tougher on the chart maker than I would have been. The chart definitely has some inaccuracies. With or without them, I just don't think there's much you can do with the chart. It could be useful to an alien though, one who's wondering what all the fuss is about. I like Haidt's approach better. He tries to find the underlying, innate values that manifest themselves as some of the symptoms shown on Tramp's chart: • The Care/harm foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of caring for vulnerable children. It makes us sensitive to signs of suffering and need; it makes us despise cruelty and want to care for those who are suffering. • The Fairness/cheating foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of reaping the rewards of cooperation without getting exploited. It makes us sensitive to indications that another person is likely to be a good (or bad) partner for collaboration and reciprocal altruism. It makes us want to shun or punish cheaters. • The Loyalty/betrayal foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of forming and maintaining coalitions. It makes us sensitive to signs that another person is (or is not) a team player. It makes us trust and reward such people, and it makes us want to hurt, ostracize, or even kill those who betray us or our group. • The Authority/subversion foundation evolved in response to the adaptive challenge of forging relationships that will benefit us within social hierarchies. It makes us sensitive to signs of rank or status, and to signs that other people are (or are not) behaving properly, given their position. • The Sanctity/degradation foundation evolved initially in response to the adaptive challenge of the omnivore’s dilemma, and then to the broader challenge of living in a world of pathogens and parasites. It includes the behavioral immune system, which can make us wary of a diverse array of symbolic objects and threats. It makes it possible for people to invest objects with irrational and extreme values—both positive and negative—which are important for binding groups together. Those were the first five. Haidt later went back and added a sixth that addressed a void in conservative values: Liberty/oppression Liberals value the first two and ranked the remaining four low much, much lower. Conservatives ranked all six more or less equally. ![](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/files/2011/12/viewer.jpg) The above graphs the results of the original surveys without Liberty/oppression. (I think it'd track along with loyalty, authority and sanctity.) Note that these are aggregate results. You can be a liberal or a conservative and not fit the profile. That doesn't make the profile invalid. Also note that the differences are less pronounced as you move away from the left or right toward the middle. I was commenting on this one, not yours, Tramp.
|
|