Conservative Morals & Lifestyle.

[Doc Savage Fan]

Moonie, the left amygdala and emotions of deep empathy are quite related. The left amygdala in women are typically larger. Wish I had more time to discuss. Will try later.

 

[Moonbeam]

Moonie, the left amygdala and emotions of deep empathy are quite related. The left amygdala in women are typically larger. Wish I had more time to discuss. Will try later.

Geez, I fgrgot my link: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201310/the-neuroscience-empathy

 

[Moonbeam]

Considering most marriages end in divorce, even amongst conservatives, technically the most moral choice would be to have children out of wedlock.

Divorce is the product of self hate. When we fall in love we feel wonderful, vindicated by the love of the other, but because the self hate is not recognized but motivates our actions, the testing begins. When we test the love of the other we do it in ways certain to fail so we destroy love because we can't believe it is real. We learn to hate those who love us because they could only do so if they are fools. We were all made to feel worthless and only another worthless person would ever love us.

 

[sandorski]

Perspective. Get some.

Once again: their goal is not to eliminate "sin," unwed mothers, poverty, STDs, or anything you said. They don't want schools encouraging their kids to sin. They want reduced teen pregnancies among secular kids to reduce abortions, but that is not the motivating factor. A single parent who doesn't abort the child is a win as far as they are concerned. They are not concerned with the teen pregnancy rate versus contraception-based sex ed, they are concerned with the rate versus NO sex ed. As long as there is an improvement over THAT scenario, they don't see it as a failure. It is a balanced approach.

So?

 

[CZroe]

So?

If he's wrong about their goal then he's wrong about their success or failure.

 

[sandorski]

Ok, but on that topic why do you think that subtle difference matters?

Do you think Not Sinning is of greater importance than not getting an STD, unintentionally Pregnant, needing an Abortion, etc etc?

 

[ivwshane]

There you go again, no one claimed that republican plans were to prevent ALL teenage /unwed pregnancies.

Maybe you'd like to try another straw man or perhaps you'd like to keep showing us just how clueless you are?

There you go again. No one ever promoted abstinence as the solution to prevent ALL teenage/unwed pregnancies so another example of a teenage pregnancy in a Conservative household doesn't mean what you think it means. How do you know she didn't also have a sex ed class where contraceptives were promoted? Would you call it a failure of contraceptive-based sex ed? Well, bad news for you then: Most teen/unwed mothers have had some form of contraceptive-based sex ed. By your logic, they are BOTH failures. Even if she hasn't had contraceptive-based sex ed, at 17 I am sure she is fully aware of both. So answer me this: are BOTH failures simply because teen pregnancy exists in households of both Liberals AND Conservatives?!

Your perspective is still WAY off base.

 

[michal1980]

Liberals talking about morals. Ha. Let me know when a liberal finds one.

 

[nickqt]

Liberals talking about morals. Ha. Let me know when a liberal finds one.

Did you get your "libruls libruls libruls, libruls libruls, libruls" nonsense quota complete today?

Thanks for nothing.

On topic:

Considering most marriages end in divorce, even amongst conservatives, technically the most moral choice would be to have children out of wedlock.

Divorce isn't 50%+ of marriages anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/u...ut-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

 

[michal1980]

Did you get your "libruls libruls libruls, libruls libruls, libruls" nonsense quota complete today?

Thanks for nothing.

On topic:



Divorce isn't 50%+ of marriages anymore.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/u...ut-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

Oh look its the resident liberal bot who's main response is 'liburls liburls rararararar"

 

[Victorian Gray]

Oh look its the resident liberal bot who's main response is 'liburls liburls rararararar"

Gov. Haley wonders if you agreed with what Ann Coulter said about her.

 

[CZroe]

Ok, but on that topic why do you think that subtle difference matters?

Do you think Not Sinning is of greater importance than not getting an STD, unintentionally Pregnant, needing an Abortion, etc etc?

No, which is why I support sex ed like most people do. If a conservative doesn't want their kids to think that unwed sex is OK as long as long as they do it safely, it's up to them to teach that to their kids. Same as if they want to teach young Earth creationism. The schools will tell them about evolution and the Earth's several billion year history and then the parents will to tell them about the 7 day creation story and their young Earth beliefs. They both contradict the values the parents want to teach children their kids, so I understand why SOME (not even nearly all) don't want it forced on their kids. Perspective matters.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Doc Savage Fan: LBD is where the lack of amygdala development produces a diminished ability to perceive and assess threat. Also, amygdala deficiency is often seen as a fundamental factor involving the lack of empathetic behavior.

M: Read this and note that with regard to empathy the only time the amygdala is mentioned is peripherally regarding psychopaths reacting to self imagined pain. The thrust of the article suggests other regions of the brain being the source of empathy and also that it can be trained. Note that shotgun thinking, the kind of speed decision threat analysis characteristic of conservatives, is implicated in a lack of empathy. It should be obvious that if one is motivated by fear, as suggested by the over size of the amygdala in conservatives, that there will not be much concern for the fate of others when in that state. The whole function of the fear reaction is to preserve the self. And without empathy that's all there is. The liberal brain is able to suppress that fear and allow rational thought to function. Do you think concern for the welfare of others is irrational? I don't.

I don't either. Perhaps their larger amygdala explains why conservatives are empathetic and more willing to make personal sacrifices to help others less fortunate.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/i...e-of-liberals-and-conservatives/#.VZLJ0flJZpg

Those with a larger amygdala are also thought to experience and express more empathy, perhaps explaining why one of the features of psychopathy is a smaller amygdala. This is not to say that someone with a smaller amygdala is a psychopath, just that they are probably less emotionally reactive or receptive.

 

[OverVolt]

I have a cat in my amygdala.

 

[MongGrel]

Liberals talking about morals. Ha. Let me know when a liberal finds one.

I don't either. Perhaps their larger amygdala explains why conservatives are empathetic and more willing to make personal sacrifices to help others less fortunate.

That's a joke, right ?

 

[Moonbeam]

I don't either. Perhaps their larger amygdala explains why conservatives are empathetic and more willing to make personal sacrifices to help others less fortunate.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/i...e-of-liberals-and-conservatives/#.VZLJ0flJZpg

M: What I see is group think, group loyalty, sympathy for people like 'us'. I see less empathy for the foreigner, the poor, people of color, people of different religions, etc. Also, there is a large social component to donations at churches, which if removed from the equation, would more balance the ratio of giving, I would think.

Also, I think you are categorizing empathy as a function of charity rather than empathy at the voting booth. I am the one who has to pay for my liberal fiscal policy when I vote for it. I am a tax payer, not a taker and so are most people who vote. The poor have little say in anything because they don't vote.

Did you look at the link I provided above on empathy that I forgot to include in my original post?

I reread your link and have read it before. The point about empathy that was made, I think, is that empathy is a feeling, and that like all feelings, liberal brains on average are better able to find ways to apply empathy rationally and not according to bias introduced by other feelings, like traditional value worship, etc.

For an example off the top of my head, I believe both in the fact that people don't value what is given for free and have empathy for the poor, and do not want them to die just because they think Santa should care for them. I have conservative values and liberal aspirations for change. The answer to welfare to me then lies in giving people things only if they give something in return, but it doesn't have to be much, just enough to provide some inner feeling that their contribution leads to reward. Their negative mentality needs to be rewired with achievement carrots until it becomes self sustaining.

I am a conservative in the emphasis I place on morality but not the morality of tradition, but a morality based on logic and reason, one based on real facts about our real nature. I believe that humanity is naturally good and not evil and that goodness is acquired not by reaching or striving for it, but by washing away the evil. The truth is found by the practice of unlearning. That means emptiness of not just conservative, but also liberal ideology. The truth is always some third way, a synthesis of opposites at a higher level of understanding.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

M: What I see is group think, group loyalty, sympathy for people like 'us'. I see less empathy for the foreigner, the poor, people of color, people of different religions, etc. Also, there is a large social component to donations at churches, which if removed from the equation, would more balance the ratio of giving, I would think.

Katrina proves your theory wrong. Conservatives came out in huge numbers from all over the country making a incredible impact helping people of all colors, religions, etc.

Also, I think you are categorizing empathy as a function of charity rather than empathy at the voting booth. I am the one who has to pay for my liberal fiscal policy when I vote for it. I am a tax payer, not a taker and so are most people who vote. The poor have little say in anything because they don't vote.

The science disagrees with your assumption. Conservatives perceive emotions and pain in others better than liberals and are much more prone to act on empathetic feelings. Liberals typically support higher taxes in principle; however, they seek to lower their own personal taxes (as we all do) and, in reality, are less likely to sacrifice personally for the poor and disadvantaged.

Did you look at the link I provided above on empathy that I forgot to include in my original post?

Yes.

I reread your link and have read it before. The point about empathy that was made, I think, is that empathy is a feeling, and that like all feelings, liberal brains on average are better able to find ways to apply empathy rationally and not according to bias introduced by other feelings, like traditional value worship, etc.

Liberals rationalize their empathy, conservatives deeply feel it and act on it.

For an example off the top of my head, I believe both in the fact that people don't value what is given for free and have empathy for the poor, and do not want them to die just because they think Santa should care for them. I have conservative values and liberal aspirations for change. The answer to welfare to me then lies in giving people things only if they give something in return, but it doesn't have to be much, just enough to provide some inner feeling that their contribution leads to reward. Their negative mentality needs to be rewired with achievement carrots until it becomes self sustaining.

This is also what many, many conservatives believe. If we truly want to help people, we need to provide a way to help them in way that goes well beyond just throwing money at them and fostering an entitlement mentality that is ultimately detrimental to them.

I am a conservative in the emphasis I place on morality but not the morality of tradition, but a morality based on logic and reason, one based on real facts about our real nature. I believe that humanity is naturally good and not evil and that goodness is acquired not by reaching or striving for it, but by washing away the evil. The truth is found by the practice of unlearning. That means emptiness of not just conservative, but also liberal ideology. The truth is always some third way, a synthesis of opposites at a higher level of understanding.

The truth indeed is a third way.

 

[nickqt]

Oh look its the resident liberal bot who's main response is 'liburls liburls rararararar"

Oh look, it's the resident conservative who can't say anything substantive because it's beyond your mental capacities, so you simply say a phrase with: liberal + denigration in every post, because that's all you got.

Keep on keepin' on!