« Psychology Today Examines "The Ideological Animal" | Main | Morning Report: January 21, 2007 »




Notice that among these studies, Liberal's purported embrace of 'integrative complexity', 'shades of gray', and 'conflicting information' is uniformly portrayed as the result of superior rational faculties. But if you look into the types of contradictions that are being reconciled, you could just as easily conclude that Liberals tend to conform observations and facts to doctrine - the complexity of integrating these conflicts derives from the incoherence of their position.


James Baldwin wryly defined a liberal as “someone who thinks he knows more about your experience than you do.” To that, we can add, “and who thinks, because of his superior knowledge, he should be making your decisions for you.”


While waiting in a store, I happened to read that article (Psychology Ptoday being the only thing to read available at that moment) and was impressed with one thing overall. The article itself was irrational.


The author of the PT article just threw out interviews where fear was not a reason for the shift to conservatism. (Neo-neocon is the one example I know of, and circuitously found your site from her expressing similar complaints here.

Hmm, html not allowed :( Here:

Apparently, the author had made up his mind, and was just looking for examples to prove it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad


StatCounter - DiL2