How to spot a flawed study
This study has lit up the blogosphere. Apparently, conservatives are conservative because they were whiny little kids.
Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative.
At least, he did if he was one of 95 kids from the Berkeley area that social scientists have been tracking for the last 20 years. The confident, resilient, self-reliant kids mostly grew up to be liberals.
(emphasis mine.)
Really? As a reader over at Michelle's site pointed out (where I filched the link), "In the end I wonder if the study doesn't merely reveal the fact that conservatives get the whining out of the way early and move on, while liberals never really get over it."
ShrinkWrapped, a psychoanalyst, fisks it pretty well.
I cannot tell if the error is Kleiner's or Block's but it is a fundamental error to assume that a political liberal is more or less rigid than a political conservative; if anything, adaptability and the creation and adoption of new ideas is much more prevalent on the Conservative side of the political divide than the Liberal side. As even Democrats have remarked, they don't even know what they stand for any more, beyond a rigid and reflexive anti-Bush stance. Progressives and conservatives have switched places around the world.
Just one example: Once again, Paris is burning, and the fires this time are being set by the university age children of the comfortable middle class who have grown up in a Socialist state where jobs, when they are available, are for life, and where all one's needs are met by the state. It is unquestionable that Berkeley liberals would point to the French as the height of progressive thought and culture on the planet. Yet the paradox here is that the French rioters are not only anything but non-conformist, they are anxious, rigid, and terrified of change; they are violently reactionary. Joe N. at No Pasaran captures their mindset brilliantly, in Life is static. Nothing should ever change. Feed me.
emphasiss in original.) Read the whole thing.
The article does make one point that I find interesting:
Whether anyone's feelings are hurt or not, the work suggests that personality and emotions play a bigger role in our political leanings than we think. All of us, liberal or conservative, feel as though we've reached our political opinions by carefully weighing the evidence and exercising our best judgment. But it could be that all of that careful reasoning is just after-the-fact self-justification. What if personality forms our political outlook, with reason coming along behind, rationalizing after the fact?
There is some truth to this, I think. Our personality is formed during our childhood and is heavily influenced by our parents and peers. If they are liberal, chances are we will be as well. Same thing goes if our parents are conservative. I've seen people on both sides of the aisle fall into name calling and straw man arguments when their own opinions are challenged. On the right, it's usually people supporting creationism or (lately) intelligent design who end up resorting to emotional arguments. On the left, it's usually George W. Bush and the war on terror, as well as economic policies and racial issues.
Don't think that "those other guys" are the only ones who do let their passions control them. It is human nature for us to be ruled by our passions. If you are human, than your passions rule you. It is not restricted to a particular political party. If you think it is, I have some great beach-front condos here in Denver to sell you.
UPDATE: Commenter M. Capulus at ShrinkedWrapped's site makes a good point:
The subtext of this "study" is that conservatives are flawed at their core, and are probably beyond rehabilitation. The implications of this view should shock us, because it's a first step in dehumanizing dissenters. In a future totalitarian system - which liberals are bent on creating - conservatives will have to be removed from the body politic.
Whether this actually happens is up in the air, but dehumanizing others based on something as simple as a difference of opinion can lead to no good.
Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative.
At least, he did if he was one of 95 kids from the Berkeley area that social scientists have been tracking for the last 20 years. The confident, resilient, self-reliant kids mostly grew up to be liberals.
(emphasis mine.)
Really? As a reader over at Michelle's site pointed out (where I filched the link), "In the end I wonder if the study doesn't merely reveal the fact that conservatives get the whining out of the way early and move on, while liberals never really get over it."
ShrinkWrapped, a psychoanalyst, fisks it pretty well.
I cannot tell if the error is Kleiner's or Block's but it is a fundamental error to assume that a political liberal is more or less rigid than a political conservative; if anything, adaptability and the creation and adoption of new ideas is much more prevalent on the Conservative side of the political divide than the Liberal side. As even Democrats have remarked, they don't even know what they stand for any more, beyond a rigid and reflexive anti-Bush stance. Progressives and conservatives have switched places around the world.
Just one example: Once again, Paris is burning, and the fires this time are being set by the university age children of the comfortable middle class who have grown up in a Socialist state where jobs, when they are available, are for life, and where all one's needs are met by the state. It is unquestionable that Berkeley liberals would point to the French as the height of progressive thought and culture on the planet. Yet the paradox here is that the French rioters are not only anything but non-conformist, they are anxious, rigid, and terrified of change; they are violently reactionary. Joe N. at No Pasaran captures their mindset brilliantly, in Life is static. Nothing should ever change. Feed me.
emphasiss in original.) Read the whole thing.
The article does make one point that I find interesting:
Whether anyone's feelings are hurt or not, the work suggests that personality and emotions play a bigger role in our political leanings than we think. All of us, liberal or conservative, feel as though we've reached our political opinions by carefully weighing the evidence and exercising our best judgment. But it could be that all of that careful reasoning is just after-the-fact self-justification. What if personality forms our political outlook, with reason coming along behind, rationalizing after the fact?
There is some truth to this, I think. Our personality is formed during our childhood and is heavily influenced by our parents and peers. If they are liberal, chances are we will be as well. Same thing goes if our parents are conservative. I've seen people on both sides of the aisle fall into name calling and straw man arguments when their own opinions are challenged. On the right, it's usually people supporting creationism or (lately) intelligent design who end up resorting to emotional arguments. On the left, it's usually George W. Bush and the war on terror, as well as economic policies and racial issues.
Don't think that "those other guys" are the only ones who do let their passions control them. It is human nature for us to be ruled by our passions. If you are human, than your passions rule you. It is not restricted to a particular political party. If you think it is, I have some great beach-front condos here in Denver to sell you.
UPDATE: Commenter M. Capulus at ShrinkedWrapped's site makes a good point:
The subtext of this "study" is that conservatives are flawed at their core, and are probably beyond rehabilitation. The implications of this view should shock us, because it's a first step in dehumanizing dissenters. In a future totalitarian system - which liberals are bent on creating - conservatives will have to be removed from the body politic.
Whether this actually happens is up in the air, but dehumanizing others based on something as simple as a difference of opinion can lead to no good.
posted by CT at 3/22/2006 12:24:00 PM
<< Home