And that can not exclude certain self-avowed conservatives who have the same uncivilized qualities and demeanor. The changes from recognizing our cultured divine qualities to gradually displacing them with ignorance and secularization were for the worse, and not for the better optimal growth and health for a nation conceived and born with sacred guiding principles. However, one of the brightest rays of hope, shining from enlightened conservatives, liberals, libertarians, moderates or progressives no matter what their mix and brand of ideologies may be can see through the demonization of the uncivilized leftist mentality.
Their transforming influences work. For example, it is a term that references the discussion of free will and to what extent there is free will, fate, or divine purpose and intervention and such.
That is a broad and interesting discussion that is not unrelated to political liberalism and instead shares roots with it. It was either Mill or Locke that noted that the use of the same term for both things that is, liberty was unfortunate.
Regardless of what hand they must write with, or what ideology they stand by. God loves us all. Judeo-Christian worldviews easily fleshes itself out as shown in this article? Is it an inaccurate generality to say that liberal mindsets, statistically speaking, lean more towards pluralistic or atheistic moral codes and conservative mindsets lean more towards Judeo-Christian moral codes?
If we can be honest and agree that there is a decent correlation albeit not absolute between these two moral codes and their political implications, one can easily see why conservatives would be united under social expectations, given that conservatives are generally united under the same source of moral code — the Bible.
The very concept of atheism suggests that every man adopts for himself whatever is fitting for himself and implies that people are different and can and should live by different systems if desired.
This is precisely why we can observe atheists that are both conservative and liberal politically albeit the vast majority liberal while there are virtually no Christian that would support various liberal positions, such as abortion, for instance, or would at least shamefully and secretly support it for personal benefits because it would go against their own moral code. This is not suggesting that conservatives live by their moral code any better than liberals live by theirs. Tis not true. This is because the Left owns and operates the media and public squares for the most part.
Liberal ideas dominate the media and the things our children see and hear from day one of their existence and any attempt conservatives have at fighting this is met with strong, condeming resistance. We all grow up hearing and knowing the liberal position.
To be conservative in this country nowadays, you have to search for it. Could you imagine how frustrating it would be to have searched for truth, found the albeit unpopular position, and agreed with its premise and interpretation after much research only to find opposition that not only severely misunderstands your lifestyle and values but also wrongly accuses you through conflation of ideas, half-truths and smear campaigns?
Would you want to have anything to do with people that did such things to you? Precisely why the red areas are entirely rural and the blue areas are in the top cities of america…. That would be weird anyway. So the point of my post is that I feel this kind of dialog needs to happen hundreds of thousands of times.
At deeper levels of every single point, we all want the same things. Yes there are those who care only about money and power. Without a doubt this is true. I deserve some of that.
And the Bible has no tolerance for laziness. I read an article a couple years ago called A Bitter Pill, why health care costs are crippling America, published in Time magazine.. Something like that anyway. It was a good read. I believe in government health care now.
Well honest government healthcare. And certainly if the parties cannot lay things aside and work together to fix this issue. Right now the Dems main focus is to make sure Trump fails. Like cutting off their nose to spite their face. But come on. Especially since social media has come into power.
All we care about is defeating the other party. Yes people like you and me. We are not the crooks. We are the victims. The show from Washington is to keep us focused on hating each other so that absolutely nothing ever changes. My point is that in that story two things are revealed. Pharmaceuticals are high because both Dems and Reps have screwed the US on this issue. Do the homework. The healthcare lobby owns both sides of the aisle.
Both sides. Because we are so entrenched in our ideologies, those in Washington get the last laugh. Because the media, liberal and conservative keep the issues hot and in our face, well we keep thinking the enemy is the other party.
They are your neighbors, your friends, your parents, your kids. Just have a family reunion. The revolution that will survive and cause things to change is the one that surrenders their own objectives for those of others. The only thing that will get Washington to listen and actually support the people and not special interests is votes and action. Just pick those things that are not hard to sell. Like heathcare. Who wants to continue to pay the highest prices on pharmaceuticals for same drugs on the entire planet?
Most know neither the dems nor reps are on our side. They are just so afraid of the other side. Unfortunately both sides are justified in there fears. The ONLY reason this is the way it is, is because of our elected officials. Do an internet search and ask the question why Americans pay as much as 7 times more for medications.
So why are American voters focused on the stupid parties to fix an issue like this and not assigning blame to the source.
The healthcare lobby for instance. We sit at home struggling to write check after check to cover medical bills while our elected officials do a bate and switch. He knew who called the shots. Ta crump is learning.
Once we as Americans realize not every issue is right or left. Not Trump or Hillary. But because people are bought, politicians are bought and parties are bought. Healthcare is probably the biggest single issue in most families. I promise you. Liberals are supposed to be against shaming women, but they think nothing about calling Melania Trump the most vile names imaginable, talking as if pictures like the ones you see in Vogue are the equivalent of a porno. As a woman myself, it makes me very upset.
So how come now, anyone that questions Obama is suddenly a bad guy? Obama says he is Christian; Its got to be true. Even though there is no record of a baptism, and he is supposed to be Southern Baptist. Does it matter? Oh yes. Lying to the voters matters very much. When did liberals become so against liberty? You will forgive me, But I simply have no trust of a group of people who have openly stated that the ends justify the means.
What was the thing that caused you to view harmonious behavior in groups as a good thing when you were in China? Was there a time before that but after you moved to China when you either ran low on money, or maybe was it something about China itself that changed your thinking?
Jonathan Haidt talked about how he used to despise conservative thinking himself before he studied in India. What do you think? Applause and admiration to Julianne Weinman and Nigel Assam for their articulation of my thoughts. Approaching 70, I remember being young and idealistic. Somewhere in my 30s, idealism began to be replaced by realism. I suspect there are many more like me.
I would only add that Caldwell-Harris, like Jonathan Haidt, appears to travel in rarefied circles. Not only is she personally inoculated from the kind of savage anti-choice policies, anti-LGBT bigotry, racist voter suppression, attacks on the social safety net, environmental injustice remember Katrina and the shoddy response by the Bush administration?
A very brave thing to wade into such a contentious debate! Thanks for getting us started on an airing of our views. I have grown more liberal as I have found out more about the real world. Personal freedom, while important, is not a core value of liberal thought. Liberalism is about supporting people in their personal development. Also, liberals do not make such support dependent on narrow judgement of character.
They are just personal and parochial. Fairness and doing no harm are such values. See Kant regarding universality of moral dicta 3 There is nothing in liberalism that would undercut warm and supportive behavior toward others-whether family or strangers. Liberals suggest that we should attempt to make the best of and see the best in each other.
Liberals recognize the futility or piecemeal charity in the face of systemic need. Only an organized system of charitable giving could succeed in addressing real need.
Peter Singer has some thought-provoking ideas on how much and who should be giving. Would love to see such reforms get more exposure. Common sense palliatives seem to satisfy the epistemic needs of conservatives. That is why it is not much fun to engage a conservative in conversation. Either they simply insist on the correctness of their views or they refuse to really engage at all in an open discussion.
It is easy, for instance, to feel good when you believe that you deserve your good fortune and that there is no obligation to share your wealth.
I would not wish to be a houseguest of such a person and I guess there is little danger that I ever will! Dear Mr. Bennett, I appreciate our difference and even though I wanted to read your entire reply, I stopped at liberals views on personal freedom. It is difficult for me to understand foregoing freedom for a collective thought. History has shown that any attempt for collective thought has resulted in mass murder and unspeakable carnage as well a financial riches for those who have successfully persuaded others to follow.
I am neither conservative or liberal…. I am a free thinking human who chooses to make my own decisions and who chooses not to follow a morality that subjugates my morality. I feel the exact same way you do… except from the exact opposite side. I am about as far right as you can get. I am always so frustrated watching two liberals argue with two conservatives on TV not getting anywhere. I have said for years, I would love to debate a liberal and have an intelligent conversation without the yelling.
I have always been conservative and the more life and business experience I get, it just solidifies by beliefs. We are happy to give our money to people and organizations that we believe need it, while liberals want to give our money to whomever THEY think needs it.
As far as financial inequality is concerned, the constitution guarantees equal opportunity, not equal wealth. Most very rich people started out not rich and worked hard to get rich; very few inherit their wealth.
Why are we supposed to begrudge hard workers their wealth? I retired early and have been relatively poor ever since. It was my choice, and I am happy for others to work long, long hours and become rich. My niece is a liberal and I felt that perhaps I could send a copy of this article to her so that we could find common ground.
But no. Such confusion of the disciplines immediately made me realize your article was a disguised attack. The years you spent holding conservative values in contempt say a lot about your own biases and state of misinformation. The global warming debate is very scientific and detailed……what one believes about the science is based on how well-read you are on the topic.
CARING is not what the debate is about; but too many times I have witnessed liberals using emotionalism to muddy the waters in debates. Again an emotional response to an intellectual debate. I found your words to be packed with emotion and irrational ideas. All conservatives are not Scrooges, but government waste is out of control and the number of people on welfare and the amount of money that is obtained by fraud and the misuse of the welfare system is well-known.
So what are you talking about? I was a liberal once. Even though I never had purple hair, I rebelled against authority. I was against patriarchy, racism and I was critical of my country in Vietnam. I wore no bra and supported myself after divorce. I learned many valuable lessons since then. I learned that even though my parents took conservatism a bit too far, their core values were right. I learned that even liberals can rule in a way that curtails individual expression, e.
How did you feel watching the IRS employees enjoying expensive parties on taxpayer dollars? I was disgusted and felt used. The self-reported social conservatives also stared longer at photos of other people reacting in disgust to icky stuff.
This research backs up other studies that have suggested conservatives are more easily grossed out than liberals. A gut reaction of disgust is, evolutionarily speaking, a good thing for survival, since it helps humans keep some foreign and potentially dangerous secretions at bay.
But in our modern world, some research suggests this kind of aversion toward "impure" pathogens may also impact how people see other people who aren't like them, including social "out-groups" like immigrants or foreigners.
A study at Northwestern University found that when conservative and liberal college students were given word problems to solve, both groups managed to arrive at some correct answers through gradual, analytical analysis. But when feeling stuck on a problem, liberals were much more likely to draw upon a sudden burst of insight — an 'aha' moment, like a lightbulb turning on in the brain. This didn't mean that the liberals were any smarter than the conservatives. Rather, it showed that their brains had a tendency to reorganize their thoughts in more flexible ways, while the conservatives tended to take a more step-by-step approach.
The researchers suggested this finding may indicate that liberals and conservatives prefer solving problems in different ways. Lead study author Carola Salvi said the results were consistent with what scientists already knew about the brains of people with different political leanings. In , researchers at the University of Nebraska tested whether conservatives and liberals physically see the world in different ways.
They found that when it comes to matching the gaze of other people, the two groups differ. The scientists measured this by having individual study participants watch a certain point on a computer screen and wait for a ball to show up in the frame.
Then they added a distracting human face on the screen before the ball appeared. The face's eyes would look around. The scientists watched their participants to see if they followed the wandering gaze.
The researchers found that the liberal participants tended to follow the direction of the eyes on the screen. Conservatives, on the other hand, weren't as swayed by their pixelated peers, and kept waiting for the ball. A review of decades of research on conservative people suggested that their social views can help satisfy "psychological needs" to make sense of the world and manage uncertainty and fear. Studies from the s showed that conservatives preferred more simple paintings, familiar music, and unambiguous texts and poems, while liberals enjoyed more cubist and abstract art.
Although that research dates back to a drastically different political climate, the findings hold up in more recent studies from , and In , Time magazine conducted an online survey and found that conservative readers tended to say they'd rather visit Times Square than the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The finding fits with other research that indicates conservatives tend to avoid uncertainty and dislike ambiguity more than their liberal counterparts.
A study of US high school students found that conservative students at that time were more likely to describe themselves as "responsible," "organized," "successful," and "ambitious," while liberal students might describe themselves as "loving," "tender," or "mellow. Surveys suggest that today's adults aren't much different than those 80s kids. A Pew Research Center study from showed that liberals were more likely than social conservatives to describe themselves as compassionate, trusting, upbeat, and optimistic, while conservatives were more likely to say they were people of honor, duty, religion, and proud to be American.
The self-reports go along with research from that suggested liberals' top moral concerns tend to be about compassion and fairness, while conservatives are more concerned with loyalty, tradition, respect for authority, and purity. One study found that conservative students were often better at focusing their attention on a cognitive task called the Stroop color and word test. The common psychological study tool asks participants to quickly name the correct color of a word that's written on a different color background.
In the study, conservative students seemed to correctly answer the color questions faster than their liberal peers. The researchers think that's because the conservatives were more likely to believe in the concept of self-control. But the conservatives didn't always out-perform the liberals. When they were told that their free will might undermine their own self-control, they performed worse than their liberal peers. New research finds that conservatives tend to express compassion to smaller social circles than liberals.
For example, conservative voters were found to be more likely to agree with statements like: "I often have tender, concerned feelings for my family members who are less fortunate than me. Liberals, on the other hand, were more likely to feel that same level of compassion for people around the world, and even to non-human and imaginary subjects like animals and aliens.
The belief of America's youngest adult generation, Millennials , in the efficacy of individual initiative at the local level to achieve national goals provides a basis for just such a solution. To once again bind the wounds of internal discord, our political leaders should adopt this approach and successfully appeal to the ideological conservatism and programmatic liberalism of the American people.
Morley Winograd and Michael D. Already a subscriber? Monitor journalism changes lives because we open that too-small box that most people think they live in. We believe news can and should expand a sense of identity and possibility beyond narrow conventional expectations. Your subscription to The Christian Science Monitor has expired. You can renew your subscription or continue to use the site without a subscription.
If you have questions about your account, please contact customer service or call us at This message will appear once per week unless you renew or log out. Skip to main content Skip to main menu Skip to search Skip to footer. Search for:. Monitor Daily Current Issue. A Christian Science Perspective. Monitor Movie Guide. Monitor Daily. Photos of the Week. Ideologically, we favor small government.
But practically, we defend big-government programs. Arcadia, Calif. You've read of free articles. Subscribe to continue. Mark Sappenfield. Our work isn't possible without your support. Digital subscription includes: Unlimited access to CSMonitor.
0コメント