Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brain Panic and why partisan voters don't think (applies to low carb)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Brain Panic and why partisan voters don't think (applies to low carb)

    These are all telltale signs of dogmatism, fanaticism and even cultism. All these factors can be regularly observed in the low-carb community, and my experience illustrates what happens when people deeply committed to a belief system are confronted with conflicting evidence. Instead of being able to examine that evidence with impartiality, or even welcome it as an opportunity to expand their knowledge base (as a person who is truly committed to learning and progressing readily would), they literally experience turmoil in their brains and react in a most irrational and emotional manner.

    Low-carbers are hardly alone in experiencing this “brain panic” when contradictory sensory data begins flowing into their one-dimensional noggins

    During the 2004 US Presidential election, researchers used functional neuroimaging to study the neural responses of thirty committed partisans presented with negative information about both their preferred and opposition candidates[Westen D, 2006].

    The purpose of the study, led by Drew Westen, professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University, was to observe “how partisan brains reasoned during the polarized 2004 election. The answer: they didn’t. When confronted with compelling negative evidence about their candidate, the brains of Democrats and Republicans registered conflict and distress.

    Whereas the circuits normally activated during dispassionate reasoning appeared to be in a persistently vegetative state when faced with a reasoning task with negative implications for the partisan’s candidate, circuits charged with regulating emotion and dealing with conflict lit up our computer screens like the Fourth of July, firing rockets into reason until our partisans had arrived at emotionally comfortable conclusions.”[Westen D, 2007]

    The Political Brain by Drew Westen

    Reader Mail: Abandoning Low-Carb, Cholesterol Hogwash, Corn Oil and Fat Loss, and more! | AnthonyColpo
    Last edited by kenn; 08-17-2011, 12:47 PM.
    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
    Current Weight: 235 pounds
    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

  • #2
    This should be interesting...

    Lifting Journal

    Comment


    • #3
      It's okay, I'm sure kenn will assure us that libertarians never experience any such phenomena since they are such paragons of rational thought and are never, ever fanatical or cultish in their approach to politics.
      “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

      Owly's Journal

      Comment


      • #4
        Tl;dr
        In all of the universe there is only one person with your exact charateristics. Just like there is only one person with everybody else's characteristics. Effectively, your uniqueness makes you pretty average.

        Comment


        • #5
          The problem with libertarians is getting them to get along. It's like herding cats.
          Lifting Journal

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Owly View Post
            It's okay, I'm sure kenn will assure us that libertarians never experience any such phenomena since they are such paragons of rational thought and are never, ever fanatical or cultish in their approach to politics.
            red herring
            Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
            Starting Weight: 294 pounds
            Current Weight: 235 pounds
            Goal Weight: 195 pounds

            Comment


            • #7
              Vote Ron Paul!
              Primal Chaos
              37yo 6'5"
              6-19-2011 393lbs 60" waist
              current 338lbs 49" waist
              goal 240lbs 35" waist

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by kenn View Post
                red herring
                If you're going to accuse me of logical fallacies, at least pick the right one. I'd say that was more of a circumstantial ad hominem than a red herring.
                “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                Owly's Journal

                Comment


                • #9
                  my my, trolling post is trolling.

                  My Fitday public journal.
                  Me vs. Russian Boar, hunt is on Aug. 20th. WHAT'S MORE PRIMAL THAN THAT?!
                  Recently survived Warrior Dash, New England.
                  Game Developer, ex-Chef, long time Fatbody.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Owly View Post
                    If you're going to accuse me of logical fallacies, at least pick the right one. I'd say that was more of a circumstantial ad hominem than a red herring.
                    red herring
                    introducing irrelevant facts or arguments to distract from the question at hand
                    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
                    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
                    Current Weight: 235 pounds
                    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem

                      A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:

                      Person A makes claim X.
                      Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
                      Therefore claim X is false.

                      Person A makes claim X.
                      Person B makes an attack on A's circumstances.
                      Therefore X is false.

                      A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. This is made quite clear by the following example: "Bill claims that 1+1=2. But he is a Republican, so his claim is false."
                      “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                      Owly's Journal

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Or perhaps it was an appeal to ridicule.
                        “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                        Owly's Journal

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Owly View Post
                          Or perhaps it was an appeal to ridicule.
                          this whole back and forth between you and I is a red herring
                          Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
                          Starting Weight: 294 pounds
                          Current Weight: 235 pounds
                          Goal Weight: 195 pounds

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kenn View Post
                            this whole back and forth between you and I is a red herring
                            I just figured I'd follow the fine example you've set for derailing threads around here. You do have an admirable talent for it.
                            “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                            Owly's Journal

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Libertarians show as much if not more "dogmatism, fanaticism and even cultism" as any other group.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X