They both have a propensity for believing in hoaxes and conspiracy theories when it’s politically advantageous to them.
Want to get a liberal to start spewing out silly conspiracy theories without any effort? Just ask him/her why the price of gas is $X/gallon. You’ll hear all kinds of accusations of how “George Bush is in bed with the oil companies,” how “George Bush is manipulating the gas price,” and how “the war was fought for oil.” Liberals believe Dick Cheney is the actual person running the executive branch, that big business is “out to get them,” and that “racism” and “sexism” are the reasons minorities falter on the socioeconomic scale. They also spread lies on what’s in the Patriot Act, and have lots of tall tales about the supposed evil doings of the CIA.
If you really want to hear some entertaining conspiracy theories spewed out by the left, just talk to some urban/black community activists, almost all of whom are politically liberal. Many genuinely believe AIDS and crack cocaine were invented by the government and distributed in poor, black communities in an effort to destroy them.
So yea, conservatives believe some wacky stuff. Almost as funny as what the liberals believe.
I agree 100%. A large percentage of people will believe the most ridiculous things that happen to coincide with their self-interests/prejudices/psychological needs.
Anyone who believes that “liberals” or “conservatives” dominate in this sort of conduct is simply revealing their own inability to assess and think critically.
I think this is the key. There certainly are conservatives who are capable of following or presenting a chain of reasonable evidence to its logical conclusion. Not all conservatives are credulous.
But some people are credulous. They want simple answers. And conservative politics gets marketed to these people. Conservative pundits will write books explaining their theories of government and economics if that’s what you want. But they’ll also boil everything down to a five word slogan.
Liberals miss this. They want to explain everything they’re doing and educate people who don’t understand the issues. Credulous people don’t want to be enlightened - they just want an answer that’s simple enough for them to already understand.
It’s not equal on both sides. I think that Thudlow nailed it, but I’ll take it a small step further. Credulous people tend to be religious, and religious people tend to be conservative.
That doesn’t mean that all conservatives are credulous. To quote John Stuart Mill:
“Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.”
I’m so far left this board’s supposed liberal population seems rather conservative to me, and I agree with you. This is, as lavenderviolet said, a classic example of confirmation bias at work, and it’s precisely the kind of partisan filtering that makes true communication between people with conflicting political viewpoints so difficult.
However, this is simply couching the results in language that “favors” liberals in this context. If we restated the second paragraph to say that liberals are more likely to accept unsupported claims about new experiences, (parapsychology, new age religions, crystals, and similar phenomena come to mind), then the result would be a conclusion that liberals are more gullible than “hard-headed” conservatives.
We have any number of left leaning posters on this board who view every action by large industry to be a serious plot to steal money or power, any action by any religious group to be an effort to lead the followers around by the nose or take their money, and any effort by the military or police to be an attempt to enslave people or suppress certain groups.
If one concluded that conservatives and liberals take their gullibility or credulousness in different directions, I would accept that argument, but claiming that one side or the other is simply “more” is demonstrably false.
I think people were mostly skeptical about the Palin rumor, but there was nothin inherently incredible about it, as is the case with the “Obama is teh Muslim,” or “Obama was born in teh Kenya” kinds of memes. The Palin rumor even turned out to be partially true. In point of fact, we still don’t REALLY know that Chip, or Toggle or Puck or whatever the baby’s name is, is truly Sarah’s baby.
Conservative political views correlate strongly with certain social psychological preferences and personality factors. There is a whole literature out there documenting this phenomenon based around identifier categories like RWA (right wing authoritarianism) and other additive categories like SDO (social dominance orientation).
These studies show that conservative polarisation tracks with certain forms of cognition bias which privilege fear and aggression, dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity, uncertainty avoidance, need for cognitive closure, and terror management. These factors, where they are strongly present, are highly predictive, and they explain why some conservatives can be more susceptible to certain forms of fallacy, deference/submission to hierarchically-vetted information in their internal networks and political in-group out-group appeals. They also explain why those same groups can remain relatively impervious to disconfirmatory evidence.
The case with liberals is more complicated. Liberals don’t have the same issue with disconfirmatory evidence - but that’s not to say liberal cognition and moral reasoning doesn’t invite its own problems. The liberal disposition is problematic because its concern with universalisability and multi-faceted reasoning creates other kinds of problems for those of lower faculties. What happens is that because liberal political morality is intensely reflective and strongly empirically based - liberals are more susceptible to many forms of empirical confusion and systemic failure in their reasoning. In other words, their cognition framework depends on certain linguistic and analytic skills which are entirely contingent. That’s why liberals are sometimes all over the place - they confuse themselves, crowd out rational reasons, become paralysed by over-reflection, etc. Ignorance and cognitive weakness may be even more devastating to liberals due to this systemic structure.
Then why are so very many liberals still Christians, for example? Or other flavors of woos, as tom points out. I agree that the policies espoused by each side are not morally or intellectually equal, though that doesn’t default to a win on the liberal side by any means. Liberals are often just as savage and ignorant as conservatives, because the only qualification for either appellation is the desire to fanboy for the team. They’re just as likely to have completely unconsidered and uninformed opinions, and in fact often get away with more by hiding behind the patina of selfless benevolence and under the camouflage of intellectual authority that comes more from privilege than erudition.
Yes and no. To be sure all sides have their fair share of dogmatism and gullible folks. I think we are talking in broad generalizations here. Like saying human males are physically stronger than females. Certainly there are plenty of women who are physically (can lift more weight) stronger than many males but generally speaking that statement is true. If we start at the top of the list and pair 1:1 down the list the strongest male will be stronger than the strongest woman.
So too with this. A prerequisite to allowing for differing opinions or accepting that you may be wrong or allowing for shades of gray is an open mind. That study says that liberals tend to be more open in this fashion than conservatives. Certainly many conservatives can have an open mind and many liberals a closed one. In general however I’d say liberals have a leg up on their conservative counterparts in being able to entertain new ideas and conflicting information.
You’re only looking at one site. I see tons of sites that are anti-McCain, and anti-Palin.
What I found is few people look at Obama seriously. He’s a movie star and that’s it. Everytime I talk to an Obama supporter it comes down to Oprah thought he was cute.
For instance I say “what’s Obama’s position on Iraq” and they tell me. Then I tell them go to his website. EVERY last time, the person has been wrong.
Obama and McCain aren’t that far apart on Iraq, but that fact flies over everyone’s head, 'cause they’re all so ga-ga over Oprah’s man crush.
Getting back to the theme that conservatives think in simple terms and liberals are used to more comples thought…
For years I’ve heard from liberals: “Bush is an idiot.”
And from conservatives: “There are four places where we can compare objective measures of intelligence for GWB, John Kerry and Al Gore. They are high school CPA, college GPA, SATs and military aptitude tests. In all four GWB came in first.”
I don’t *believe *that Trig is actually Sarah’s son- I just don’t automatically buy her version of the story, since it doesn’t make sense. Her supporters accepted her story, holes and all.