I suggest we leave sociobiology out of this discussion. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < thill....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now, Steve, I assume you're being humorous, but I can't say for sure > because I've learned over the years that you and I most likely have very > different personalities (based only on the limiting medium of this > discussion forum). I bet we have different brain structure, even if similar > intelligence. But no, that's not what I'm saying. Perhaps some PhD student > will identify and analyze that correlation someday, but my PhD years are > well behind me! > > All I'm saying is that we seem to have two sides in this debate (as in > politics), and for the most part they talk past each other because, I > believe, our brains are wired to light up in response to different inputs. > It would be nice if there was an objectively "right" answer that perfectly > intelligent people could agree on! > > On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 11:59:58 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote: >> >> On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 09:56 -0700, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery wrote: >> >> > Discussing this topic in a different way is a puzzle, isn't it? On my >> > (helmet-free) ride to work today, I thought of an article I read >> > several years ago, about brain scientists identifying brain structure >> > differences between political conservatives and political liberals. >> > Finally an explanation of why these two groups can't understand each >> > other! The difference was primarily in identification of and response >> > to risks. The conservatives tended to have enlarged brain sectors that >> > were wired to identify and rapidly respond to risks. In other words: >> > "there's a risk, kill it!" The liberals tended to be enlarged in the >> > sectors that handle analysis and nuance. In other words: "this may or >> > may not be a risk, study it some more!" Not sure if order of causality >> > has yet been established. I don't know if politics correlates to >> > helmet attitudes, but it seems like the same pattern exists here. On >> > one hand, you have the helmet proponents who relate strongly to >> > graphic examples of cracked skulls, and on the other hand, you have >> > the group (typified by GP, I'd say) who seemingly cannot relate to >> > graphic examples and who tend to spend lots of bandwidth picking apart >> > the flaws in the statistics. >> >> So you're saying the conservatives favor helmets and liberals do not? >> >> >> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rbw-owners-bunch/-/0L54ao9Iwg8J. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > -- "Believe nothing until it has been officially denied." -- Claude Cockburn ------------------------- Patrick Moore, Albuquerque, NM, USA For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW http://resumespecialties.com/index.html ------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
