Originally posted by The Ellimist
Anecdotes aside, the statistical correlation is pretty well replicated; it's not too much of a stretch to say that it may be causative.Can you name one liberal position you once held that can be refuted by having better social skills/etc.?
Being a parent has shown me the value of innocent human life. Gaining the emotional and spiritual connection that I lacked in my youth made me get back in touch with my Catholic roots.
It is not about refuting positions with cold logic, but being able to attain a point of view that allows you to better understand and accept the realities of life, gaining a calm and peace of mind I couldn't when I was a lot younger.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Being a parent has shown me the value of innocent human life. Gaining the emotional and spiritual connection that I lacked in my youth made me get back in touch with my Catholic roots.It is not about refuting positions with cold logic, but being able to attain a point of view that allows you to better understand and accept the realities of life, gaining a calm and peace of mind I couldn't when I was a lot younger.
Sorry to sound rude; your growth and maturity may have helped you on practical matters, but that doesn't mean that they've substantively improved your ideological stances. Large scale political policies that impact millions-billions of people better contain cold logic, moreso than your "spiritual connection".
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Being a parent has shown me the value of innocent human life. Gaining the emotional and spiritual connection that I lacked in my youth made me get back in touch with my Catholic roots.It is not about refuting positions with cold logic, but being able to attain a point of view that allows you to better understand and accept the realities of life, gaining a calm and peace of mind I couldn't when I was a lot younger.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/166/Statement-of-Conversion
Originally posted by Silent Master
There is the saying and I'm only paraphrasing.If you are not a Liberal at 25, you have no heart. If you are not a Conservative at 35 you have no brain.
Interesting that you say that, given that it was mainly those 25 year olds that stood on the right side of history with civil rights, women's rights, opposition to the Vietnam War, gay marriage, etc.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
Sorry to sound rude; your growth and maturity may have helped you on practical matters, but that doesn't mean that they've substantively improved your ideological stances. Large scale political policies that impact millions-billions of people better contain cold logic, moreso than your "spiritual connection".
Humans aren't beings of pure cold logic, tho. We also have morality, compassion and conscience.
We, for example, would not kill the few to save the many as that would violate our basic humanity. Nor do we believe that the ends justify the means for as long as it is mathematically advantageous.
Political policies need to tempered with logic and humanity. And policymakers need as much empathy as they do intelligence if they want to improve people's lives.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Humans aren't beings of pure cold logic, tho. We also have morality, compassion and conscience.
To inform premises of moral philosophy, not to take the place of the logic.
We, for example, would not kill the few to save the many as that would violate our basic humanity. Nor do we believe that the ends justify the means for as long as it is mathematically advantageous.
We do things like that all the time, it's just masked. We do that every time we commit soldiers to a conflict or police officers to a dispute, knowing that there's a good chance of deaths occurring. Heck, we do that when we develop roads, given that there will be some car fatalities, because we believe that the aggregate utility derived from having a transportation system is worth it.
Political policies need to tempered with logic and humanity. And policymakers need as much empathy as they do intelligence if they want to improve people's lives.
Yeah, but I fail to see how the conservative positions do this at all.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Thank you for admitting that you don't know what paraphrasing is.
You didn't paraphrase it, you completely changed "liberal" to "rebel" and "conservative" to "establishment". Unless if you think the establishment and conservative are synonymous, and liberals are always the rebels or something.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
To inform premises of moral philosophy, not to take the place of the logic.We do things like that all the time, it's just masked. We do that every time we commit soldiers to a conflict or police officers to a dispute, knowing that there's a good chance of deaths occurring. Heck, we do that when we develop roads, given that there will be some car fatalities, because we believe that the aggregate utility derived from having a transportation system is worth it.
Yeah, but I fail to see how the conservative positions do this at all.
Morality and compassion should superscede logic if we want to be a humane society.
No, people fight to protect themselves and others. We take risks with our daily lives as we understand that living IS risk, but these are risks we CHOOSE to take for ourselves. We DO NOT, however, take lives out of expediency unless we have lost our humanity.
You are labeling my position into a far-right conservative position. When my exact words were "leaning". I am, I believe, within the more moderate middle ground.
I am still a firm believer in climate change. I support gun regulations (but also understand the right of a person to own firearms, although I do not own one myself), I feel do not tolerate racism in its vilest forms but also (as a minority who actually HAS experienced racism in the US) do not implode (and can laugh when it is funny) when ppl make racial jokes, I support equality (but true equality, not the "equality" dictated by popular media).. I believe in freedom of speech but also believe that we need to take responsibility for what we say (but only up to the point of us being accountable ito the ppl we reasonably and directly affected by it).
If there were stances that pushes me towards the conservative position, it would be abortion and freedom of religion. I am pro-life. I am Catholic (and adhere to Catholic values but also understand that this should only apply to myself and my family).
There are IMO stupid things from both sides of the political spectrum, what surprises me is how much some ppl can see only the good in their ideology and only the bad in the other side without attempting to try and meet in the middle.
Originally posted by The Ellimist
You didn't paraphrase it, you completely changed "liberal" to "rebel" and "conservative" to "establishment". Unless if you think the establishment and conservative are synonymous, and liberals are always the rebels or something.
Actually the original quote is Celui qui n’est pas républicain à vingt ans fait douter de la générosité de son âme; mais celui qui, après trente ans, persévère, fait douter de la rectitude de son esprit.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Morality and compassion should superscede logic if we want to be a humane society.No, people fight to protect themselves and others. We take risks with our daily lives as we understand that living IS risk, but these are risks we CHOOSE to take for ourselves. We DO NOT, however, take lives out of expediency unless we have lost our humanity.
You are labeling my position into a far-right conservative position. When my exact words were "leaning". I am, I believe, within the more moderate middle ground.
I am still a firm believer in climate change. I support gun regulations (but also understand the right of a person to own firearms, although I do not own one myself), I feel do not tolerate racism in its vilest forms but also (as a minority who actually HAS experienced racism in the US) do not implode (and can laugh when it is funny) when ppl make racial jokes, I support equality (but true equality, not the "equality" dictated by popular media).. I believe in freedom of speech but also believe that we need to take responsibility for what we say (but only up to the point of us being accountable ito the ppl we reasonably and directly affected by it).
If there were stances that pushes me towards the conservative position, it would be abortion and freedom of religion. I am pro-life. I am Catholic (and adhere to Catholic values but also understand that this should only apply to myself and my family).
There are IMO stupid things from both sides of the political spectrum, what surprises me is how much some ppl can see only the good in their ideology and only the bad in the other side without attempting to try and meet in the middle.
Catholic and pro life here.
Are you pro life based on religious belief? Or would you be pro life regardless?
I ask this, because I was pro life long before I understood the positions of Catholicism. As a kid, my reasoning was simple, and hinged on the logic that a "human being" and a fetus are one and the same.. Only at different stages of their development. It was actually quite a shock to learn the majority supported pro choice positions.
Of course, now I understand life isn't that simple. Forcing a human being to do anything, let alone give birth, is a serious consideration.
I think I put a lot more thought behind the issue than most, though. That's not an insult to pro choicers, it's just not thought about that humans don't really value the unborn like they do the born (Even up to the moment of crowning, where the born and unborn are essentially the same thing developmentally.)
Originally posted by cdtm
Catholic and pro life here.Are you pro life based on religious belief? Or would you be pro life regardless?
I ask this, because I was pro life long before I understood the positions of Catholicism. As a kid, my reasoning was simple, and hinged on the logic that a "human being" and a fetus are one and the same.. Only at different stages of their development. It was actually quite a shock to learn the majority supported pro choice positions.
Of course, now I understand life isn't that simple. Forcing a human being to do anything, let alone give birth, is a serious consideration.
I think I put a lot more thought behind the issue than most, though. That's not an insult to pro choicers, it's just not thought about that humans don't really value the unborn like they do the born (Even up to the moment of crowning, where the born and unborn are essentially the same thing developmentally.)
Pro life regardless. Once I became a parent, I have gotten this strong instinct to be protective of children. If anything, it was the want to become a better person for my wife and daughter that allowed me to reconnect with my faith.
Our logical views on pro-life is very similar. Tho, I would warn that it is a very touchy subject for a lot of ppl and bringing it here might risk derailing the thread.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Pro life regardless. Once I became a parent, I have gotten this strong instinct to be protective of children. If anything, it was the want to become a better person for my wife and daughter that allowed me to reconnect with my faith.Our logical views on pro-life is very similar. Tho, I would warn that it is a very touchy subject for a lot of ppl and bringing it here might risk derailing the thread.
True, unfortunately.
A rare thing to see somebody that's not "woman's rights" or "religious right" on the issue, though.
Much less someone not informed by talk radio garbage. Kind of annoying having to defend a position everyone assumes is built off the talking heads, knowwhati'msaying?
Another time, maybe.
Satoshi Kanazawa. Evolutionary psychologist cited in the CNN article at the start of this thread. I've read his article on why Liberals are smarter and more altruistic than Conservatives on psychology.com awhile back.
He also got in some trouble for questioning why black women are less physically attractive than other women.
And by "a bit of trouble", I mean liberal sites ganged up on him.
But they clearly overreacted, right? This is objectively no different than the intent of this thread.
Right?
Originally posted by cdtm
Satoshi Kanazawa. Evolutionary psychologist cited in the CNN article at the start of this thread. I've read his article on why Liberals are smarter and more altruistic than Conservatives on psychology.com awhile back.He also got in some trouble for questioning why black women are less physically attractive than other women.
And by "a bit of trouble", I mean liberal sites ganged up on him.
But they clearly overreacted, right? This is objectively no different than the intent of this thread.
Right?
I've read about Satoshi as well. The important question to ask is..was there any actual scientific basis for what he was saying?
If there was, then were people upset at what he said or were they upset he told the truth?
Here's one difference, the Democratic Party just announced their support for Keith Ellison of Minn, to become the new DNC chair. He has past ties to the Nation of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood..
Originally posted by kevdude
Here's one difference, the Democratic Party just announced their support for Keith Ellison of Minn, to become the new DNC chair. He has past ties to the Nation of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood..
Lol well damn, and yeah I also wonder why this hasn't been in the news more.
I guarantee you some people will just try to attack the website the article appears on. Assuming people comment on it at all.