Is the fundamentalist mind less evolved than a progressive one?
If they were less evolved–I think you would see a large difference in the social economic achievements of progressives versus liberals. I realize thats a bit of a hypothesis, but none the less a decent intuition.
And the idea of evolved in this context may be a bit like saying X came after P, Q, R, S, and T and is therefore better. In this context its just a reaction to what came before it (or for instance Star Wars II and III are better than the first one).
Wait. Conservatives still give–they just give to church. Ergo–they are progressive–they are just progressive about different stuff.
So while altruism & community thinking may be a more evolved notion–the idea that the government has to be the agent of that change isn’t necessarily more evolved. Even if in moderation it might make smart policy–which helps get us past zero sum games and creates more win/win solutions. My assumption is these studies are primarily around the issue of altruism & philanthrophy….not as much GOP vs. democrat per se. Plus, there is a certain egoism in the idea that government can solve our problems or that the Federal government can solve our problems better than local. Systems theory says that a one size fits all solution to our problems isn’t going to work. We have different cultures, geographies, and other wonderful diversities from California to New Mexico to Kansas to New York to Boston Washington DC to Florida and to Louisiana.
And as a side note, I’m a moderate–and so certainly some of this resonates with me. I have a relative who listens to right wing radio and it drives me nuts.
And in someways the discussion is a question of language & framing. If the language of conservatism were framed in a different way, perhaps many of those same people would favor different policies. The rhetoric of fundamentalism and conservatism has arguably been stolen from what it means to be either one of those things. I think the assumed causes and relationships between these things have been skewed by various issues.
At the same time, I think the “all Republicans are just selfish” canard is a bit played out. Particularly when presumably many Republicans support local solutions (aka Federalism).
As a side note, would you say the former soviet union had more advanced minds? And is Marx a more forward thinker than Adam Smith, Locke, and Hayek? I don’t think anything other than time and context effects those comparisons. (And I’ll apologize for the use of Marx–it just seemed to be the most useful example).
Plus, I think you still have to calibrate, execute, and sync your policy. Voting alone isn’t enough. You could prove that you had a more advanced mind–but if the policy isn’t functionally better–its pretty useless or perhaps even blinding in one respect to have that mindset or thinking model.
It seems to be the integration of an accounting mindset and a growth mindset is what makes sound fiscal policy and what makes sound personal policy as well. We need realism and idealism. Only via an integration can we make higher order decisions and ultimately survive.
Plus, polarizing rhetoric–like these types of brain studies–seem to create enemies when we really need to build bridges to achieve change.
Will check out that article.
* And just to prove my moderation. I critiqued Libertarianism & Ayn Rand pretty hard core on a Quora thread on that topic–among other of my moderate posts on Quora.