Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

blackhawks, The phrase "Hidden Brain" is a good idea as it may attract people to metacognition more
comfortably than the seemingly more vague term the "unconscious." As far as this last bit of yours goes

-
"There was a time when we had many, many more people in the center. The most liberal Republican was often to the left of the most conservative Democrat. And, you know, there really has been a sorting of the political parties in recent years. What explains this change, especially over the last 20, 30 years?

HIBBING: What I would say to that argument is that I believe we have always had this very same division, this very basic difference between people who are fairly sensitive to threats and think we need to be vigilant and those people who are more into experimentation and trying new things.

Ralph Waldo Emerson has a great quote, and I'm sorry I can't give it to you verbatim. But it's basically that the division between those people who are supporters of tradition and those people who are supportive of innovation is very old and has structured the world since time began"
.. link to your post ..
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=153273288
-

Emerson no doubt has it right. To imagine people were more the same as to levels of empathy 1000s of years ago seems sorta baseless.

It feels a bit like the debate that morality has it's origin in religion (and the prosperous idea that without religion there can be no morality) which surely is a very wrong-headed and arrogant position for supporters of religion to take. It feels as off-beam as suggesting divisions between liberals and conservative developed only fairly recently.

If anyone is interested in reading 109 pages here is page 1.

Religion and Morality

Ryan McKay and Harvey Whitehouse

Additional article information

Abstract

The relationship between religion and morality has long been hotly debated. Does religion make us more moral? Is it necessary for morality? Do moral inclinations emerge independently of religious intuitions? These debates, which nowadays rumble on in scientific journals as well as in public life, have frequently been marred by a series of conceptual confusions and limitations. Many scientific investigations have failed to decompose “religion” and “morality” into theoretically grounded elements; have adopted parochial conceptions of key concepts—in particular, sanitized conceptions of “prosocial” behavior; and have neglected to consider the complex interplay between cognition and culture. We argue that to make progress, the categories “religion” and “morality” must be fractionated into a set of biologically and psychologically cogent traits, revealing the cognitive foundations that shape and constrain relevant cultural variants. We adopt this fractionating strategy, setting out an encompassing evolutionary framework within which to situate and evaluate relevant evidence. Our goals are twofold: to produce a detailed picture of the current state of the field, and to provide a road map for future research on the relationship between religion and morality.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345965/

To read, read the left side first then go to top right and read down. Scrolling is jerky, but neatly
gives you one page at a time. It took some seconds for me to be sure that's how it works.

Just to link a few others see also:

nlightn, Carl Jung and the Shadow: The Ultimate Guide to the Human Dark Side
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=142693626

An old favorite How Facts Backfire is included there.