| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| "Red" and "Blue" on the Brain..... |
| 2005-01-18 |
| From the NY Times. Presented to you in its entirety....have at it, Rantburgers! Maybe it explains PEST? PRESIDENT BUSH begins his second term this week as the leader of a nation that appears to be sharply divided. Since the election, there's been endless discussion about the growing gap between "red" and "blue" America. When former President Bill Clinton said a few months ago that he was probably the only person in America who liked both Mr. Bush and Senator John Kerry, it seemed it might be true. Yet, surprisingly, recent neuroscience research suggests that Democrats and Republicans are not nearly as far apart as they seem. You mean they're the same species? Next he'll be saying they could interbreed! In fact, there is empirical evidence that even the fiercest partisans may instinctively like both Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, although they struggle against this collaborative impulse. During the eight months before the election, I was part of a group of political professionals and scientists from the University of California, Los Angeles, who used functional magnetic resonance imaging, or f.M.R.I., to scan the brains of 10 Republicans and 10 Democrats, producing images like those seen above. We measured brain activity while subjects looked at political advertisements and at images of the presidential candidates. The news media have focused on our finding that the amygdala, a part of the brain that responds to danger, was more heightened in Democrats when viewing scenes of 9/11 than in Republicans. This might seem to indicate fundamental differences, but other aspects of our results suggest striking commonalities. While viewing their own candidate, both Democrats and Republicans showed activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, an area associated with strong instinctive feelings of emotional connection. Viewing the opposing candidate, however, activated the anterior cingulate cortex, which indicates cognitive and emotional conflict. It also lighted up the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, an area that acts to suppress or shape emotional reactions. These patterns of brain activity, made visible on the f.M.R.I.'s, suggest that both Bush and Kerry voters were mentally battling their attraction to the other side. Bush voters wanted to follow Mr. Kerry Simplifying the neurophysiology somewhat, one can regard the process of reaching an opinion or making a choice as a collaboration between two regions of the brain - the limbic area, which feels emotions, and the prefrontal cortex, which controls the processing of ideas and information. The two areas work in tandem: thoughts provoke feelings, and in turn, the intensity of these feelings determines how the thoughts are valued. In reacting to pictures of the opposing candidate, the voters we tested countered the feelings of connection with even stronger hostile emotions, which they induced by calling up negative images and ideas. And facts, in the case of the Bush voters.... This dance between strong emotions and interconnected ideas is well known in psychiatry, and it forms the foundation of cognitive behavioral therapy, an effective form of talk therapy. When there is a divorce, for example, adolescents may induce in themselves feelings of rage toward one parent out of loyalty to the other. A cognitive behavioral therapist could help quench this rage by challenging the child's beliefs about the estranged parent. Without the beliefs to sustain it, the rage disappears. So all we really need is a good shrink....right.... In the case of this past election, while we witnessed an electorate that seemed irreconcilably divided, using f.M.R.I., we could see that the Republicans and Democrats we tested liked both candidates. The initial reflex toward allegiance is easy to explain: people rise through the ranks to run for higher office because they are able to evoke in others a powerful impulse to This suggests that the passions swirling through elections are not driven by a deep commitment to issues. We are not fighting over the future of the country; we are fighting for our team, like Red Sox and Yankee fans arguing over which club has the better catcher. Both in an election and in baseball, all that really matters is who wears the team uniform. Uh, no....Barry Bonds could be the newest Diamondback, and I'd still think he sucks! Will an awareness that we are conning ourselves to feel alienated from each other help to close the political gap? It is unknown, because neuroscience has advanced only recently to the point where humans can begin to watch themselves think and feel. If we are going to solve the nation's complicated problems, it is important to close this gap because in a setting where emotions run high, careful thoughts have no chance against intoxicating ones. In divisive politics, as in highly spiced dishes, all subtlety is lost. So, Democrats, admit that you admire the confidence and decisiveness of President Bush. That will never happen! And Republicans, concede that you would like a president to have the depth of knowledge and broad intelligence of |
| Posted by:Desert Blondie |
| #10 "Calling Dr. Krauthammer..." |
| Posted by: Parabellum 2005-01-18 6:00:29 PM |
| #9 McPaper for the left. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-01-18 4:15:12 PM |
| #8 Pinch's NYT is a gay-friendly, college-educated version of USA Today: lots and lots of lite articles about subjects near and dear to the NPR crowd. There are still some excellent reporters (John Burns esp, also Gretchen Morgenson in the business pages) and a few reporters who rise to the occasion now and then (Dexter Filkins occasionally hits it), but by and large the reporting in the Times is shoddier than it was ten years ago and the proportion of content devoted to heavy subjects has fallen considerably. What content has taken its place? Well, every time I open the Times there's at least one front page article on either gay issues, or porn, or the housing market, or the science of aging or urban frivolities that have nothing to do with the core issues that sway elections and world affairs. This is simply pandering to a core market arbitrarily defined as liberal yuppies who fear Karl Rove more than Osama, who care more about real estate and Thai restaurants than they care about understanding swing voters or China or Ukraine. Same old shit, just in a pseudo-urbane wrapper. |
| Posted by: lex 2005-01-18 4:11:57 PM |
| #7 well said, lex. I read this article, with an interested and open mind, and found zero content. |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-01-18 4:02:13 PM |
| #6 The NYT under Pinch Sulzberger has ceased to be a serious newspaper. It's really more of a lifestyle guide for childless urban and college-town liberals. Sort of a better-behaved and duller version of the Village Voice. |
| Posted by: lex 2005-01-18 3:42:58 PM |
| #5 DB - :-) I looked, but couldn't locate an image I once had which fit the topic - in the humorous vein. Sigh. BTW, you should be able to get the direct path to any image by right-clicking and selecting Properties, heh. Just FYI... |
| Posted by: .com 2005-01-18 2:52:05 PM |
| #4 .com, sorry about not being able to post the "images" along with the story. I couldn't get it to work. All it was was two pictures of the same brain...one with a pro-Bush caption, one with a pro-Kerry. Not much to see, there.....but what else do you expect from the NY Times?? |
| Posted by: Desert Blondie 2005-01-18 2:35:41 PM |
| #3 Should have said screw red or blue. How about having red, white, and blue on the brain? |
| Posted by: John Q. Citizen 2005-01-18 2:28:12 PM |
| #2 Red, white, and blue on the brain? |
| Posted by: John Q. Citizen 2005-01-18 2:11:13 PM |
| #1 Zee poop, she is very deep at the NYT. "in its entirety" Um, not exactly, heh. How about links to those fMRI images? True, people have interesting subconscious reactions - often differing from the eventual conscious reaction. But (knew that was coming, huh?) I completely reject this puffery. It is my real-life experience, not interpretation of fMRI images, that the conscious mind goes through much hand-wringing, weighing of pros and cons, wearing sack-cloth and ashes, and gnashing of teeth as a delaying tactic prior to finally accepting on the conscious level what the subconscious decided the instant a question or dilemma is posed or encountered. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-01-18 1:33:22 PM |