Consider this:

the fuck is 'upwing' and 'downwing' suppose to mean?

Would gender differences explain the ratio of WNs to SJWs among the genders?

So basically, if the WNs of /pol/ (also the fringe minority which isn't Mexican American) were born female they would be SJWs on Tumblr.

>>3075737
It is a play on leftwing and rightwing that's all. You should've been smart enough to figure that out. We can also call it forwardwing and backwardwing.

Jonathan Haidt has the moral foundations theory which is sort of like the Big Five but for moral values. Then some studies found there are some differences in taste and smell between rightwing and leftwing people. And a difference in how rightwing and leftwing play a game (so a cognitive difference)

The idea is that it is possible that we found a third or fourth, if we find a different moral foundations combination or a different set of taste and smell, or cogntive.

I must say I find the idea highly arousing

>>3075749
Those studies can be done because there already exist the defined social conventions of 'left and right wing' through which those personal values can be assessed. While someone may be genetically or socially predisposed to adopting certain values, how those values actually express themselves depend almost entirely on the social conventions they are exposed to. A person who exhibits those moral indicators of a modern 'left wing' individual can only be called such because we have this preexisting convention of 'left wing' to interpret them through. That there could be a bundle of genetic or moral indicators for a 'third way' is fallacious because they could never be identified without an existing a social framework for those values to be interpreted through.

>>3075786
>While someone may be genetically or socially predisposed to adopting certain values, how those values actually express themselves depend almost entirely on the social conventions they are exposed to.
I do wholeheartedly agree. The way I see it is that we are born with certain physical and cognitive quirks which may or may not result into left and right wing ideology, but that the environment plays a role in it as well.

I believe the environment is more as social conventions alone though. There was some research in economics showing that those of low mate value or high mate value tend to adopt different views on redistribution.

And I think individual experiences instead of social conventions are more important.
>That there could be a bundle of genetic or moral indicators for a 'third way' is fallacious because they could never be identified without an existing a social framework for those values to be interpreted through.
You are right and here I am wrong. Though it does mean if we would ever identify people with some cognitive or physical quirk, and if these people tend to cluster around a certain ideology a third or fourth way would be possible.

But still it could be possible that these people would cluster around the left or right, or even middle, and perhaps for social reasons. Group dynamics is certainly not unimportant, though I still hold my view that the underlying quirks and other environmental reasons might be more important.

>>3075865
>Group dynamics is certainly not unimportant, though I still hold my view that the underlying quirks and other environmental reasons might be more important.
Or at least, less important as commonly believed. So relative to.