what does /sci/ think of the veracity of this premise?

Sounds completely logical. I have nothing to counter it.

People can be simple minded

>>7785845
Psychological studies like these that rely on binary answers to intricately worded questions are shit. All this proves is that the result is dependent on what questions you choose and how you word them, not on anything real.

No, people who identify exclusively as Republicans or Democrats are dogmatic. It's the whole "adhering to the party doctrine" thing instead of independent thought.

While conservatives tend to be more dogmatic than liberals due to their association with contradictory religious doctrine, it applies to anyone who outsources their opinions from another person.

>>7785910

I'll take this as the official /sci/ stance. Thanks!

>>7785845
Typical divisional social propaganda. You try to make a side to be on so you can hate others that are not on your side as well as bring others to your side to prevent your own cognitive dissonance. The truth of the matter is that you are using "divide and conquer" tactics you learned from entertainment propaganda meant to keep the masses off balance and disorganized.

There are no "sides" to be on. Stop making up problems where none exist.

>party rhetoric not-so-cleverly passed off as science

>>7785845
Left vs. Right vs. neither vs. either vs. me.

It's not like I can even say anything about the intelligence of a newspaper, it doesn't think. I personally think the biggest issue with democracy is the fact it commends people to operate on the premises supplied by the media, even when the media says that it's not receiving coverage on issues. Democracy plays on to the dichotomies of the american public to have them be "aware" and "informed" while neglecting the fact that the voter is missing a crucial legal consultation on what is is to actually be a witness. The idea of a traditional republic system is for the people to elect an actually person, personally, of their community to represent them before a senate. Voting on a federal level is retarded in theory and ethic. I'd rather have a local representative vote for the nominee on his/her behalf then my own for that matter. Reportings of a far away land are not relative to the scope of day to day life, and should not concern a person one bit. The media panders prejudice at large, irregardless of where you stand with it, it augments your expectations of society preemptively before your very own eyes and ears, and opens a discussion on things for the most part, figments of our imagination. So that even if it never really actually happen, in warranting itself to be effable within the consensus of the public to be treated without contempt. Democracy is not wrong, it's just a clever means for our beloved retarded public to live peacefully.

>>7785845
I read a paper back in '11 or so where the researchers found individualistic and self-interested attitudes, acceptance of/deference to hierarchical systems/authority and acceptance of dominant cultural values to be negatively correlated with cognitive ability and that by giving subjects burdensome cognitive tasks they could obtain stronger expression of these attitudes. The paper labeled this suite of beliefs "conservative" but really, it sounds a lot like the criticism each side has of the other: "liberals are the big government party!" "but conservatives are the ones trying to legislate reproductive rights away, mix government and religion and defend an overblown military and draconian national security state! how can we be pro-big government when we oppose these?" "but liberals are trying to ban guns and the national security state is on Obama's hands, he's has US citizens killed by drone without trial" and so on, back and forth. Really, both sides are right but absolutely refuse to own up to their own dirty laundry. Remember when the anti-war left went on vacation in '08? I do.

That's basically the problem with psychology as a rigorous science. It's near impossible to get useful "executive-level" conclusions out of it because the choice of definitions, assumptions and methods is highly subjective and must be known to understand the results. Plus even standard measurements like a cognitive battery are easily confounded (most will score quite differently on a test for conspiratorial/magical thinking based on their peer group's attitudes) see >>7785903

>>7785910
This. Most people that can comfortably classify their views as "right" or "left" simply aren't worth it.
>conservatives tend to be more dogmatic than liberals due to their association with contradictory religious doctrine
This is an especially important caveat for what it implies. SJWism is an important analogue, inherently contradictory, dogmatic and unbending to evidence in a very similar way.

File: f57.jpg (89KB, 680x522px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 680x522px

>>7785951
/thread

File: bismuth.jpg (240KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1000x1000px

>>7786144
>>7785910
Love you guys.
The mentality to desperately trying to appeal to a side is what causes the polarization. It renders your individual opinions null because you will be involuntarely characterized by the appereance of whichever side you say you're on. But I think it's the suggestion of giving people the highly opposing "option A" or "option B" which leads them to ask the question "which side should I take" rather than "why should I take a side" And after they stick with it for some time, they simply tend to own their side.
People usually have opinions about different things that cater to both left and right on different subjects. If you can't bring yourself to strip from your labels, you're not a free thinking person.

>>7785845

Have you not seen what the left has been doing for the past year or so? They have become as stupid (if not stupider) than the far right.

File: 7-26-2006 - 1 - Micrathena gracilis -014a.jpg (323KB, 1227x1351px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 1227x1351px

>>7786173
I'll admit, it can be a pretty daunting task when each side is so vehement about whatever the fuck and want you to join them. If you don't, you are, "the other side".

>>7786429
That spider is the stuff of nightmares and I would use a Mauser to kill it, never mind the hole in the wall I'd leave

>>7786435
>LE KILL WITH FIAHHH!!1!xD

It's harmless, you limp-wristed faggot.

Well liberals act like children so..
>I want to invite all refugees to my country so they can play minecraft with my son

>>7785977
/thread

>>7786454
Wow what an incredibly convincing stawman. You have persuaded me to go out and vote for the Republican Party.

>>7786447
Shove those spiders up your ass if you like them so much.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we6CGVyd5nE

>>7786461
so if you're not going to vote for the liberal party, who are you going to vote for ?

>>7786481
The /pol/ party
8)

>>7786522
good. i don't want another 9/11

>>7785845
Of course they're both simple-minded. This is like r9k vs tumblr. Just because they've fabricated a conflict with two sides doesn't mean there's an actual winner.

>>7785910
>While conservatives tend to be more dogmatic than liberals due to their association with contradictory religious doctrine...
No, liberals are just as bad, they just call their behavior by a different name and therefore conclude it's better.

>>7786534
the only winner in a war is the devil

Psychologist reporting in.

>People on side A can think a thing and people on side B can also think a thing
WOW IT'S FUCKING NOTHING. Outliers exist in practically every statistical sampling ever.

>>7786549
> implying there are sides
my sides

>>7786552
>having sides
Us unbounded objects are the only ones who will survive and transcend the plight of existence while the rest of you disturbed creatures kill each other off.

>>7786549
>Psychologist reporting in.
what weight does this statement carry? your post is worth less to me now that I know.

File: Images-stories-Photos-roger_scruton_16_70dpi_photographer_by_pete_helme-267x397.jpg (19KB, 267x397px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 267x397px

>>7785845
Who'r you calling simple minded you bloody degenerate?

>>7785900
/thread

File: Micrathena_gracilis_web.jpg (333KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 960x720px

>>7786475
They make beautiful webs

File: 1431830654325.jpg (23KB, 500x550px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 500x550px

>ideology

Simple minded fools. Stirner warned about this shit 200 years ago.

>>7786144

Is Ben Garrison actually a nazi or have I been rused for years?

File: Ben Garrison arrives in Baltimore.gif (2MB, 286x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 286x225px

>>7788843
>Is Ben Garrison actually a nazi
He's even more of a nazi then Hitler himself

The liberals who assume their party affiliation can be attributed to an increase in cognition or intelligence are hiding from the evidence that stands for true conservative thought

>>7785845
"Liberals and Conservatives can be both simple-minded and dogmatic."

Grant money is given too easily.

>>7785845

It's probably horse shit. There are a lot of people that are insecure about their intelligence, and would switch to whichever camp thought made them appear smarter.

>>7788843
A few of his cartoons were edited to be antisemitic.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/ben-garrison

And of course someone who had way too much time on their hands,
https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Ben_Garrison

>>7785910
I agree with this fellow.

File: Anonymous Conservatives waifu.jpg (2MB, 2720x3370px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2720x3370px

While we're talking about /pol/ things, ya'll niggas need to read Anonymous Conservative.

>>7786561
>Us unbounded objects are the only ones who will survive and transcend the plight of existence while the rest of you disturbed creatures kill each other off.

This. /Thread