Difference between liberals and conservatives

[Clarakore]

There are five concerns as listed below.

Harm

Fairness

Authority

Ingroup

Purity

Liberals care for two of them, Conservatives care for all five.

The real difference between liberals and conservatives: Jonathan Haidt on TED.com

[Keel M.]

This doesn't adequately reflect what was stated in the video. I think it's better if people click the link and watch the video.

[Kowalski]

[Kowalski]

[Rlyeh]

While this is a conservative's brain.

[supervike]

^{Airport sex....LOL. That's hilarious.}

[Sweetpumper]

Closing in 3...2...1...

[Kowalski]

Closing in 3...2...1...

Yeah I know. Some people have no sense of humour...

While this is a conservative's brain.

Everybody knows that "blowing stuff up and shooting things" take up the majority of a Conservatives brain.....Duh....

And another big part is BEER, and the religion part should be replaced with Nascar....

Edited May 13, 2013 by Kowalski

[Almagest]

To everyone who is posting junk; Watch the video, it is really good.

[Kowalski]

To everyone who is posting junk; Watch the video, it is really good.

I was responding to this part, not the video (Which I watched, and found very interesting):

There are five concerns as listed below.

Harm

Fairness

Authority

Ingroup

Purity

Liberals care for two of them, Conservatives care for all five.

Which as Kasey pointed out doesn't really reflect what the guy in the video was saying.

[Kowalski]

Honestly, both parties are part of the same beast. There is no difference....

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Liberals care for two of them, Conservatives care for all five.

So you're saying Conservatives are more caring then Liberals? I'm deeply shocked to hear you say that LBA

[Kowalski]

So you're saying Conservatives are more caring then Liberals? I'm deeply shocked to hear you say that LBA

Honestly, I think most liberals, like LBA, have their hearts in the right place, and genuinely want to help people, but they are too naive when it comes to human nature. You can't save everyone. And banning guns won't deter people from killing each other either. Criminals will always have guns. If you want examples: Prohibition and the War on Drugs has not worked either. Because you can't make a law against human nature, whether it's to use drugs or to kill people. Can't legislate morality...

I like the phrase, "I no longer try to change the world, I just try to get by in it."

But I don't think liberals care more than conservatives, or conservatives care more than liberals. Both are human beings, and probably care quite a great deal....

[tapirmusic]

A liberal is a person who is so generous he will give you the shirt off someone else's back.

[Guest]

The ability of conservatives to deny hard verifyiable facts in favour of ideological postures. I am not talking about soft socialogical facts here, I am talking about empirical facts derived from hard science.

Hard facts are not a problem for Liberals, assimilate and move on - Simple.

A belief system which denies reality in favour of belief is dangerous.

Take for example those who advocate the belief in small government, and yet voted for people like Bush and Reagon who both presided over a growth in national government. Ideology denies reality.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 14, 2013 by Guest

[preacherman76]

The ability of conservatives to deny hard verifyiable facts in favour of ideological postures. I am not talking about soft socialogical facts here, I am talking about empirical facts derived from hard science.

Hard facts are not a problem for Liberals, assimilate and move on - Simple.

BS, Liberals ignore science when it doesnt fit thier views all the time. Little things like the statistical odds of life creating its self are completly ignored.

A belief system which denies reality in favour of belief is dangerous.

Take for example those who advocate the belief in small government, and yet voted for people like Bush and Reagon who both presided over a growth in national government. Ideology denies reality.

Br Cornelius

Well thats not really fair to say. Both Reagon and Bush talked a real good game about small government. I do agree with you regarding the people who voted for them a second time. But its not like there was much choice. Thats why I personaly no longer vote for the president. Nor will I till a true conservative gets the knod. Though the bank will never let that happen.

[Gromdor]

BS, Liberals ignore science when it doesnt fit thier views all the time. Little things like the statistical odds of life creating its self are completly ignored.

I think this somewhat proves Br. Cornelius' point. From your statement, I get the impression that you believe because something has long odds that it is impossible. When I see long odds, not only do I think it is possible but I can see with what frequency it occurs.

[Guest]

The creationists ignore the fact that there was a period of about 4 billion years on earth over which only one "accident" needed to happen. That represents a potential for a near infinite number of failures to occur along the way. It only took one success out of those trillions upon trillions of failure for life to begin. Each of the critical early evolutionary steps towards cellular life had 100's of millions of years to develop, so it is not even true that life developed suddenly - rather it evolved over billions of years from its component parts to eventually become life as we would recognise it. Each step is recorded in the genetic code which we each carry around in every cell of our body, and a rough cronology of the steps can even be worked out by tracing them down the phytological tree.

I would say with those odds it makes the occurance of life an almost certain probability on any planet which has the conditions capable of supporting life.

Contemplating the number of attempts the planet had to create life is like contemplating the infinitie or God, beyond our ability to grasp.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 14, 2013 by Guest

[tapirmusic]

BS, Liberals ignore science when it doesnt fit thier views all the time.

Liberals deny science sometimes... For example, is that a man or a woman in the above photo?

Well, even though science will tell you 100% of the time that it is indeed a man, a liberal will ignore science. A liberal will say..."Well, it depends what the above person considers himself. If the above person thinks he's a woman, than he is a woman."

Science

[Clarakore]

I think this somewhat proves Br. Cornelius' point. From your statement, I get the impression that you believe because something has long odds that it is impossible. When I see long odds, not only do I think it is possible but I can see with what frequency it occurs.

To the trained mind complexity is not impossibility but a dim lightbulb. Something that makes it more difficult to work in but not impossible.

[Guest]

Liberals deny science sometimes... For example, is that a man or a woman in the above photo?

Well, even though science will tell you 100% of the time that it is indeed a man, a liberal will ignore science. A liberal will say..."Well, it depends what the above person considers himself. If the above person thinks he's a woman, than he is a woman."

Science

A Liberal will not see the issue in humouring the person who has gender identification issues, because he will not be able to see the harm in doing so. Harm is the loadstone of the Liberals opinion forming faculties.

The Conservative on the other hand will believe that his own personal prejudices should form the basis of societal laws.

The reality is that people with gender identification issues are real and it does no-one any good to deny that.

Br Cornelius

Edited May 15, 2013 by Guest

[MiskatonicGrad]

How's this the difference is how the agendas are carried out the conservative agenda can survive without government. usually the government hinders the conservative agenda which is why conservatives want smaller government.

while the liberal agenda needs government the bigger the government the easier it is for the liberal agenda to move forward if you take away government their agenda would die.

[tapirmusic]

A Liberal will not see the issue in humouring the person who has gender identification issues, because he will not be able to see the harm in doing so. Harm is the loadstone of the Liberals opinion forming faculties.

The Conservative on the other hand will believe that his own personal prejudices should form the basis of societal laws.

The reality is that people with gender identification issues are real and it does no-one any good to deny that.

Br Cornelius

This deserves it's own thread methinks.

[F3SS]

Gender identification issues, lol. I've heard it all now.

If you're confused, drop your pants and look in the mirror. Please do not argue against that while at the same time saying you believe in cold hard scientific facts because if what you see in the mirror isn't cold hard scientific fact at its most basic levels I don't know what is.

[F3SS]

Gender identification issues, though possibly real, used to be classified under a different term in prePC times. That term would be 'crazy' but I'm no doctor....