Well, it appears that liberals truly are smarter

[LTR]

The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.

"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.

Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?hpt=C2

[OHdem10]

1. What happend to Conservatives when it comes to exporting jobs

to people out of their country and leaving those around
them suffering. Insisting on no common sense mgmt of
Trade Policy.

[bvar22]

12. Oh. You're talking about conservative Democrats.

They call themselves "Centrists/Moderates".
But, YES, this report would include them too.

"Centrism"...because its so EASY!
You don't have to STAND for ANYTHING,
and get to insult those who do!
:party:

[Myrina]

2. ... makes perfect sense, lower on the self-actualization pyramid ...

... Prometheus Rising is turning out to be more accurate than I ever imagined.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_Rising

[Jackpine Radical]

3. Interesting...

The "treatment effect size" of liberalism is equal to a Cohen's d of .70, which is generally taken as a large effect. (No, I'm not really trying to imply causation here, just to put it into perspective. Antidepressant medication has a Cohen's d of about .30, benzodiazepine anxiolytics about .50.)

[Sheepshank]

4. from the article...

Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ.

I've heard about this "elitist behaviour" so frequently from the Reps regarding Obama...the study must be dead on. Because we know how smart Obama is :)

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin,

the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.

Totally bogus argument.

Why did civilization arise on natural trade routes? Because they were places where strangers were more likely to meet, share goods and ideas in mutually beneficial exchanges, each making the others' chances of survival better. Helping strangers encouraged such trade. Killing strangers ended trade. Therefore, the best path to the survival of your offspring and nearest kin was to be GOOD to strangers, not to hate and fear them.

Notably, ALL cultures have traditions of respecting the stranger - from the middle-eastern codes of hospitality, to the Native American communalism, to Inuits, to Australian aborigines. Such traditions in cultures equivalent to those of our "caveman" ancestors are common. It is only with the development of higer civilization, the development of cities and of authoritarian governments that paranoia about 'the stranger' became the standard.

[anonymous171]

8. EXACTLY. Humans are naturally cooperative. nt

[QC]

6. The same scientist loves to link intelligence to race.

For example, he argues that people in Sub-Saharan Africa are less healthy because they are not as smart as other people. (I guess the extreme poverty has nothing to do with it.)

Funny that no one around here is talking about his other theories.

[LTR]

10. Well, forgive me!

I'm not 100% up on my scientists. Not like I had their posters plastered all over my bedroom walls when I was a kid. Shit, I worshiped Reggie Jackson! Where did I go wrong?

[JoeyT]

11. Yeah, I've seen that one too.

And it's about as ass-backward an argument as a person can make.
Somehow he gets his cause and effect mixed up in everything he puts forward.
By which I mean that we've known for a long time that an environment of severe malnutrition, disease, and bad sanitation causes intelligence to develop more slowly or to be stunted. (Figured I should say that before someone yells at me. :P)

[anonymous171]

7. 11 points =/= Definitive proof of intellectual superiority. nt

[stray cat]

9. You would not guess it based on common sense and practical wisdom in politics