Martian:
Nurture certainly plays a role as well.
Though it has long been demonstrated that political leanings are inherited. It used to be that this was assumed to be a function of parenting - and that certainly plays a role - but it appears that parentage itself also has an influence (the issue of identical twins mentioned in the article is particularly noteworthy).
Another study was recently published,
Partisanship, Voting, and the Dopamine D2 Receptor Gene [
pdf][
abstract], which demonstrated a correlation between genetics and partisanship and political participation. It's like Sulloway said in the article I quoted: the genetics don't determine specific political opinions, but they effect one's worldview which has a strong influence on political opinions.
I admit to having "nature" leanings, though I certainly don't discount that nurture has a significant role. I do think people, in general, are reluctant to accept how much we really are just animals. But every time we try to describe what makes humans different, we also seem to eventually find other animals doing similar things. Using tools is a great example: first it was unique that humans use tools. Then we found out chimps use tools. Now we know that chimps use tools, birds use tools, even rats use tools. And not only do they use tools, they can manipulate the tools in their imagination, so that they can pick the right tool to use even when they've never seen it before.
More importantly, regardless of whether or not genetics are at the root of the issue, it's pretty well demonstrated here, and elsewhere, that, for the most part, trying to get a liberal to agree with a conservative position, or vice versa, is mostly futile.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
I have to disagree, because the facts that occasionally come out, know no right or left.
|
Yes, but the entire point of the OP is that the facts have nothing to do with it. How one
interprets those facts definitely
does know right or left. Your posts are a perfect example: you post citation after citation after citation (after citation, after citation...) and, still, you've convinced almost no one who doesn't already agree with you here.