Brains… BRAINS!!!

From the Movie "Young Frankenstein" 1974

From CNSNews.com – Proponents of human-caused global warming claim that “cognitive” brain function prevents conservatives from accepting the science that says “climate change” is an imminent threat to planet Earth and its inhabitants.

George Lakoff, a professor of cognitive science and linguistics at the University of California-Berkeley and author of the book “The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics,” says his scientific research shows that how one perceives the world depends on one’s bodily experience and how one functions in the everyday world. Reason is shaped by the body, he says.

Lakoff told CNSNews.com that “metaphors” shape a person’s understanding of the world, along with one’s values and political beliefs — including what they think about global warming.

“It relates directly (to global warming) because conservatives tend to feel that the free market should be unregulated and (that) environmental regulations are immoral and wrong,” Lakoff said.

“And what they try to do is show that the science is wrong and that the argument is wrong, based on the science.  So when it comes back to science, they try to debunk the science,” Lakoff said.

On the other hand, he added, liberals’ cognitive process allows them to be “open-minded.”

“Liberals say, ‘Look seriously at the science and look at whether people are going to be harmed or not and whether the world is going to be harmed,’” Lakoff said.

In a Feb. 23 report on National Public Radio, reporter Christopher Joyce began his story by stating that recent polls show that fewer Americans believe humans are making the planet dangerously warmer, despite “a raft” of contradictory reports.

“This puzzles many climate scientists, but not social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs,” Joyce said.

Read the entire piece here

=======================

The explanations are getting desperate. I wonder then how Dr. Lakoff explains people like myself, who once accepted the scientific arguments presented on global warming, but who now reject most of the hype and urgency attached to it? Believe it or not, in the early 90’s I used to be a global warming activist. But that’s another story.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Is that Dr. Lakoff, as in ‘rhymes with’ …
.
.

hunter

Perhaps the good Dr. and his peers can come up with a solution to make sure those pesky deformed thinkers don’t get in their way in the future?

rbateman

Here brain, atta boy, sit. Now look at the pictures and tell daddy which one proves global warming:
http://www.robertb.darkhorizons.org/WhatGlobalWarming.htm
-!!!!!!!!!!! !!!-
Good boy, you picked Sacramento 5 ESE, which has the Kiss of Giss.

Tim

“Fact’s are not as important as beliefs”. That actually scares me. This is why Christian Scientists (the religious group) don’t go to medical doctors when their children are gravely ill.

PB-in-AL

Yes the liberals got a brain, Abby-something.
“…whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs.” – Indeed, the religion of AGW as promoted by its high priest, Algore.
As someone I know said once, “it is possible to have your mind so open you brains fall out.”

Toto

“This puzzles many climate scientists, but not social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs,” Joyce said.
At least he got this one thing right. Sad, but true.

Harold Vance

Isn’t this like saying that only liberals can detect phlogiston?

“Liberals say, ‘Look seriously at the science and look at whether people are going to be harmed or not and whether the world is going to be harmed,’”
Uh, excuse me but it seems they are a priori assuming that open minded people could not conclude from looking seriously at whether people are going to be harmed that they won’t be!
What a crock. But unsurprising, as this kind of crap research by political hacks is common, for instance:
http://brneurosci.org/nature.html

Michael D Smith

Another story indeed! That would make a very interesting post, Anthony. What made you change from advocate to [insert adjective here] – realist, seeker of truth, researcher…? What events transpired?

If scientists who believe the theory of anthropogenic global warming actually produced some science according to scientific principles that have been respected for centuries, and also respected the house-rules of scientific journals that insist on peer-reviewing, then maybe those of us whose brains are wired to assess the facts without ideological accretions could begin to look at the AGW case.

Steve Goddard

After 30 years of being bombarded with disastrous predictions about global warming (drought, heat, no more snow, etc.) it is just about as cold and wet and snowy as it always was. Sea level isn’t rising significantly, hurricanes aren’t increasing, polar sea ice hasn’t changed and is right at normal.
Lakoff confuses academia with intelligence. The lack of evidence for CAGW is overwhelming.
“Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach,”

Only a professor of cognitive science could conclude that anyone who believes that AGW is a fraud must be a right-winger.
The fact is, I know a fraud when I see one. Whether its a false scientific hypothesis or a false left-right political paradigm, a fraud is a fraud.
This guy is a perfect example of what happens when you cut funding to mental health care.

Duster

Although I usually consider being open minded a good thing, but I also recall the line about being too open minded – anything can walk in.
Lakoff’s research has previously been directed toward explaining why “conservatives” are so fearful and why “liberals” are so adventuresome and debonair. From what I have read of his research he seems to be engaged in an “affirmation of the consequent.”

Henry chance

More dishonest science. Take this fool either a brain or a hand full of test results and measure cognitive processing ability and in a blind test he couldn’t guess if they were a liberal or conservative.
(I have both clinical psychology training and brain surgery experience)
“reason is shaped by the body” False in 2 ways. In a physical sense, reason has no shape. In another sense, Behavior is shaped. Cognitive processing doesn’t conform to shape.
Just a little sidbar on behavior. Capitialsim is a reward, reinforced behavior mechanism. If I work hard, it warms my body and lets me earn money and pay my utilities. In a welfare model, the people can have the state pay their bills and it rewards slothfullness.

Dave F

Yeah. Those dirty scrubs are just incapable of understanding. How long does this go on before AGW proponents break out an ‘Air Rwanda’ type of dehumanization process? This is the beginning, claiming that skeptics are just incapable of comprehension. I am sure there are some people who comment here, that are skeptical, yet have very good comprehension of the arguments.
Of course, this is not the first time this argument has been advanced, albeit in different form:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100224132655.htm

Daniel

haa haaa I was global warming activist in the 90’s too 😉

Veronica (England)

“facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs”?
Well, cognitive dissonance can work on both sides, I would have thought, even though it sounds a bit post-normal.
What if there was a left-wing, pinko bleeding-heart liberal who became a sceptic because she is a scientist and tends to try to understand the data rather than worry how she feels about global warming?
Does that person smash the paradigm or should she be committed to a mental insitution for some kind of split personality disorder? I need to know!

Wondering Aloud

Hilarious.
Projection. Has anyone ever met a liberal with an “open mind”?

Somebody should have clued Lakoff in.
We Own the word OPEN.
1. We are the ones who link to our opponents sites
2. We are the ones who think data and code should be shared.
3. We are the ones who invite our opponents to TOP POST
4. We are the ones who let anyone civil comment
5. We are the ones who don’t care what most people think (consensus)
6. We are the ones who refuse to say the science is settled.
Hey Anthony, how open minded was Menne et al WRT to working with you?
I studied lakoff a long time ago and for the most part I agree with him that the way we thing is structured by the metaphors we believe. The problem he has here is that he’d so closed minded that he can’t even see that he made a great argument for us easy.

EJ

Leave it to a soft scientist to back up the soft climate science!

John F. Hultquist

Liberals say, ‘Look seriously at the science and look at
What solar system did the author say he was from?

Enneagram

It all began in the 1960’s ….Those were the days my friend!…All that hemp and LSD made alchemy transformation possible, from conservatism to liberalism in just one single dosis. Just wonderful!

manfredkintop

“Believe it or not, in the early 90’s I used to be a global warming activist.”
GASP!
as late as 2005, I was selling GHGV services…yet have never voted for a conservative candidate in any federal, provincial, or municipal election. I also don’t find Ann Coulter attractive.
Go figure.

Doc

Questioning bad science makes me a close minded conservative then?
Looking seriously at the science, it seems that more people will be harmed/disadvantaged by attempting to rectify purported AGW than if we let nature take its course. Wait, am I a liberal now???

There was a report on CNN (sorry can’t find the link anymore) showing that the average IQ of democrats was higher than that of republicans. I recall that they did their study on a University population, implying that most of the respondents would have been young adults.
As I pointed out in the ensuing family quarrel, there is an old saying.
“He who at the age of 20 is not a socialist has no heart. He who at the age of 50 still is, has no brain.”
What the intellectual snobbery of Lakoff et al fail to come to grips with is that even average intelligence informed by experience trumps high intelligence every time. In brief, it takes someone of high intelligence to understand that, for example, communism is superior to capitalism in every way. Yet even the dim witted amongst us can observe that every implementation in history has failed.
I imagine that if you took the IQ of the average victim of the Nigerian banking scam and compared it to the average, you would find out that to be truly suckered by complete bull, you have to be smart enough to think you can’t be conned.
Not to mention that there are two kinds of liberals in my experience. There are the ones who believe in the cause, and there are the ones who believe they can proft from the cause. Mr Gore likely is an example of the latter.

TerryS

So what his research boils down to is that conservatives are closed minded and liberals are open minded.
Of course, if you try to argue against his research then you are simply proving you are a close minded conservative whereas if you accept it you are proving you are open minded liberal.

“This puzzles many climate scientists, but not social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs,” Joyce said.
As a social scientist I am not surprised at all. Progressive liberals are a demonstration of the correctness of that statement. They perceive man as evil, ignorant, greedy and destructive and, by God, that’s what their research proves…. much as every extreme weather event, hot, cold, wet, dry, flood or driught proves AGW.

Brian G Valentine

Are we still having contact with Planet Berkeley?

Bill Parsons

George Lakoff, a professor of cognitive science and linguistics at the University of California-Berkeley and author of the book “The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics,” says his scientific research shows that how one perceives the world depends on one’s bodily experience and how one functions in the everyday world. Reason is shaped by the body, he says.
Hmm! This study could go a long way towards explaining why professor’s of cognitive science and linguistics tend to be somewhat rotund, myopic and balding, with a propensity for bow ties, rimless glasses and irrational theories espousing imminent “threats” to humanity from bizarre sources.
I’d like to read more. Perhaps it would help me understand myself better!

robert of ottawa

“This puzzles many climate scientists, but not social scientists, whose research suggests that facts may not be as important as one’s beliefs,” Joyce said.
That’s certainly true for the AGWers.

Skeptic Tank

It’s SCIENCE!!

Al Gore's Holy Hologram

How do we perceive the world when we’re well fed, latte sipping urbanites who have never experienced an iota is suffering or toiling the fields for generations?

John Laidlaw

Or, phrased another way, conservatives are closed-minded, liberals are gullible. You can phrase it any way you like, but in the end it comes down to bias and interpretation.
For the record, I was also – back in the 90s – a global warming activist, until the phrases “the science is settled” and “the debate is over” were uttered. My science-trained brain rebelled at these, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Charles. U. Farley

Obviously suffering from a lakoff brains….

Jim

Maybe this numb nuts should look at the science instead of the social aspects of the situation!

Stu Blumenstock

Yes, yes! As usually, only progressives can ignore facts when coming to their conclusions, and still be considered thoughtful and logical!
LOL!

David

He must have either started out very stupid or smoked a lot of that stuff they used to have in Berkeley, to think that there is a perfect correlation between political views and cognitive processes, and that all the logic is on one side. It’s a very short step from his stated views to deciding that his political opponents are incapable of reason and therefore should be denied the vote.
Note that he calls himself a cognitive scientist, but his core discipline is linguistics, which is more accurately a branch of history.

Antonio San

OT: An interesting exchange between Andy Revkin and Joe Romm about the Barber “rotten ice” paper in climateprogress highlights my own doubts about chosing to report on the Beaufort sea at the end of summer…:
Revkin writes:
“The reason I didn’t write on Dave Barber’s paper when it came out (even though he was featured in our 2005 Discovery-Times “Arctic Rush” documentary and is a highly regarded scientist), is that I got a lot of pushback from a batch of Arctic Ocean ice specialists who immediately said that the Beaufort is a special case and cited various reasons to handle those findings cautiously. I may revisit and query Dr. Barber and them anew. That’s how I try to avoid what I call “whiplash journalism” (or blogging). Covering every paper can lead to real neck trauma when focused on the more complicated parts of climate science (even as the basics are clear). ”
Winnipeg’s Barber is an alarmist and seems to stop at nothing to get his funding renewed. It is funny to read that Canadian scientists are muzzled and to see Barber’s stuff quickly published in a peer reviewed journal and featured all over the MSM.
Now Revkin is thrown under the bus… not alarmist enough!

wucash

Wow… So I’m basically a mentally ill conservative, despite the fact I have more liberal beliefs.
But whatever, let them spew this rubbish. If it damages their agenda then I’m ok with being a mentally ill conservative.

b.poli

Funny that these conservative hard hats believe they are open minded. They even don’t accept scepticism as a tool for new ideas. It looks a bit like sclerosis.

George Lakoff needs to take some time out with Hanson and company at the drug rehabilitation centre of their choice. Maybe then he could honestly dissect his own cognitive process. Oh by the way this bloke wants you on his team.http://bushynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Kumi-Naidoo_1596791c.jpg

JN

Cognitive dissonance keeps liberals from rejecting the hype.

Lance

What utter nonsense this is!
“look seriously at the science”, liberals say…if only they did!

ew-3

I do have to admit, we’re I to be in the market for a new brain, I’d prefer to buy a liberals, since it would have such low mileage on the odometer..

Myron Mesecke

“Lakoff told CNSNews.com that “metaphors” shape a person’s understanding of the world, along with one’s values and political beliefs —”
I guess liberals understanding of the world is to expect the government to take care of them instead of doing things for themselves.

“It relates directly (to global warming) because conservatives tend to feel that the free market should be unregulated and (that) environmental regulations are immoral and wrong,” Lakoff said.
This is just insulting.
I’ve NEVER heard a conservative say that environmental regulations were “immoral and wrong”.
I’ve certainly heard a lot of grousing about nonsensical, hysterical, or corrupt regulations. A prime one is the mandated use of reformulated gasoline, as an example, which is more costly, hard on engines, and does nothing to improve net air quality. Or mandating cfl’s without accounting for disposal of their mercury nor the real cost comparisons with incandescents.
On the other hand, I know a lot of conservative folks who support regulation of pesticide use as well as release of contaminants into the water table or noxious chemicals into the air.
Of course conservatives rightly understand that the free market is best, but they also understand that there’s certainly nothing wrong with using regulation for keeping polluters from poisoning us or their neighbors.
What is wrong with these people? Will they say ANYTHING?

Tenuc

Another article which is 180 degrees away from what’s happening. I’ve been a socialist most of my life, and was a believed in CAGW until a couple of years ago. I’m a now sceptical denier of the link between climate and catastrophic warming and all it took was a few days examining the evidence, rather than just accepting the scare stories put out by the media.
Cargo cult science, as practised by the IPCC cabal, has no place in the 21s century. The more they try to hide the facts from the public, the worst the situation becomes, and few people and few people will believe a word they say.
We may be winning the CAGW battle, but need to be vigilant regarding the next scam they will perpetrate. Their ultimate aim remains to rule the people of the world through an unelected elitist world government.

Chris in Ga

“Liberals say, ‘Look seriously at the science and look at whether people are going to be harmed or not and whether the world is going to be harmed,’” Lakoff said.
Which is why they don’t teach hard science at liberal arts colleges

Jason Bair

So in other words, I do not have the ability to view absurdity as fact? No thanks, I’ll keep my conservative brains intact.

Gary

On the other hand, he added, liberals’ cognitive process allows them to be “open-minded.”

You know, there just might be something to this idea. The AWG crowd will swallow any scam that comes their way without giving it a thought. It seems to me that an “open mind” so often translates to an “empty head.”