This does explain a lot...

[Tom Wetmore]

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/27/i_was_a_right_wing_sidekick_what_i_discovered_working_for_the_anti_woman_right/

[bonnie]

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/27/i_was_a_right_wing_sidekick_what_i_discovered_working_for_the_anti_woman_right/

As In?

[CoAspen]

Interesting article and he seems really PO about his experience. Would like to know the whole story as much of it rings true.

[Tom Wetmore]

I read his book that he mentioned in the article. Quite a thought provoking read and not at all what you might expect it to be from the title.

[Geoarrge]

The article illustrated the typical disjointed thinking of someone helplessly addicted to an environment of abundance. 

[bonnie]

The article illustrated the typical disjointed thinking of someone helplessly addicted to an environment of abundance. 

How can that be? Salon is a unbiased always accurate portrayal of conservatism isn't it? 

[fccool]

How can that be? Salon is a unbiased always accurate portrayal of conservatism isn't it? 

 

  You realize that it's an article written by individual who has been conservative for a larger part of his life, right? 

[Geoarrge]

  You realize that it's an article written by individual who has been conservative for a larger part of his life, right? 

He nevertheless seemed predisposed to being disturbed by actual conservative behavior. My guess is he simply rode the momentum of having been raised conservative for a while.  That kind of hyperbolic revulsion to cohesive families isn't some simple innocent intellectual evolution. 

[fccool]

He nevertheless seemed predisposed to being disturbed by actual conservative behavior. My guess is he simply rode the momentum of having been raised conservative for a while.  That kind of hyperbolic revulsion to cohesive families isn't some simple innocent intellectual evolution. 

 

"Predisposed"?  What kind of argument is that?  Flip the label and you get exactly the same thing...   on which bases do you judge the validity of the "predisposed" argument then?  I guess in order for it to be "non-predisposed", it has to be not critical... and therefore in line with what one find to be agreeable? 

 

Wouldn't this world be wonderful filled with only exact copies of ourselves?

[Geoarrge]

I'm suggesting that Mr. Schaeffer's statements are consistent with being unable to comprehend successful mating strategies--based on the laws of biology and economics-- in an environment with scarce resources (i.e. most places, most of the time, in the real world).  His reactions show an anticompetitive mindset - whatever he may have self-identified as being beforehand was superfluous.

[Tom Wetmore]

That makes no sense.

[Geoarrge]

In nature there are basically two general biological strategies: competitive and anticompetitive. Competitive organisms favor selective mating and high-investment parenting, to maximize the quality of their offspring. Scarce resources encourage the competitive strategy. Anticompetitive organisms favor unrestricted mating and low-investment parenting, to maximize the quantity of their offspring. Abundant resources encourage the anticompetitive strategy.  Schaeffer was clearly disturbed when faced with the actual practice of the competitive strategy, which I would guess is because his brain was wired for an anticompetitive perspective, probably due to never having faced hardship or any sense of responsibility for his own survival when growing up. 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Schaeffer was clearly disturbed when faced with the actual practice of the competitive strategy, which I would guess is because his brain was wired for an anticompetitive perspective, probably due to never having faced hardship or any sense of responsibility for his own survival when growing up. 

 

Clarity is in the mind of the beholder.  PK's (Preachers' Kids) have a LOT of stressors that they face as children....the primary one being that they are always under scrutiny, being measured by others in their behavior.  Preachers seem to be the "star players" and "politicians" of religion, ergo, their children end up being the targets of the religious paparazzi.  I highly doubt Schaeffer escaped that, as his father was an icon of tele-evangelism.

[Tom Wetmore]

In nature there are basically two general biological strategies: competitive and anticompetitive. Competitive organisms favor selective mating and high-investment parenting, to maximize the quality of their offspring. Scarce resources encourage the competitive strategy. Anticompetitive organisms favor unrestricted mating and low-investment parenting, to maximize the quantity of their offspring. Abundant resources encourage the anticompetitive strategy.  Schaeffer was clearly disturbed when faced with the actual practice of the competitive strategy, which I would guess is because his brain was wired for an anticompetitive perspective, probably due to never having faced hardship or any sense of responsibility for his own survival when growing up.

And that also makes no sense, especially when put in the context of the actual facts of his life and the facts over which he ultimately parted company with conservative/fundamentalist evangelicals.

[Gerr]

A person is anti-women because he/she is against abortion?  And believes in the Biblical principle of male headship?

[Geoarrge]

And that also makes no sense, especially when put in the context of the actual facts of his life and the facts over which he ultimately parted company with conservative/fundamentalist evangelicals.

The actual facts of his life indicate that something snapped in reaction to witnessing the actual practice, and advocacy, of training young women to be excellent wives and mothers.  That much is apparent. And since it is, objectively, a perfectly sound biological strategy, the fault must be within the mind of the one having the reaction. How exactly that fault originated, I will freely confess I have no clue, but I stand by the rest.

[Tom Wetmore]

It seems evident that you have read little or nothing of his life, his story and that you are just making speculative assumptions from you POV, relfecting your ideas, values and experiences rather than his.

[Geoarrge]

Little or nothing apart from Amazon's free previews of a couple of his books and this article, yes.  Mainly the article.  If you think it's a poor reflection of his experience, I'm not going to argue with you.

[fccool]

In nature there are basically two general biological strategies: competitive and anticompetitive. Competitive organisms favor selective mating and high-investment parenting, to maximize the quality of their offspring. Scarce resources encourage the competitive strategy. Anticompetitive organisms favor unrestricted mating and low-investment parenting, to maximize the quantity of their offspring. Abundant resources encourage the anticompetitive strategy.  Schaeffer was clearly disturbed when faced with the actual practice of the competitive strategy, which I would guess is because his brain was wired for an anticompetitive perspective, probably due to never having faced hardship or any sense of responsibility for his own survival when growing up. 

 

Hardship doesn't equal responsibility, neither it means better upbringing.   Better upbringing has a healthy balance of competition with a dose of community-based morality that doesn't leave people bite the dust and trampled upon by the rest. 

 

Likewise, how is this even relevant to what he is writing about?  What kind of argument is that?  

[Geoarrge]

The theory from which I am operating states that there are biological roots to the worldviews associated with political alignment. Hardship does not equal responsibility or better upbringing; it does however offer an incentive. Being bad at acquiring resources is a handicap given scarce resources, and more negligible given abundant resources.  This feeds into two general psychological archetypes, one based on competence and one based on dependence. 

 

I see Schaeffer's article as an interesting case study: a man who was raised, socialized, and intellectually trained as conservative, but who was apparently ready to flip, in reaction to encounters with so-called 'anti-woman' 'chauvinist' groups. According to this theory, the most likely explanation is that the psychological foundations for his worldview were unsound.  I don't expect there's any way to confirm this unless he had a brain scan before his shift.

[JoeMo]

I liked the article.  Given where this discussion is going, that's all I'm gonna say.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

The theory from which I am operating states that there are biological roots to the worldviews associated with political alignment. Hardship does not equal responsibility or better upbringing; it does however offer an incentive. Being bad at acquiring resources is a handicap given scarce resources, and more negligible given abundant resources.  This feeds into two general psychological archetypes, one based on competence and one based on dependence. 

 

I see Schaeffer's article as an interesting case study: a man who was raised, socialized, and intellectually trained as conservative, but who was apparently ready to flip, in reaction to encounters with so-called 'anti-woman' 'chauvinist' groups. According to this theory, the most likely explanation is that the psychological foundations for his worldview were unsound.  I don't expect there's any way to confirm this unless he had a brain scan before his shift.

 

 

please give specific references for studies involving brain scans used in proving or disproving the archetypal theories of Jungian (or even of non-jungian) analytic psychology...

[Geoarrge]

Political views reflected in brain structure:  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110407121337.htm
A blogger who's been attempting to explain how it works: http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-muscular-amygdala/

[Aliensanctuary]

The man can make an unflattering characterization of "conservative" beliefs and practices, but it doesn't necessarily mean that his opinions and invective are true. One could also make a similar, unflattering exaggeration of "liberal" beliefs and practices expressed by a former "liberal". By demonizing Biblically-based beliefs and values based on the 10 C's and the commands of our Creator, he makes himself an enemy of God, in whom he no longer believes.

 

Conservatives are, of course, imperfect and flawed human beings, as are liberals.

[Aliensanctuary]

If pro-lifers are portrayed as anti-women, then pro-abortionists must be anti-baby:

 

Go ahead, lady,

Kill that baby.

Sure it's alive

But it's gonna die.

 

One less mouth to feed,

One less kid to beat,

One less prison cell,

One less place in hell.

 

(Copyright by AS)

 

(I never did finish that poem)