Brain Wiring Redux

[freeztar]

Do you not consider this an answer, when I have said I want to move the discussion to the Social Sciences Forum?

 

No, it is not an answer. It's an acknowledgement of the question perhaps, but it did not answer the question.

[freeztar]

By the way I do intend to obey the rules and treat others as i am treated.

 

That's good to hear! :)

 

A caveat though...If someone treats you rudely or attacks you, do not respond in the same manner. Report that person to the staff and we will handle it.

 

As long as you abide by our rules, you will have zero problems here. :)

[REASON]

''You will just have to wait for further discussion in the Social Sciences Forum.''

 

Do you not consider this an answer, when I have said I want to move the discussion to the Social Sciences Forum?

 

questor, this of course is not an answer to either of my questions. I'm having a hard time understanding why you now want to move this to another thread considering what I am asking is directly related to comments you've made in these threads.

 

The first question is a simple yes or no question. It does not take another thread to answer it. But trust me, I do know why you might find it difficult to answer. :)

 

The second question is directly related to traits associated with genetic brain chemistry that you feel are indicative of the type of traits that you think are necessary for a person to be qualified as President of the United States. This thread would be a perfectly suitable place for you to enumerate them so that we can get a sense of how you think understanding "brain wiring" can help us choose a suitable person for high office. I understand why this might be difficult to answer as well, but I assume you've at least thought about it.

 

I think these questions can be answered in this thread and I'd appreciate it if you would make an attempt. :)

[questor]

OK Reason, since you want these answers...

1. ''If somehow, it were objectively determined what the traits are that would be "necessary or beneficial for a national office holder," would you support establishing a law that would restrict national office holding postitions to those who were deemed to possess those traits?''

If it became possible sometime in the future that reliable tests could be performed to determine the sanity, honesty, character, integrity and ability to perform the job for national office holder, I would think the public and candidates would welcome the test. I see no reason for a law. If one candidate agrees to the test, how would the other dare refuse? As of now, we have to rely upon what someone tells us about himself. How good is that for getting at the truth? Would a candidate willingly tell us he will have sex with interns? or continue to raise taxes? or attend racist churches?

2. Traits necessary or beneficial: honesty, integrity, good morals, job experience, intelligence, ability to bond with the public, love of country, fairness, steadfastness, knowledge of economics and foreign policy, and ability to negotiate.

[REASON]

OK Reason, since you want these answers...

1. .....If it became possible sometime in the future that reliable tests could be performed to determine the sanity, honesty, character, integrity and ability to perform the job for national office holder, I would think the public and candidates would welcome the test. I see no reason for a law. If one candidate agrees to the test, how would the other dare refuse? As of now, we have to rely upon what someone tells us about himself. How good is that for getting at the truth? Would a candidate willingly tell us he will have sex with interns? or continue to raise taxes? or attend racist churches?

 

Or lead us to war based on lies and deception, or resort to torture, or ravage the Fourth Amendment, or spend us into massive debt, etc., etc., etc.

 

So no law. Good answer. But without a law, I don't think anyone will succumb to some sort of test that has the potential of undoing their candidacy or any other job opportunity for that matter.

 

What kind of test do you envision, a brain scan like you mentioned in the first Brain Wiring thread, or a written test like a questionnaire? I assume an oral test wouldn't work considering you don't trust what anybody says, that is of course, unless they are saying something you already believe in. A questionnaire would be too subjective and everyone would have to agree on the validity of the questions and how to interpret the answers.

 

So I gather you are referring to some sort of brain scan that can detect something about the character of individuals. Of course we would all have to be witness to the scan because we can't just assume that whoever conducts the test is telling the truth about the results. But, I'm sure whoever has the authority to administer the test would have already had to have passed it themselves so we would obviously be able to trust that they wouldn't lie about the results.

 

So this test would be able to scan our brains and detect our brain wiring and be able to tell if we are good or bad people according to some standard of what is good or bad. Who determines and enforces the standard, a new government agency maybe?

 

 

2. Traits necessary or beneficial: honesty, integrity, good morals, job experience, intelligence, ability to bond with the public, love of country, fairness, steadfastness, knowledge of economics and foreign policy, and ability to negotiate.

 

I agree that these are good characteristics.

 

So you think these characteristics are genetically hardwired? Virtually every characteristic you've mentioned here are learned. Are children naturally honest, or do they learn the value of honesty? How could job experience, good morals, ability to bond with the public, knowledge of economics and foreign policy, and an ability to negotiate be considered genetic traits? How are they associated with genetically presdisposed "Brain Wiring" or hemispheric orientation? Does a candidate have to possess all of them, or will 70% pass?

 

Would you consider these characteristics more indicative of someone who is right-brained or left-brained, and how do you arrive at that conclusion?

 

All you've mentioned here are qualities that are a product of a person's upbringing, education, personal influences, life experiences, etc. This appears to have nothing to do with the topic of this or the previous thread.

 

This has everything to do with your belief that your particular political persuasion is superior to everyone elses except those who's is similar to yours, and you are interested in figuring out a way to use some sort of scientific research as a means to show that your political mindset is genetically superior as well, and as such should be used to weed out from the political process those who you deem inferior and have been trained to fear.....Liberals.

 

Sorry questor, your political brain wiring scheme is undemocratic, discriminatory, brainwashed, bigoted bunk, and unlike any of the honorable human characteristics you described above.

[questor]

Reason, since you chose to end your post with this insulting paragraph, I won't bother to correct the rest of your trumped up assumptions stated above. I do not choose to answer you in kind, but if you continue to write to me I will report it to a moderator.

'' Sorry questor, your political brain wiring scheme is undemocratic, discriminatory, brainwashed, bigoted bunk, and unlike any of the honorable human characteristics you described above.''

[InfiniteNow]

</me Laughs at the hypocrisy shown here> :)

[REASON]

Reason, since you chose to end your post with this insulting paragraph, I won't bother to correct the rest of your trumped up assumptions stated above. I do not choose to answer you in kind, but if you continue to write to me I will report it to a moderator.

 

Well, if you are unwilling to answer any of the questions I have asked, or challenge any of the statements I've made then they will stand as is in the posts I've submitted.

 

The fact of the matter is, I have found your entire premise relating to these threads to be ideas that are extremely onesided and dangerous. And I have taken it upon myself to challenge them as such.

 

But you're right, I will correct my last statement.

 

In my opinion, your political brain wiring scheme is undemocratic, discriminatory, brainwashed, bigoted bunk, and unlike any of the honorable human characteristics you described above.

[modest]

</me Laughs at the hypocrisy shown here> :hihi:

 

/me senses a fellow irc user in the room. :singer:

 

~modest

[Moontanman]

I'm laughing at the superior intelect.... KHAN!:singer:

[Zythryn]

Questor, I am curious about your list.

Do you feel those traits are unique, or much more or less common in liberal or conservative people?

How would your list tie into your original idea of being able to tell if someone is liberal or conservative by scanning their brain??

[Overdog]

...If it became possible sometime in the future that reliable tests could be performed to determine the sanity, honesty, character, integrity and ability to perform the job for national office holder, I would think the public and candidates would welcome the test.

 

I haven't weighed in on this thread in a while, but now I will.

I seriously doubt if the public would welcome such a test. I don't think those ignorant voters you referred to are nearly as ignorant as you think they are.

 

I see no reason for a law.

 

Good thing. Because those ignorant voters would probably become a lynch mob.

 

If one candidate agrees to the test, how would the other dare refuse?

It would never get to this point, the candidates would be leading the lynch mobs.

 

As of now, we have to rely upon what someone tells us about himself. How good is that for getting at the truth? Would a candidate willingly tell us he will have sex with interns? or continue to raise taxes? or attend racist churches?

 

It's good enough for me, if the alternative is fascism.

[questor]

Zythryn, your questions are covered in the first few posts. Please read from post 1, if you have any questions that are not answered, get back to me.

[InfiniteNow]

Questor,

 

I've read this thread from front to back more than once, and I'm not seeing it. If I'm not seeing it, then chances are good that several others also are not.

 

Can you please state precisely which of Zythryn's questions are answered in exactly which posts?

 

 

Thank you for all of your sincere attempts to increase the understanding of this topic which you are clearly passionate about.

[Zythryn]

Sorry Questor, I reviewed the first few posts and could find no answer.

Let me simplify it, get rid of the second question, just address the first if you would be so kind.

Here is a simpler version:

Do you think that the traits you mentioned 'sanity, honesty, character, integrity and ability to perform the job' are limited to liberals or conservatives. If so, which?

[questor]

Zyhthryn and Freeztar, I am sorry, I was referring to my original post on this subject where certain traits are ascribed to different hemispheres.

I assume these different traits are the ones under discussion?

'' 2. Traits necessary or beneficial: honesty, integrity, good morals, job experience, intelligence, ability to bond with the public, love of country, fairness, steadfastness, knowledge of economics and foreign policy, and ability to negotiate.''

Answer, I know of no research that would link these traits exclusively to either hemisphere or either political party. Some of these traits are subjective, such as intelligence. A mass murderer can be intelligent but exhibit none of the other traits. A politician can be able to bond with the public, but have zero morals. Fairness? As relates to whom? Some are only ''fair'' to people that think like they do. As I have stated repeatedly, the specific research on my theory has not yet been done, but quite a lot of research has been done that points to definite hemispheric differences.

[InfiniteNow]

And which traits go with which hemisphere?