There's no arguing with conservatives ... No, seriously, scientific studies prove it

There is an interesting study behind the scenes here, unfortunately it's presented in a pretty biased way. I'm willing to bet this phenomenon isn't just limited to conservatives.

There are other studies supporting the notion that the more people hear a lie exposed as a lie, the more they tend to believe it. Maybe that's behind the McCain campaign's strategy in this election.

Damn that was condescending.
WTF?

Oh and if you think you can make any difference in the mind of a liberal, even if you put the living proof in his hands, it won't make a difference.
They come "pre-programmed".

Although I do feel the same way about trying to talk to a conservative, I dont think that liberals are really any different. I think that once you have decided to close your mind then it is closed and that is it. It has been just as hard to try to have a decent discussion with Obama supporters as it is to have one with a republican. I guess that is what Al Gore was talking about with the assault on reason. Most people these days are not open to any real reasonable discussion, or they wouldnt vote for people that dont really have their best interest in mind.

For the sake of objectivity, and before sharing it as a resource for others I guess I'd prefer having more information on the methodology used in this study (ironically, this would be my Democratic "intellect" at work, no doubt). However, even without this info I have no problem believing in either its soundness or its conclusions. Based on my own experience with conservatives, and for that matter with zealots of any stripe, I already know there's no changing closed minds, at least by use of logic alone.

The question to ask though is this: what is it about human nature that makes some folks so predisposed to dogmatic thinking. I think "pericles" and "crob", above, make very important and possibly related points in this regard. That is, far too many people are inclined to see the world in narrow, dualistic ways that in the end prevent them from seeing (let alone accepting) alternate viewpoints. In such a world the notion that people are either "with us or against us" is wholly acceptable, if not preferable.

Regrettably, these folks-- chiefly because of their credulity-- are convenient fodder for the agents of the "sinister elite;" e.g. those well-versed in the use of imagery and symbolism to craft "false realities." This has always been so and it's no coincidence really that Rove and his ilk are ardent students and masterful practitioners of prior propaganda machines. They know, as Hitler and his crew knew, that the tendency for humans to attach themselves to emotion-laden symbols can be used to drive their thinking and behavior. This is especially true for the uninformed.

Ironically, the more dutiful and trusting the populace, the more vulnerable they'll be to programming and manipulation. In effect, good intentions and unwavering allegiance to worthy ideals are contorted in such ways as to advance and protect the very people who would use these tendencies against them. By recasting these symbols in convenient ways, lies become truth, wrongs becomes right and anyone disagreeing with this is not to be trusted. And, brilliantly, it's all done without their knowing because in a mindset that celebrates blind allegiance and rejects independent thought, no one has the faculties to know that they "know not."

Talk about a disturbing and ultimately pathetic state of affairs. Mmmmm... 1984 anyone?

The following link is to an article that articulates the above points exceptionally well and demonstrates how the resultant dilemma is being played out in the current election. The article, written by George Lakoff, author of The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 20th Century Politics With an 18th Century Brain (2008), makes it easier to understand the differences between the two major parties and the limits of rational thought in framing the Democratic position. It's an important, revealing read and should be circulated far and wide:

www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/the-palin-choice-and-the_b_123012.html

was this an "Onion" reject story or something? It's a pure opinion piece! I'm more left than anyone I know, and Iagree with the content, but this is just begging to be torn apart. Next time the author should try to work in a little finesse rather than hitting people square over the head with simplistic language and mockery. Also it lacks citation.
Is this even a real news website?

I can back this argument with my own scientific study of the subject. You get NO WHERE with the closed mind, except more stupid, rigid thinking.

I THINK and DO, therefor, I am a conservative

The Greatest Hits of Circular Conservative Reasoning:

An example of circular reasoning is when you use one unproven assumption to support another unproven assumption.

Example: I know God exists because the Bible says so. I know the Bible is true because God exists.

Global warming.

"Global warming is a hoax!" How do you know? "Because I read a report that says so." How do you know that report is accurate? "Because global warming is a hoax and that report confirms it." What about all the reports that say global warming is real? "They are obviously flawed because global warming is a hoax." How do you know they are flawed? "Because of this reports that say it is a hoax."

They begin with an assumption, accept whatever supports that assumption as accurate and then dismiss all evidence to the contrary as "flawed."

WMD's In Iraq.

"Iraq has WMD's." How do you know? "Because this report says so!" What about all the other reports that say they do not? "They are flawed." How do you know? "Because Iraq has WMD's." How do you know that? "Because this report says so."

And around and around it goes.

This phenomenon of assumption followed by willful ignorance or dismisal of all facts that contradict their initial assumption is why no one can successfully argue with a Conservative/Republican.

Because in their mind ALL facts that contradict their initial assumption are "wrong" and therefore dismissed.

They have initial assumptions about all of these things...and nothing anyone says is going to change their minds because they are locked into some kind of weird internal feedback loop! A kind of sel-fulfilling prophecy

Most conservatives tend to be older and stuck in their ways, so arguing with them tends to not work - especially if they're extremists.

Whew!!! I thought is was just me...

I live in extremely conservative East Tennessee the republican influence is overwhelming (check our voting record) and the article is dead on.

I had a guy just today say it was OK to bail out AIG but we don't need to be spending money on health care. Oh yeah he makes $8.50 per hour. He believes this like Pavlov's dogs believe there is food because he has been told it's true.

As an earlier post stated "I think therefore I am liberal"

We've seen this study confirmed nearly everyday.

When the Dems tried to tell the Conservatives that we needed more troops in Iraq....Bush "felt in his gut" that more troops weren't necessary. No one was gonna tell him that his black and white assesment of the war was wrong.

He viewed the world in simple absolutes: America is great and Iraq is bad, therefore we will win. That's the romantic, simplistic worldview that Bush (and 51 percent of voters) believe. They don't let ugly "facts" or "reality" interfer with their hyper-moralistic and romantic worldview. Thus generals are ignored and Rumsfeld and Cheney (also simplistic, absolutist romantics) are followed.

When we showed Bush (or ANY Conservative) the mountain of evidence that dumping 100 metric tons of pollution into the air every day might be having an effect on global weather patterns....he simply dismissed it! He even refused -- refused! -- to even watch Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" becaue he "knew in his gut" that it was wrong. In his (and his followers) simplistic worldview America is great, God will fix it and therefore any inconvenience is unnecessary. These are not rational people.

When Bush got bills from Congress that diretly contradicted what he personally wanted to do...did he bow to the will of the majority? Nope! He invented signing statements to get his way because in his gut he knew he was right and everyone else was wrong. In his simplistic worldview he justified his breaking the law by virture of the fact that he was "right" therefore it couldn't be wrong to lie and cheat to get his way.

When the law specifically forbid Bush to wiretap people without a warrant....well, we all know what that fucker did.

And nearly ever single Republican / Conservative voter wholeheartedly supported Bush because they also adopted his simplistic hyper-moralistic romantic (and ultimately irrational) worldview.

A overly-romantic, irrational, black and white, simplistic worldview of absolutes can NEVER be a moderate or centrist position....and isn't that exactly what the Republican party has become?

We cannot deny that this type of black and white absolutist follower mentality plays a significant role in the lives of many, many, MANY Americans.

I will be referencing this study for a long time! Thanks scientists!

I usually don't buy into studies like this, there's often too many variables that aren't taken into account.

That being said, I find the results to be entirely accurate.

I've convinced many liberals to change their positions and have my own positions changed quite a few times on this site.

I can't even recall a single time when I earnestly changed a conservative person's mind about ANYTHING. Even things they probably agreed with!

I hate to generalize, but to them, it's about confrontation and e-peen. It very rarely is about the actual issues and certainly not about the truth. They lie, they bullshit, they make things up, they take possibilities and make them probabilities and they take probabilities and make them certainties.

Liberals can be stupid as hell, blockheaded, short-sighted, completely unrealistic and embarrassingly idealistic. But they DO change their minds and are willing to accept hypotheticals and usually earnestly want to know the truth, even if they often bunk it up.

Conservatives do no such thing. They're absolutely certain about everything, even when the issue is clearly ambiguous. And like the article states, when faced with the truth, they just cling even harder. And that's not just Republicans, that's all conservatives, libertarians too.

Obviously there are many exceptions on both sides and I'm just adding anecdotal evidence to this study, but that has been my experience.

I don't know what they're talking about. All conservatives I know are balanced, reasonable people. We engage in respectful discourse and red wine on a nightly basis.

Just because something is a study does not mean it is correct. There are probably studies that contradict studies, and studies that say most studies are incorrect.

i watched this video from TED earlier today-- interesting and informative, although not a lot i didnt already know...well put though. worth the watch.
Jonathan Haidt: The real difference between liberals and conservatives
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html

Okay, now try proving that to the same conservatives they're referring to.

anyone that's stupid enough to believe that god wrote a book, will believe any insane rhetrotic that's spoon fed to them by the gop.
republican mantra; don't bother me with facts, my mind is already made up!

I believe this study is not attacking conservatives' intelligence. It is pointing out the fact that when these people are given the opportunity to gain NEW intelligence they are writing it off as non-factual based on...well, nothing.

Being open to possiblities is more important than your IQ.

the stipulation that iraq had the weapons or the ability to produce them was from george tennants CIA, a clinton appointee

Oh no! Attacking them with facts only makes them stronger! AAAAAaaaaaAAAAAhhhhhhhhhh!

Is there no hope?!

Try arguing with a Barack Obama supporter sometime. It generally ends with "you must be a racist". Don't pretend one side is any less intolerant than the other. As a Clinton Democrat I can tell you there is just as much intolerence on both sides.

I'm not sure that labeling all conservatives like that is the right way to put it.

Now religious people we can all agree on.

It's really tough to argue "facts" against "talking points". The only thing about the shifting reality is that it doesn't shift that much. If you question military actions at all, "you must hate the troops" or " you support the terrorist". If you stand in opposition to anything the current administration as done, you are immediately labeled a "liberal". Sarah Palin is not qualified to be president, " You must be a Liberal". No-bid contracts are bad, "you Liberal".The 911 Commission has holes in it, "you support the terrorist". Conservatives are the masters of staying "on message" not matter what! The Yale study is right on the money.

The central problem of Conservative/Republicans is their insistance on a simplistic black and white worldview.

It is impossible to be "moderate" if you live in a world of absolutes.

But it's more complicated than that because the absolutes they insist on are so vague and so ill-defined as to be largely unworkable in a practical, real world sense. In other words, they aren't entirely sure what they believe but, by god, they will believe it until the bitter end and ain't no one gonna convince them any different!

Look at such issues as the Iraq War, torture, the economy, gay marriage....there is a simplistic black and white worldview on all these positions even though they aren't entirely sure what that view is.

"We must win in Iraq!" -- what exactly does "winning" mean in a military conflict as convoluted as Iraq? Who are the bad guys? The Sunnia? The Shia? The Kurds? Osama bid Laden? The coalition government that refuses to help pay for our war efforts with thei oil revenue? Does the use of our military in this particular conflict actually work? That level of "gray" is unknow to Republicans who (as we have seen for the past 7 years) keep repeating that victory is the only option....though they have repeatedly refused to define what victory actually is in any meaningful sense.

All of those above question (as we all know) are brushed aside and the Republican simply insists, "We can't surrender!" even though it wouldn't be exactly clear who we would be even surrendering too since we aren't conquering Iraq or have any plans to make it the 51st state. It doesn't make sense exactly, but they believe it and won't change their minds!

That black and white ultra simplistic worldview comes through in gay marriage. "It's wrong!" they say, though they cannot entirely explain why it's "wrong" or how that sentiment can co-exist with their other deply held belief that individual rights are supreme and the government should leave us all alone as much as possible. They want maximum individual freedom, yet insist it must be denied at the same time.

The real issue here isn't that there is a difference of political opinion -- the real issue (as this study seems to confirm) is that it's impossible for people who adhere to this ultra simplistic black/white worldview to be moderate.

Look at the economy. It is overwhelmingly clear to everyone that massive deregulation is a bad idea and that some common sense government oversight is desperatly needed to prevent this from happening again. Yet in the black and white mindset of Republicans all regulation is evil, therefore that cannot be the answer.

That isn't a logical thought process. It's just a...I don't know what you'd even identify it as!

But the bottom line is that if you believe something in purely black and white terms then you are incapable of being a moderate or in dealing with the world in a common sense way.

As evidenced by: The Iraq War. Hurrican Katrina. Civil Liberties. The Mortgage Crisis. And on and on and on.

I am LMAO at the conservatives deepening their entrenchment against the premise of this article. It's like science in action! Had we just left them alone, they might have come to this conclusion on their own, and more quickly.

"In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

- Ron Suskind - New York Times Magazine - October 17, 2004

Oh by the way, this study is biased. It makes no mention of conservative democrats.

Reason magazine’s Jesse Walker believes "There is no party of tolerance in Washington—just a party that wages its crusades in the name of Christ and a party that wages its crusades in the name of Four out of Five Experts Agree.”

if one refuses to accept facts that dispute their preconceived notions about the world and continue to live in their own fantasy world, wouldn't that mean by definition that conservatives are delusional and suffer from a mental disorder?

so if we lie will they start thinking the truth
or will they just feel victorious

This proves Conservatives are idiots! Thanks! LOL No we all know this can't be true. The people who run the republican party are very smart. They know their core redneck, racist, radical christian voter base well enough to prey on their fears and stupidity. Ignorance is bliss to the republican party!

I'm no liberal, but I'm no fool either... so I'll just settle for moderately intelligent. Or at least I'm smart enough to realize when I'm wasting my time talking to a fool. :-)

What exactly does a stubborn Conservative person think they "are" anyway? It's been my experience that these people seem to need to catalog, group, and classify every person they meet.

They get stuck on labels... and they only want to store information in a concrete form in their brains. You'll know you've met one when they ask you: "So, are you a Democrat or a Republican?" Usually when faced with those kinds of personality features in a person I just listen alot but don't provide much opinion. I think they just need to talk out loud to feel good about themselves or something... or maybe they're looking for approval in any form they can get it? It's cool, I'm happy to oblige but if they aren't listening to facts I really don't have time to waste.

Honestly, I think this can easily be as true for the far Left as it is for the far Right. By definition, any person who is at all open to allowing new information to change their minds is at least relatively moderate. It's therefore logical to conclude that anyone who has gone too far to either side is only there because they've blindly devoted themselves. It's extremism that's the problem, not political affiliation - I've met just as many crazy extremist Liberals as I've met crazy extremist Conservatives, and neither one wants to change their minds.

I highly doubt if this was reversed that their would be the same replies.

Based on my experiences being around conservatives, it is real difficult arguing your position with them if you come at them with a liberal type of view. There is some truth in this article.

good article, but the only thing I want to comment upon is
GO KU

I have seen this same phenomenon.

Whenever there is a position where they are just flat wrong, they change the subject, refer to the bible, claim that "both sides do it" or throw out a few economic figures that they cannot explain themselves. This is assuming that they have the balls to engage you in a discussion.

I remember watching a show where they took a super conservative girl and put her in a family that was composed of 2 gay men and four young children who were boys. She was forced to go spend time with these people and was routinely engaged in an argument with them. She cried, and got upset, because the men were fantastic parents, all of the children had been adopted out of hideous living conditions and every family involved felt that these men were a godsend to their children that they couldn't take care of themselves.

When presented with a nonstop evidence stream of how wrong she was, she just cried. She claimed that she "didn't have all the answers" to the questions she was being asked, as to why what these guys were doing was wrong.

She said: "it's just wrong."

She said this despite the fact that even she saw what was going on, and had acknowledged that there were good things happening there.

I don't think conservatives are stupid, I think their EGO stops them from allowing themselves to be wrong. Most liberals I know will change their position when they hear overwhelming supported evidence that there is a better way.

I myself change my feelings about things routinely. I think that is why we like discourse, because it allows us to access new information and streamline our positions.

Truth is, liberals are more afraid to be wrong than conservatives are. We are far more interested in being accurate, than standing behind something that doesn't make sense to us.

You conservatives on here have only levied claims that these studies are "biased."

I bet if we discovered an asteroid flying towards earth you doofi would start saying that it isn't real, or that it is god's will and that the scientists didn't know what they were talking about.

if this really were a biased study, it wouldn't be making publication anywhere. if anyone has written a research paper to get published, most get rejected, especially if there is bias in the results. i'm just proud someone was able to prove Liberals are simply smarter...

This has been proven by some posters at current.com

Just cause it's biased doesn't mean it ain't true.

I Think Therefore I am Liberal.

I agree with the statement, don't waste your breath. Don't try to convince a conservative about anything, just go around them as quickly as possible. The only way to kill a cancer is to isolate it and let it die out.

this is news to everyone?

funny.

if you use logic, they just claim bias.
reference the idiot who posted above me.

Wait....That must be the most bias thing I have ever heard on here. This makes as much sense as ''scientic'' studies that show that black people have smaller brains.

wow not at all a Bias study

Then, based on the YALE(we liberals have only the truth)University's enlightening STUDY, I guess since they have not been able to find Osama Bin Laden, then Osama Bin Laden doesn't exist.

You are right about one thing. It is football time and we Southern Evangelical Conservatives, also known as the South Eastern Conference, where the WMD"S are hidden and only revealed in post season bowl games will show you the truth again this year.

GO SEC