Your mention of dopamine interests me for an interesting reason.
The parasite protozoa that causes toxoplasmosis is almost unique in selectively producing an enzyme that causes the brain of its host to secrete dopamine in the pleasure center of its brain. Specifically when the host experiences a stress or fear response to something. Thus the protozoa retrains its host to be attracted, even sexually stimulated, by things it should be afraid of.
This is essential to the reproductive cycle of the protozoa. It is consumed by rodents that it then infects, and retrains them to be strongly attracted to the smell of cat urine. The protozoa wants them to be eaten by a cat, because it can only reproduce in the gut of a feline.
However, the protozoa can and does infect humans as well. Including an estimated 11 million Americans.
Importantly, rodent and human brains have many aspects in common, including the use of dopamine. But since the protozoa secretes its enzyme not based on a particular fear, but fear in general, and intense fear especially, it raises the question.
Does the protozoa retrain their minds to be attracted to things that they fear, or should rightly fear?
Now let us consider liberals. Liberals despise our national friends, and embrace our enemies. They also reject a healthy, normal family and life, embracing things that are unwholesome and destructive.
But at the same time, they are unwilling to just “walk into the mouth of the cat” by themselves. They want everyone to have to follow them to their doom.
Are liberals infected by a protozoa? And if so, are their brains being controlled?
This would benefit with lots of examples of effective arguments.
I am still not certain about the boundaries of using such techniques when arguing with a liberal.
I plan to read this in its entirety later. Some interesting ideas.
I agree totally about liberals not using logic in a debate. This has been my greatest frustration when trying to have an honest and open discussion with them. Regardless of how the debate unfolds, 90% of the time it ends when they run out of arguments, then play their trump card: “You’re mean.”
Translation: You, personally, are not mean, but your ideas are. Why? Because I don’t like them. So by extension, all Republicans and Conservatives are mean. So they are bad people. I’m not one of them. So I’m a good person. So now I feel good about myself.
Bump to read later
Perhaps you have more examples in your book of “how” to set up these situations ... It would help see the application of this in some easy examples. I was not familiar with k/r, perhaps a touch more definition there? Obviously a well thought out piece, hesitating to purchase the book because, frankly, I’m not sure I would understand it. You perhaps need to publish a K/R for Dummies book for the likes of me. :-)
Good piece. However I might add something that sums up your entire piece:
“the fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” - Alinsky
The way you beat a liberal is to ridicule the lib. We give liberals a pass. The most effective statement against a liberal in the last 20 years was Joe Wilson’s “you lie” comment made to Obama on the house floor. It drove the liberals nuts and opened pandoras box.
That’s how you win.
Let’s back up for a second. What exactly is the objective here? To correct liberals’ faulty thinking? To make them abandon their position against their own convictions? Or to merely shut them up?
I studied aberrant psychology in college. Your findings here are very interesting to note and I believe that there’s more to it than just making Liberals believe that they are in danger. Liberals suffer from an inability to process information independently. This isn’t a pathology per se but a predisposition to follow as opposed to lead. They want to be feel as if they are a part of a larger organism and not specifically alone in the universe.
Conservatives in general make up for this and understand their place in the cosmos thanks to a healthy appreciation and fear of God and more specifically the unknown. They are willing to face the world as an individual because they understand that God is with them. As such this breeds a sense of self-esteem and individualism thanks to the affirmation that they can tackle many things alone and anything in a group of like minded individuals.
In many ways I believe today’s Republican Party has been overrun by liberals since the conventional mindset of self-preservation and individualism has been replaced by a sort of groupthink led by the GOPe. If we don’t start reframing our arguments in the way that our founders understood them, we might find ourselves all alone in a sea of lemmings.
Powder..patch..ball FIRE!
Excellent series of articles!
Whoah. Fascinating...and scary..I read more at the site, and it makes a lot of sense, especially with the stimulation (and overload) of electronic media and dopamine levels.
I feel a little used...or more like... controlled.
In argumentation nothing beats common sense and white-hot Truth.
What is a “K-selective environment?” I hate it when people use jargon and fail to tell me what it means. I skipped the rest of your potentially good article because of this.
This isn't true. The appeal of conservative leaders and opinions was not increased. The opposite is what happened.
Am I missing something?
Never try to win an argument with a pig.
It wastes your time, and annoys the pig.
I just get snarky with them. If they ask how I am on abortion I say, “I’m for it. Too bad your mother didn’t go that route with you.” Usually shuts them up.
Social psych class was very enlightening into their motivational agenda strategies. I was often very angry. Now taking research design and the author of the book is a feminist. I spend more time writing my arguments in the margins than I do memorizing. She is a good writer (first text that didn’t put me to sleep) but holy moly all the examples are progressives=good, conservatives=bad and Marx is a saint.
Sitting back on a liberal, you will also be beaten.
Some examples please.
Bfl