Liberals are from Mars and conservative from Venus. The main theme of Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences is to present the reader with how neither is better than the other, but different. The book focuses on the analysis on how biology determines our political views and inclinations.
John R. Hibbings, Kevin B. Smith and Jon R. Alford are the authors of Predisposed. As biopoliticians, they provide evidence of people’s view and how it differs based on biology. In all respects, their research suggests that individuals are “hardwired” to be either liberal or conservatives. Predisposed is defined in the book as the standing orientations that have a measurable biological - though not necessarily innate …show more content…
Although political viewpoints manifest themselves most often as opinions on issues, they show that the roots of our opinions rest on some basic ways in which different people see the world. Preferences for novelty or tradition have a basis in neurobiological differences that are both genetically and environmentally influenced. This belief is often overlooked, and although at times our beliefs can be attributed to our upbringing. The book analysis it at a much deeper level.
Stanley Milgram is known for his obedience experiment, where he found that 65% of his subjects did bad things to people and that it doesn’t require that the subject be an evil person. Milligram’s experiment was based on his interest in researching who and how would someone obey authority figures. He was driven by the thought that maybe there is something about human nature that led people to obey.
Having studied previously both Milgram and Zimbardo’s obedience studies, it was easier for me to analyze and apply it to the purpose of the book. The authors point out that although general results are important, there was not much thought put into the difference among the individuals in the experiments. Milgram focused on the 65% of subjects who obeyed the authority, but was less interested on why the 35% of the subjects
John R. Hibbings, Kevin B. Smith and Jon R. Alford are the authors of Predisposed. As biopoliticians, they provide evidence of people’s view and how it differs based on biology. In all respects, their research suggests that individuals are “hardwired” to be either liberal or conservatives. Predisposed is defined in the book as the standing orientations that have a measurable biological - though not necessarily innate …show more content…
Although political viewpoints manifest themselves most often as opinions on issues, they show that the roots of our opinions rest on some basic ways in which different people see the world. Preferences for novelty or tradition have a basis in neurobiological differences that are both genetically and environmentally influenced. This belief is often overlooked, and although at times our beliefs can be attributed to our upbringing. The book analysis it at a much deeper level.
Stanley Milgram is known for his obedience experiment, where he found that 65% of his subjects did bad things to people and that it doesn’t require that the subject be an evil person. Milligram’s experiment was based on his interest in researching who and how would someone obey authority figures. He was driven by the thought that maybe there is something about human nature that led people to obey.
Having studied previously both Milgram and Zimbardo’s obedience studies, it was easier for me to analyze and apply it to the purpose of the book. The authors point out that although general results are important, there was not much thought put into the difference among the individuals in the experiments. Milgram focused on the 65% of subjects who obeyed the authority, but was less interested on why the 35% of the subjects