Skip to main content

You Can Lead A Republican To Facts But You Can’t Make Him Think; New Research Confirms It

Author: September 20, 2013 12:28 am
 
 
Armor of Ignorance by Pat Bagley

I’ve been saying for a long time that you can lead a Republican to facts, but you can’t make him think. Ignorance is now part of conservative politics.
Armor of Ignorance by Pat Bagley

I’ve been saying for a long time that you can lead a Republican to facts, but you can’t make him think. Wouldn’t you know it, Scientific research has verified my conclusions. Up until now my opinion on this was formed strictly from personal observation, combined with a multitude of anecdotal evidence. But now Dan Kahan, a Yale Law School Professor, has added to a growing body of evidence, which provides verifiable evidence that leading a person to facts does very little to make them think.

Kahan’s paper titled “Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government” was published early in September, 2013. The research shows that strong ideological beliefs undermine a person’s ability to interpret data and even perform math problems. The researchers first assessed the subject’s ability to handle the math problems and interpret the data by using material that had no political association. Subjects who were able to correctly interpret the data and solve the math problems when they addressed non-political situations, became unable to do so if the correct solutions and interpretations conflicted with their underlying ideological beliefs. Yes, this phenomena was documented in people with strong beliefs, both on the left or on the right.

One large difference between the two parties is the consistency with which facts tend to collide with an underlying worldview (religious or political) outside of the experimental laboratory. Previous studies have confirmed that showing facts to a person who has a misconception not only doesn’t correct the misconception, but actually causes them to become even more committed to their false belief. In a separate study conducted by Dartmouth College Professor Brendan Nylan and Jason Reifler of Georgia State University (2011) the researchers decided to test this idea using three commonly held misconceptions:

“where some citizens may be unwilling to acknowledge factual information that contradicts their

preexisting beliefs:

1. Whether insurgent attacks in Iraq decreased after the US troop surge

2. Whether the number of jobs in the US increased from January 2010 to January 2011

3. Whether average global temperatures have increased over the past thirty years

 

I think it’s safe to conclude that commonly held misconceptions in these three areas are only “commonly held” among die-hard Republicans. In spite of being presented with evidence which contradicted their beliefs, the subjects of those experiments became even more dedicated to the idea that the false information was true.

Aside from climate change, the Iraq war and President Obama’s economic record, there are literally hundreds of areas where Republican beliefs contradict facts. We see this type of rejection of reality in everything from gun violence to the abortion debate. It’s apparent in their false interpretation of United States history and their unfailing devotion to the theory of “trickle down economics.” It’s obvious when you think about their totally wrong conclusions about the Affordable Care Act as well as their inability to figure out that Obama has not raised their taxes. The list of realities that remain firmly out of the grasp of Republican minds goes on and on.

Anyone who has ever attempted to debate a Republican using graphs, charts, data, statistics, research, reputable sources of information etc… has experienced the mind numbing reality of it. Facts don’t matter. Regardless of how much information conflicts with their beliefs, regardless of how well documented an opposing view is, they dismiss every bit of it in favor of the voices in their heads. While the results of the study are depressing to the say the least, at least people on the left now have evidence to support what we already knew – you can lead a Republican to facts, but you can’t make him think.

 

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2...esearch-confirms-it/

 

given, the research applies to all people... politics were not part of the research. however, as the article states... underlying ideological beliefs... and we all know jesus was a republican

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The article is an excellent example of academia subverting logic.  The sophists of ancient Athens/Attica would recognize his trick. 

I will point out one and, the outright lie, as well.

 

“3. Whether average global temperatures have increased over the past thirty years”

Excellent example of false conclusion.  For the first 15 years, there was a sharp rise in global temperature.  However, for the last 15 years, there was little significant rise.  Of course, if one

averages the entire span of 30 years, the average rises. 

 

If someone experiences a sharp rise in temperature due to a fever that kills them.  Then, the body temperature drops due to death, if one takes the temperatures over a certain period and averages the results, one may arrive at 98.6 degrees and conclude the patient is OK. 

 

“their inability to figure out that Obama has not raised their taxes”

 

Demonstrably false statement.

 

“Starting in 2014, most people will have to have insurance or pay a "penalty deducted from your taxable income". For individuals, penalty starts at $95 a year, or up to 1% of income, whichever is greater, and rise to $695, or 2.5% of income, by 2016.

 

For families the tax will be $2,085 or 2.5% percent of household income, whichever is greater. The requirement can be waived for several reasons, including financial hardship or religious beliefs. If the tax would exceed 8% of your income you are exempt, also some religious groups are exempt. That tax cannot exceed the cost of a "bronze plan" bought on the exchange.”

 

If this isn’t a tax, Obamacare is unconstitutional per the Supreme Court.

 

“ObamaCare increases taxes on unearned income by 3.8%. This also applies to home sales over a certain amount. The 3.8% homes sales tax typically doesn't apply to your primary residence. It also doesn't usually apply to homes you have owned for over 5 years or on profits of less than $300k.”

 

“ObamaCare Medicare Part A Payroll Tax

Starting in 2013, ObamaCare taxes individuals with earnings above $200,000 and married couples making more than $250,000. This tax is an increase to the Medicare part A payroll tax. It's an increase of 2.35%, up from the current 1.45% ( a .9% Medicare payroll tax hike), on adjusted income over the threshold.

 

ObamaCare Unearned Income Tax

This group will also pay a 3.8% unearned income tax on interest, dividends, annuities, royalties, rents, and gains on the sale of investments over the threshold.

 

Taxable income under the $200/$250k threshold is subject to the same benefits and tax cuts as those who make under the threshold.

Medicare part A Tax Hike for Employers and Employees

The ObamaCare small business Medicare tax hike is a .9% increase on the current Medicare part A tax. Small businesses making under $250k in taxable profit don't have to pay this ObamaCare small business tax increase. Employees with earnings under $200 / $250k don't have to pay this either.

Other business taxes.

 

Aside from having to adhere to the "employer mandate" ObamaCare also imposes taxes and fees that are unique to big business. ObamaCare taxes some medical device manufactures, drug companies and health insurance companies. Beginning in 2013, medical device manufacturers and importers must pay a 2.3% tax on the sale of a taxable medical device. This raises $29 billion over a 10 years. However, many states are asking to delay the medical device excise tax to protect jobs in states that produce the devices. An annual fee for health insurers is expected to raise more than $100 billion over 10 years, while a fee for brand name drugs will bring in another $34 billion.

ObamaCare "Cadillac" Tax

Starting in 2018, the new health care law imposes a 40% excise tax on the portion of most employer-sponsored health coverage (this excludes dental and vision) that exceed $10,200 a year and $27,500 for families. The tax has been dubbed a "Cadillac" tax because it hits only high-end "gold", "platinum" and high-end health care plans not purchased on the exchange. The tax raises over $150 billion over the next 10 years.”

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-taxes.php

 

 

 

when you start taking shots personally at the other side of debates, you are letting people know what kind of person you are. most will know there are good points and bad points on both sides. Yale is a liberal outlet, and will paint things to support their side. Stats can be presented to help one side or the other. name calling has no place in our countries future's debate.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×