Science Reveals How the Brains of Social Justice Activists Are Different From Everyone Else's
http://mic.com/articles/92253/science-reveals-how-the-brains-of-social-justice-activists-are-different-from-everyone-else-s
The news: People who are more sensitive to the ideas of fairness and equity are driven by reason, not just passion, according to a recent University of Chicago study published in the Journal of Neuroscience. For decades, social science researchers have focused on the role of emotion in activist movements. A 1996 study of the 1960s civil rights movement, for example, examined how Freedom Riders used songs and speeches to express anger, sadness and frustration and to encourage others to become involved in the movement on an emotional basis. Similarly, New York University sociologist Jeff Goodwin wrote in his 2001 book on the subject that animal rights supporters "describe their journey into activism in terms of their emotional attachment to animals."
As it turns out, when people who are more responsive to injustice see things happen that they find morally wrong, such as abuse or race-based inequality, their minds respond by accessing the sections of the brain responsible for logic and reasoning. When they view examples of people acting morally just, such as giving equal rights to a marginalized group or protecting animals from harm, their brains respond in the same way.
The details: A team of researchers led by University of Chicago neuroscientist Jean Decety monitored participants' brain activity using an fMRI while they watched videos of people exhibiting morally good or bad behavior. One of the clips showed someone putting money in a beggar's cup, for example, while another showed someone violently kicking the cup away. Those who said they felt more emotionally triggered by the action on the screen also exhibited more action in the areas of their brain associated with planning, organizing and logical thinking.
...
Why it matters: The research suggests that human rights and environmentalist organizations could get more public support by appealing to people's sense of logic and reason rather than to their emotions. Efforts to combat global warming, for example, saw a surge in public support after scientists and statisticians began publishing data about how much sea levels and temperatures would rise instead of sad polar bears on a floating iceberg.
I disagree that we could win more people over by appealing to logic and reason rather than to emotions. I believe it has to be both. Drew Weston's "The Political Brain" is an excellent resource for understanding this. I recommend it for anyone who wants to learn how to win elections - and why Democratic candidates have lost past elections when failing to make such appeals.
http://www.thepoliticalbrain.com/videos.php
The Political Brain is a ground-breaking investigation into the role of emotion in determining the political life of the nation by Drew Westen, professor of psychology and psychiatry at Emory University. Westen shows how politicians can capture the hearts and minds of the electorate through examples of what candidates have said—or could have said—in debates, speeches, and ads.
The Political Brain shows how a different view of the mind and brain leads to a different way of talking with voters about issues that have tied the tongues of Democrats for much of forty years—such as abortion, guns, taxes, and race. You can’t change the structure of the brain. But you can change the way you appeal to it.
“Drew Westen is a must read and must hear for any Democrat… In 2008 we will win the presidency if our candidate reads and acts on this book.”
—Howard Dean, Chairman, Democratic Party
= new reply since forum marked as read
