This amuses me immensely. Conservatism as a psychological buffer! Silly conservatives, the state of Canadian politics, among other things, makes perfect sense now. Be sure to hit the teensy audio player at the top of the article, I missed it the first time.
It’s things like this that make me adore Scientific American.
6 responses so far ↓
willdanceforideas // June 25, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
Alas, ignorance is truly bliss. To be honest did we really need the study to tell us that Romney is happier than Gore or that Huckabee is happier than KucinichÉ
Clearly there is something to a sense of entitlement and a faith that approves of anything (as long as it`s practiced by the powerful).
bitpart // June 25, 2008 at 6:03 pm |
The study set out to isolate what was the greatest factors are in influencing why different groups of people are happier than others, and they discovered that political ideology was just such a factor. Not that Romney is happier, but why!
willdanceforideas // June 25, 2008 at 6:38 pm |
He’s among the richest men in America. He believes in Mormonism, which means that no matter how bad things seem to get there will always be salvation after death (as he is devout).
I never understood the idea of an afterlife for this reason. What is the point of worrying about 70-80 years worth of trifles when all of eternity will play out in one of two ways? The way I see it like a baby being slapped; the ones that cry go to heaven, the ones that don’t go to hell. Seeing as life will only last another few seconds (if we’re keeping it to scale), why should the baby destined to heaven care if he’s hungry or gassy or soiled. The hell baby is forced to go through denial and thus care about what’s going on in the real world. A benevolent god indeed.
bitpart // June 25, 2008 at 6:51 pm |
The article isn’t about Mit Romney.
Control, control, you must learn control.
Melissa // June 30, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
But you and Dan are discussing only religion here! Religion is a relevant aspect of this, obviously, as there is a visible correlation between political and religious ideology in the average citizen, but the article very specifically focuses on the political side.
This makes it, in my opinion, more threatening… religious nuts have always been “happier” than their non-religious counterparts for the reasons Dan has stated, but this article is outright acknowledgement that, even in a society where the divide between rich and poor is wide, conservatives – of either economic status – are happier simply because they are intentionally blind to the flaws in the system. Resisting change just for the sake of resisting change.
Scary…
(For some reason, this came to mind)
willdanceforideas // June 30, 2008 at 8:33 pm |
Well, to me it’s the same problem with a different label. Instead of people being blinded by faith in god, they are here blinded by faith in government, or at least their understanding of what the government is, which to many conservatives extends well into the private realm to include things like national narratives and culture. The problem here is not that they are happier, it’s that they fear change will make them less happy. Thus they become conservative.