Do you have any of those items some­where near (or on) your com­puter? Then you’re more likely a con­ser­v­a­tive. At least that’s what this arti­cle says.

I think that’s really silly. I can either see or put my hand on any of the above from where I’m sit­ting, and I’m no con­ser­v­a­tive. Well, at least I think I’m not. Although the arti­cle also says

A study of twins, for instance, has shown that a con­ser­v­a­tive or pro­gres­sive ori­en­ta­tion can be inher­ited, while a decades-​​long study has found that per­son­al­ity traits asso­ci­ated with lib­er­al­ism or con­ser­vatism later in life show up in preschoolers…”

and I’m pretty sure that when I was a preschooler I exhib­ited all the char­ac­ter traits of con­ser­vatism. As a small child I was obses­sively neat, fond of order, highly moti­vated and mis­trust­ful of peo­ple I didn’t know.

(I dis­tinctly recall hat­ing the idea of Santa Claus. I didn’t want any fat stranger wan­der­ing around our house in the mid­dle of the night, and lob­bied strongly to have him leave the gifts in the barn where we could go and safely col­lect them in the morning.)

The arti­cle is really worth read­ing. Take a minute and skim it so we can all talk about it. Go ahead…I’ll be here when you get back.

The article’s packed full of inter­est­ing (albeit “con­ven­tional wis­dom”) tid­bits like this:

Jonathan Haidt, a social psy­chol­o­gist at the Uni­ver­sity of Vir­ginia, said…[he] was more inclined to see a person’s moral frame­work as a source of dif­fer­ence between lib­er­als and con­ser­v­a­tives. Most lib­er­als, he said, think about moral­ity in terms of two cat­e­gories: how someone’s wel­fare is affected, and whether it is fair. Con­ser­v­a­tives, by con­trast, broaden that def­i­n­i­tion to include loy­alty, respect for author­ity, and purity or sanc­tity. Con­ser­v­a­tives have a richer, more elab­o­rate moral hori­zon than lib­er­als, Mr. Haidt said, because there is a “whole dimen­sion to human expe­ri­ence best described as divin­ity or sacred­ness that con­ser­v­a­tives are more attuned to.”

But apart from the gen­er­ally accepted stuff, this arti­cle also reflects a cer­tain self-​​critical approach that makes it unusual and fas­ci­nat­ing. The writer feels there is an innate bias in not only the research itself but also the report­ing of find­ings, since both the sci­ence and the jour­nal­ism tend to be done by peo­ple with lib­eral leanings:

As for the present research, John Zaller, a polit­i­cal sci­en­tist at the Uni­ver­sity of Cal­i­for­nia, Los Ange­les, said: “I am per­son­ally embar­rassed by some of the lead­ing work by psy­chol­o­gists on per­son­al­ity and con­ser­vatism. I take the data to be valid, but I feel the man­ner of describ­ing it too often sets up con­ser­v­a­tives to look bad.” Mr. Haidt, who agrees lib­er­als and con­ser­v­a­tives have dis­tinct dis­po­si­tions, still thinks bias is a prob­lem: “Our own biases as researchers—because we are almost all lib­eral — make it dif­fi­cult for us to under­stand the psy­chol­ogy of conservatives.”

Words really do mat­ter. It makes a big dif­fer­ence, for instance, whether a researcher describes con­ser­v­a­tives as “obses­sive and fearful”…or “method­i­cal and cau­tious.” Lib­er­als can be either “lazy and care­less” or “laid-​​back and happy-go-lucky,”…but the mildly pejo­ra­tive terms in this kind of research really are, it seems, more likely to be applied to conservatives.

I don’t know how use­ful it is to apply labels like this to dif­fer­ing polit­i­cal views at all, though I am always fas­ci­nated by the issue of per­son­al­ity and pol­i­tics, and whether polit­i­cal lean­ings are the result of nature or nur­ture. (I’m eagerly wait­ing for Monotreme to look at this in detail one day when he has time.)

One thing I do take issue with is the con­ven­tional wis­dom that peo­ple tend to become more con­ser­v­a­tive as they age…or the old say­ing that “a con­ser­v­a­tive is a lib­eral who has been mugged by real­ity.” It is my obser­va­tion and expe­ri­ence that peo­ple become more lib­eral as they age…because they evolve from the youth­ful approach of see­ing the world in black-​​and-​​white. When I was young, my friends and I knew every­thing and were pretty adamant in our posi­tions on abor­tion, cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, wel­fare, gay mar­riage, the rights of bio­log­i­cal par­ents, and other dif­fi­cult soci­etal issues. Now we are all wishy-​​washy and con­tra­dic­tory and see our world in shades of grey. Any polit­i­cal dis­cus­sion even­tu­ally comes to down to some­body say­ing, “But then, on the other hand…”

After you’ve had enough life expe­ri­ence, all these abstract issues sooner or later become real-​​life prob­lems, and the solu­tions veer more toward sit­u­a­tional ethics than moral absolutes. And that, I believe, is a quin­tes­sen­tially lib­eral position.