TownieDeac
words are futile devices
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2011
- Messages
- 76,189
- Reaction score
- 16,924
The issue here is that liberalism philosophically is wedded to nurture and not nature. (Perhaps you feel more comfortable with those words, rather than heredity and environment.) So, if these studies are going to prove reliable, then liberalism, as a philosophic point of view, will have taken a far greater hit than conservatism. I don't see how hereditary privilege fits into this discussion at all, save perhaps as just another aspect of the man-made social environment.
So this is where we are at loggerheads.
I would like some evidence of your first statement other than the fact that it was apparently some keystone of my diploma that is missing. Nature/nurture and heredity/environment, either way, I'm still suspect of your initial premise. From what I can tell, the only tenets of politics that fit into developmental psychology or genetics and heritability are that starting from the industrial revolution, the premises of liberalism and conservatism were based around how to deal with notions of privilege at birth. Conservatives strongly favored a notion that your station in life should be honored and that (in)herited wealth was a noble and unassailable concept. Liberals eschewed (in)herited privilege, as well as state religion, divine right, and absolutism.
So I don't see how developmental psychology or genetics fits in to that discussion at all, hence why we are at a contradiction of terms. I take umbrage both at your semantics and your logic.