Free Brain Scan
So yesterday I got a call from a friend who says she knows a guy who wants to scan my brain.
I’m not kidding. Apparently this guy is doing an experiment to see whether the brains of Republicans scan differently from those of Democrats. He is based in L.A., and has Democrat volunteers coming out his ears — but can’t find a Republican anywhere in the vicinity.
So he asked his friend to find him some Republican brains to scan, and she called me.
I think I’ll do it. The experiment sounds a little goofy, to be honest, but a free brain scan never hurt, right?
P.S. By publishing a post like this, I know I am asking for some partisan and/or insulting comments. All I can ask is: try not to make them too obvious, mmmkay?
Just let us know the results……. that will be fun enough!
Cheerio from Old Europe
Comment by Pat — 8/4/2004 @ 6:57 am
It’s the expensive brain scans that hurt.
Comment by Hugo — 8/4/2004 @ 7:06 am
That is hilarious!
Comment by Athena — 8/4/2004 @ 8:15 am
Be careful, Pat. Often times sociological and more recently psychological tests performed by the academic communities have concluded from their ‘unbiased’ interpretations that conservatives/republicans are lacking in, among other positive attributes: empathy, intellectual flexibility, general intelligence, people skills, and of course compassion. My recommendation is that you join the study to get whatever peace of mind the actual neurological results will provide and then throw a curve at them by ‘revealing’ your sadness at Saddam’s removal as dictator of Iraq, your belief that African Americans are incapable of competing with any other segment of society, and a firm acknowledgment that anti-abortionists are hatemongers and anti-child. If they doubt your sudden conversion, try ranting about Condi Rice and Secty Powell being “house n….”. That will at least affirm that you are not racist and most certainly a Democrat.
Comment by mikem — 8/4/2004 @ 8:57 am
IF this is a serious post — which I doubt — I would be very reluctant to allow a “brain scan,” given the circumstances. It’s obviously crank science, and that means you have literally no idea whether the “scan” is to be conducted safely. Assurances provided by the party doing the “scan” would not convince me, not even if this nutcase offered to let me watch while he “scans” Igor, his humpbacked assistant. Don’t do it, Patterico. This is plain crazy.
Comment by L. Barnes — 8/4/2004 @ 10:56 am
It’s a serious post. I’ll be careful.
Comment by Patterico — 8/4/2004 @ 12:29 pm
I can see a million ways in which such tests can be biased.
For example: The meaning of “Democrat” and “Republican” is not monolithic and unchanging. The Republican party of fifty years ago was different from that of today. The Democratic party started as the slavery-supporters of the South. Since there is no scientifically definable meaning of “Democrat” vs. “Republican”, the test does not prove much except that science can be abused.
Another thing: how old are the test persons? Personality changes with age. This should show up in brain scans. Unless the test clearly keeps check of age differences among test persons, the test results are worthless.
-A.R.Yngve
http://yngve.bravehost.com
P.S: A scan of John Kerry’s brain might reveal that a large tumor has replaced his brain… (kidding!! ;))
Comment by A.R.Yngve — 8/4/2004 @ 1:53 pm
This may actually be a cover story so they can zap you with liberalizing rays. You’ll come out chanting, “Free Mumia!”
Comment by steve M. — 8/4/2004 @ 3:21 pm
If can break topic here for a second… I just got really annoyed by one of these comments:
…by ‘revealing’ your sadness at Saddam’s removal as dictator of Iraq, your belief that African Americans are incapable of competing with any other segment of society, and a firm acknowledgment that anti-abortionists are hatemongers and anti-child.
Do you really believe this is how liberals think? It’s no wonder there is such a divide among liberals and conservatives with that kind of rhetoric being thrown around.
I’m a liberal and:
1.) I’m glad Saddam is out of power
2.) I believe Blacks (notice I didn’t use the politically correct term “African American”) can compete with any segment of society they want to. In fact, I think affirmative action is one of the most ridiculous liberal ideas ever.
3.) I don’t believe anti-abortionists are hate-mongers, and I don’t believe they are anti-child - although I do believe they are anti-woman…
4.) In case you missed it, I think political correctness is for the birds, although I do try to teach the kids I’m in charge of at the school I work for that the word “nigga” is not an acceptable version of the word “nigger”.
Not all liberals fit into this narrow-minded tree-hugging skinny rice-eating corduroy-wearing profile that you might have in your head. I’m a 6 foot tall 230 pound meat-eating paid-on-call fire fighter and one of the many reasons I’m voting for Kerry is because of Bush cutting overtime pay for firefighters and other workers in June of 2003. (Bush also proposed cuts to the Assistance to Fire Fighters Grant Program administered by the Department of Homeland Security by 33%. The administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2005 would cut the program by $246 million. Bush also cut $340 million in firefighter funding in 2002. Bush claims to have made the country more secure, but how can the Bush administration talk about homeland security with credibility if it is not willing to make sure fire fighters and other first responders have the tools they need to do their jobs?)
Sorry about the rant at the end there…
Anyway, I just get annoyed at the slanted perception of liberals that’s being portrayed in general. The commenter may have been joking just now (maybe, maybe not) but the truth is that I hear this kind of “liberals hate America” or “liberals want failure not success” or “liberals are Saddam sympathizers” bullshit way to often and it makes me sick.
Comment by Sonny Parlin — 8/4/2004 @ 4:07 pm
I believe in the past year, someone published a similar study. I think it came out of the Bay Area. I did a quick search but could not find it. The results were something to the effect that dems use creative part of brain, etc., and republicans use none of their brain. Obviously, an exaggeration on my part, but that was the gist of it. Besides being junk science, its purpose is to make you look bad.
Comment by julia — 8/4/2004 @ 5:27 pm
Sonny,
You sound like a good guy, and I agree with many of your specifically articulated positions. But the positions you disagree with are generally thought to be liberal positions, and are held by more liberals than conservatives.
The comments weren’t directed at you, but at liberals in general, so I don’t see why you would personally take offense.
Analogously, I am generally a conservative but have plenty of opinions that don’t fit the mold, on the environment, gay rights, animal rights, smoking, etc. I can get offended if someone insultingly pigeonholes me, whereas I may not if people make valid comments about conservatives generally. If someone wants to say that conservatives generally suck on the environment, why should I get upset? They’re right, and the fact that I disagree with conservatives on the issue doesn’t make the conservatives’ critics wrong.
As a conservative, btw, I am uncomfortable with the idea that firefighters and police should be federally funded. And I say that as a member of law enforcement (district attorney’s office). It’s primarily a local function that should be funded locally, in my opinion. That doesn’t mean I don’t care about getting local authorities funding — of course I do. But the question of how it should be done is open to debate.
Comment by Patterico — 8/4/2004 @ 5:54 pm
See if they’re affiliated with the Natural Law Party.
John Haeglin, their perennial candidate for president is fond of calling for EEGs to determine the “best” candidate.
Comment by The Angry Clam — 8/4/2004 @ 7:31 pm
I am sure they can find many Democrats in California, but where do they find the brains in the Democrats?
Comment by bob — 8/4/2004 @ 8:26 pm
I haven’t met ANYONE (Democrat, Republican, Socialist, Libertarian, Peace & Freedom member, American Independent, Nazi, fascist, communist or anyone else) who says they are “sad” that Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. Plenty of people think it was wrong for the U.S. to go to war, but they don’t think that because of sympathy for Saddam. Can you name one?
Comment by LordActon — 8/4/2004 @ 8:43 pm
“Sad,” I can’t think of anybody. “Really, really steamed,” I would say tens of millions. But I don’t know any of those people personally, thank goodness.
“Disappointed” or maybe “frustrated” or possibly “philosophical about the end of a Good Thing,” probably a fair number of UN insiders and their cronies who were riding the gravy train. “Shrugging off their bad luck with a glass of over-rated wine,” probably most of the folks who run TotalFinaElf. All of these parasites are far above my social station. So I guess you have a point.
Comment by L. Barnes — 8/4/2004 @ 10:27 pm
Paterico: being myself a basically conservative guy by party-association, but differ in a number of issues with from the standard party lines (mainly taxation, civil rights and environment), I can understand your position very well. While it is anoying to get accused by simple prejudices about my party when meeting some people from the other side of the aisle, some of the sterotypes are correct for the party as such nonetheless.
Referring to the financing of some civil services like firefighting etc.can not be solely localy financed. While most of their service is of course for local needs, they do, after all, provide a number of services far above the reach of their community in times of regional or national emmergencies. In addition financing of firefighting only by the communities will make it hard for the poorer communities to provide equal services for their citzens in areas that are pron to are more endangered by fires. Here in Germany a large part of the financing comes from state side. The communities share the burden of manning the fireengines by volunteers in most smaller villages and towns anyway.
Cheerio from Old Europe
Comment by Pat — 8/5/2004 @ 4:12 am
I am discussing an ideal, Pat. In reality, you’re right — local entities can rarely fund their own responsibilities, due to factors like the existing nature of the tax structure, the tendency on the part of larger governments to overtax and to raid local governments, etc.
Comment by Patterico — 8/5/2004 @ 6:21 am
I think this is a great idea. What better use of your time could there be than to assist some dingbat academic in keeping his NSF/NIH grant? And what about the potential for the future headline, “Study Finds Conservatives Have Tinier Brains”? Pure gravy!
Comment by Hank Fenster — 8/5/2004 @ 2:10 pm
Sonny Parlin I have to disagree with your liberal spin on what the President has proposed for workers. Giving workers more options on how to receive overtime or how arrange their worktime as Federal employees do is a far cry from “Bush is stealing my overtime pay!”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040805-6.html
Please try getting your facts straight before regurgitating the nonsense your read off of the AFL-CIO’s website.
Comment by Todd Hickman — 8/14/2004 @ 12:16 pm
Sonny Parlin I have to disagree with your liberal spin on what the President has proposed for workers. Giving workers more options on how to receive overtime or how to arrange their worktime as Federal employees do is a far cry from “Bush is stealing my overtime pay!”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040805-6.html
Please try getting your facts straight before regurgitating the nonsense your read off of the AFL-CIO’s website.
Comment by Todd Hickman — 8/14/2004 @ 12:17 pm