The abstract is called
Misperceiving Bullshit as Profound Is Associated with Favorable Views of Cruz, Rubio, Trump and Conservatism
The writing in question can be found here:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0153419
I am not actually here to make a partisan point. The abstract, in fact, finds an attraction
to pseudo-profundity in people identifying with any of the candidates for President of the United States
at the time. I try to get to an honest bit of truth in each and every one of these posts, and in all good
conscience, could never sully one with outright factual untruths. Granted, there are short stories along
the way- many were collected in Be Chill, Cease ill Vol. 1 for anyone interested in a copy- but even
those are either outright factual accounts at their core, or symbols and metaphors for true events.
"http://www.amazon.com/Be-Chill-Cease-ill-Volume/dp/1518629849">
As for the abstract: it's fairly intensive and takes a few minutes of clarity to read.
Yet, while a lot of people will go to the provocative title alone for their reaction,
the writers do attempt to delineate how a standard for objective detection of any sort of logic
does not exist strongly for many individuals- and tries to be a little scientific, if inconclusively,
about the underlying logic with which people of different political stripes examine the principle soundness
of the ideas presented, in pragmatic terms. That's really too bad- one would fervently hope
pragmatic measures would be the only sort about which we would debate, politically- the only ends
we'd attempt to seek in our laws. But we must remain discerning, for they are not-
and this is the cause of unjust laws.
There are numerous positions where the most humane approach can be figured out with facts.
A set of facts can be configured to buttress most any position's logical argument,
but those facts themselves deserve examination. Strong opinions deserve an examination of both
conscience and existing examples. Most bigotry- and inhumane points of view -relies on a perception
where emotions overrule empathy as well as demonstrable proof- sometimes substituting isolated events as
evidence, sometimes manufacturing said events for the sake of propaganda. It is my opinion that respectable critical
thinking skills are desperately needed to form and support humane individual, group, corporate or governmental policies.
I find much less evidence of this than I had hoped to discover upon reaching adulthood. But I can at least stand for this
principle, and I appeal to you to do so, too.
Feel free to leave a well-reasoned comment. Such thought is really good for the soul!
