Crossfire, Hard-Wired?

Is political conflict bred in the bone (or, put less charitably, do some among us just have an easier time with higher-order thinking)? A new joint NYU-UCLA neurobiological study finds once again that left- and right-leaning brains function differently, with liberal minds more receptive to change than their conservative counterparts. “Dozens of previous studies have established a strong link between political persuasion and certain personality traits. Conservatives tend to crave order and structure in their lives, and are more consistent in the way they make decisions. Liberals, by contrast, show a higher tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances…[In this case] respondents who had described themselves as liberals showed ‘significantly greater conflict-related neural activity’ when the hypothetical situation called for an unscheduled break in routine. Conservatives, however, were less flexible, refusing to deviate from old habits ‘despite signals that this…should be changed.’

The World Forgetting, by the World Forgot.

Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind! Each pray’r accepted, and each wish resign’d. Life imitates art as researchers hone in on drugs that will potentially erase traumatic memories. “‘This is all very preliminary,’ said Dr. Roger Pitman, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist. ‘We’re just getting started. There is some promising preliminary data but no conclusions.‘”

A World of Addicts.

Love is a stranger in an open car…or is it just a much-needed dopamine fix? Somebody writes this story every Valentine’s Day. Still, I guess it’s something to keep in mind. (And sorry, Berk, you may be my Valentine again this year, but the same type of deconstruction applies to you. No hard feelings, bud.)

Prayers for Tim.

Get well soon, Tim Johnson. Oof, talk about terrible news on several levels. One hopes the Senator will make a full and complete recovery after his AVM surgery, and we won’t have to think too deeply about the possibility of a Senate turnover. Fortunately, there seems to be a good deal of precedent for long absences from the chamber — my first thought (other than Nate Fisher and Narm!) was Charles Sumner’s three-year absence after the caning, but there are apparently many 20th century examples too.

Dance Dance Evolution.

“‘People are born to dance,’ Ebstein told Discovery News. ‘They have (other) genes that partially contribute to musical talent, such as coordination, sense of rhythm. However, the genes we studied are more related to the emotional side of dancing — the need and ability to communicate with other people and a spiritual side to their natures that not only enable them to feel the music, but to communicate that feeling to others via dance.” Looks like the Red Shoes are just a placebo — According to recent research at Hebrew University’s Scheinfeld Center for Genetic Studies, some people are just hardwired to dance. Now if only they could figure out why some people start conga lines or insist on breaking into the Electric Slide. (Via Dangerous Meta.)

Hardwired?

It’s an ugly day for voter rationality in today’s New York Times. According to a new study by several political scientists, our political predispositions may be genetic (and last summer’s Zellout may have been the result of a lingering discordance between genetic and environmental factors in Miller’s make-up.) Whatsmore, we seem to choose our elected leaders immediately by their physical attributes, namely a general look of competence: “Both babies and baby-faced adults share certain characteristics: round faces, large eyes, small noses, high foreheads, and small chins. No one trusts the competence of a baby, and few, apparently, trust that of an adult who looks like one.” (Don’t lose heart, fellow advocates of an informed and capable electorate — There’s obviously a huge gaping hole in this latter theory.)

Lacuna, Inc?

“Sun is shinin’ in the sky, there ain’t a cloud in sight…” Life imitates art as scientists attempt to achieve “therapeutic forgetting”, a.k.a. the focused erasure of memories. Right now, though, they haven’t got much past dulling the edge off old remembrances. “Our experiences and our memories in a lot of ways define us and define who we are,” notes Stanford ethicist David Magnus about the field, “[a]nd so that’s a scary step to go down. We should be very careful about going down a path that could lead to a serious alteration of the core essence of our identities.” Can you hear me? I don’t want this anymore, I want to call it off!