<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Misstatement - more people are _married_ in red states; in blu states
they just live together, so 'divorces' aren't recorded.<br>
<br>
<br>
Steve Hovland wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid01C5190C.DFACC170.shovland@mindspring.com">
<pre wrap="">I hear the divorce rate in the red states is
higher than the blue states :-)
Steve Hovland
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.stevehovland.net">www.stevehovland.net</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: G. Reinhart-Waller [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SMTP:waluk@earthlink.net">SMTP:waluk@earthlink.net</a>]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 1:43 PM
To: The new improved paleopsych list
Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9, Issue 20
Of interest is that many older people have grave
concerns about their children having difficulty making
long-term commitments (see Alice's post below). If
what Steve says (below) is correct, by advising our
youths to make political and social commitments, we are
in effect brainwashing them into grabbing a
conservative mentality. I wonder if it also follows
that those without any commitment are those with
liberal mentality.
Gerry Reinhart-Waller
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Hovland" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:shovland@mindspring.com"><shovland@mindspring.com></a>
To: "'Alice Andrews'" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrewsa@newpaltz.edu"><andrewsa@newpaltz.edu></a>; "'The
new improved paleopsych list'"
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org"><paleopsych@paleopsych.org></a>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 3:36 AM
Subject: RE: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol 9,
Issue 20
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">This also touches on the issue of black-and-white
versus shades-of-gray mentalities.
The conservative mentality tends to be
black-and-white
while the liberal mentality is more shades-of-gray.
Both sides have problems when carried to the extreme.
A conservative can be unbending at a time when it is
actually in his self-interest to be flexible, and a
liberal
can be unable to commit to a course of action when
that is required.
Steve Hovland
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.stevehovland.net">www.stevehovland.net</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: Alice Andrews [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SMTP:andrewsa@newpaltz.edu">SMTP:andrewsa@newpaltz.edu</a>]
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 8:31 PM
To: The new improved paleopsych list
Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol
9, Issue 20
Hi Gerry,
Randy Nesse edited a book called "Evolution and the
Capacity for
Commitment"; do you know it? It's wonderful... if you
don't. (His
'Commitment in the Clinic' chapter is superb, btw.)
Anyway, I think the
book addresses your question. The word 'commitment'
itself addresses the
question. We have evolved mechanisms for detecting
commitment and for
detecting possible defection in others. People who
tow the party line, etc.
are considered committed. We seek out such people
because it is proximately
and ultimately adaptive to do so. Befriending,
supporting, trusting, etc.
the uncommitted would have been-- and still is, a
risk (or threat). Such
risks could have been very costly over our
evolutionary history and can be
still today. Of course, sometimes such risks (siding
with someone who seems
to be sitting on the fence, uncommitted, a rebel) can
be to one's
advantage. But 'ancient-brain' doesn't know this--and
probably
'statistics-brain' doesn't know this either!
Anyway, enough late-night babbling! It's a good book
and might answer your
question...
All best!
Alice
----- Original Message -----
From: G. Reinhart-Waller
To: The new improved paleopsych list
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] Re: paleopsych Digest, Vol
9, Issue 20
>> Someone beyond the liberal/conservative
dichotomy may be rejected by both sides as a
nuisance,
a threat to shared assumptions that define a group
against another.
This is absolutely amazing! Why would any audience
reject someone who cannot plop into either the
liberal
or conservative camp? Please explain the threat you
feel is apparent. This I need to hear!
Gerry
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
<<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="File:ATT00002.html">< File:
ATT00002.html ></a>> << File: ATT00003.txt >>
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>