The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality by Chris C. Mooney

Oct 26, 2012 Stephanie rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2012, politics, psycology

“Oh…….Sweet Jesus”- Joe Scarborough

So last night was the last presidential debate and all of us are a bit tired of politics at the moment, even political geeks like me. Also, considering the fact I live in Ohio, Ohio, Ohio, (if you live anywhere else, multiply your ads by ten) the most salivated over state in the nation……..well, I’m wanting this over! But, never the less, I had to read this book.

Why? Because, like you may have experienced yourself, I have been through some mind boggling convers...more

53 likes · like · see review

May 13, 2013 Leon rated it 3 of 5 stars

Bestselling author Chris Mooney uses cutting-edge research to explain the psychology behind why today’s Republicans reject reality—it's just part of who they are.

From climate change to evolution, the rejection of mainstream science among Republicans is growing, as is the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy and much more. Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts?

Science writer Chri

...more

Bestselling author Chris Mooney uses cutting-edge research to explain the psychology behind why today’s Republicans reject reality—it's just part of who they are.

From climate change to evolution, the rejection of mainstream science among Republicans is growing, as is the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy and much more. Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts?

Science writer Chris Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas and less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.

Goes beyond the standard claims about ignorance or corporate malfeasance to discover the real, scientific reasons why Republicans reject the widely accepted findings of mainstream science, economics, and history—as well as many undeniable policy facts (e.g., there were no “death panels” in the health care bill).

Explains that the political parties reflect personality traits and psychological needs—with Republicans more wedded to certainty, Democrats to novelty—and this is the root of our divide over reality.

Written by the author of The Republican War on Science, which was the first and still the most influential book to look at conservative rejection of scientific evidence. But the rejection of science is just the beginning…

Certain to spark discussion and debate, The Republican Brain also promises to add to the lengthy list of persuasive scientific findings that Republicans reject and deny.

Review

"Drawing on a growing body of empirical research, he provides an intelligent, nuanced and persuasive account of how conservatives and liberals tend to differ at the level of psychology and personality" (Financial Times, April 2012)

From the Inside Flap

Why do so many Republicans believe man-made climate change is a hoax? The two most common explanations are that the deniers are uninformed or that they have been bought off by corporate money. Bestselling author Chris Mooney isn't buying either of those arguments. In fact, as he points out, the better educated a conservative is, the more likely he is to dismiss climate change concerns. How can that be?

Part of the answer lies with motivated reasoning—the psychological phenomenon of preferring only evidence that backs up your belief—but in The Republican Brain, Mooney explains that is just the tip of the cognitive iceberg. There is a growing body of evidence that conservatives and liberals don't just have differing ideologies; they have different psychologies. How could the rejection of mainstream science be growing among Republicans, along with the denial of expert consensus on the economy, American history, foreign policy, and much more? Why won't Republicans accept things that most experts agree on? Why are they constantly fighting against the facts? Increasingly, the answer appears to be: it's just part of who they are.

Mooney explores brain scans, polls, and psychology experiments to explain why conservatives today believe more wrong things; appear more likely than Democrats to oppose new ideas; are less likely to change their beliefs in the face of new facts; and sometimes respond to compelling evidence by doubling down on their current beliefs.

The answer begins with some measurable personality traits that strongly correspond with political preferences. For instance, people more wedded to certainty tend to become conservatives; people craving novelty, liberals. Surprisingly, openness to new experiences and fastidiousness are better predictors of political preference than income or education. If you like to keep your house neat and see the world in a relatively black and white way, you're probably going to vote Republican. If you've recently moved to a big city to see what else life has to offer, you're probably going to vote Democrat. These basic differences in openness and curiosity, Mooney argues, fuel an "expertise gap" between left and right that explains much of the battle today over what is true.

Being a good liberal, Mooney also has to explore the implications of these findings for Democrats as well. Are they really wishy-washy flip-floppers? Well, sometimes. Can't they be just as dogmatic about issues close to their hearts, like autism and vaccines, or nuclear power? His research leads to some surprising conclusions.

While the evolutionary advantages of both liberal and conservative psychologies seem obvious, clashes between them in modern life have led to a crisis in our politics. A significant chunk of the electorate, it seems, will never accept the facts as they are, no matter how strong the evidence. Understanding the psychology of the left and the right, Mooney argues, should therefore fundamentally alter the way we approach the he-said-he-said of public debates.

Certain to spark discussion and debate, The Republican Brain also promises to add to the lengthy list of persuasive scientific findings that Republicans reject and deny.

(less)

like · see review

Mar 04, 2013 Grant rated it 5 of 5 stars

I'm not sure I've done a 5 star review before but I am now. It's not from poetic artistry but rather personal impact. It's very frustrating not knowing why people make certain choices (or lack of choices in some cases) and even though the Republican Brain is political science (the scientific study of politics) it has a lot of insight into WHY people are they way they are. Why do liberals waffle when it comes time to making decisions? Why do conservatives ignore empirical evidence (the point of t...more

like · see review

Jan 10, 2013 Luis Uribe rated it 4 of 5 stars

I had some misgivings about reading this book as I don't like self-congratulatory, biased reporting of any stripe. With a name like "The Republican Brain" I though it would be silly and endless GOP bashing with little substance. That's not the case. Mooney presents a well balanced and informative narrative on past and current research on the subject of political thought and decision making. He provides plenty of support for his theories with appropriate references, in case you'd like to read the...more

2 likes · like · see review

Nov 08, 2012 Erica rated it 4 of 5 stars

I rushed through reading this book, but I think I got the gist of it; Mooney gathered and analyzed research in brain & personality functions in terms of political self-identification.

In short, this is what I took away (I may have misinterpreted or misunderstood or forgotten some): People who vote Republican on average tend to make decisions & stick to them, choosing to ignore most new information and (of the little new information they let in) to be dismissive of contradictory informati...more

like · see review

Oct 29, 2012 Vincent rated it 3 of 5 stars

This book surprised me. I had expected glorification of the liberal frontal lobe, accompanied by severe mocking of conservatives, who are supposedly shown to be phobic automated response machines by modern cognitive psychology.

But the book wasn't like that. Instead, Mooney gives a neat summary of advances in political psychology and tentatively links it to partisan behavior. He is not particularly critical of the research he describes, but also certainly doesn't overplay the value of any study o...more

1 like · like · see review

Oct 05, 2012 Socraticgadfly rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: politics-public-policy

First, this is under my "politics/public policy" shelf, because it's just not quite ... science.

That said, here's a LONG review that I'm also posting on my blog.

What’s wrong with Chris Mooney’s #TheRepublicanBrain?

In a word, “scientism.” He’s not as bad or as blatant about it as a Sam Harris, but, yes, the book does veer off into scientism.

And, Chris is not a scientist, but he is a science journalist of several years standing, and the author of previous books. He should know better.

And I suspect...more

like · see review

Sep 14, 2012 Maxine McLister rated it 5 of 5 stars

It's impossible to avoid US politics lately. It is, after all, am election year. However, if it seems to you that the two American parties are moving further and further apart, you are not alone. According to author Chris Mooney, the differences between the two parties may be grounded, not only in philosophy, but in the very workings of the brain. When brain scans have been conducted on self-described conservatives, they show a larger amygdala, that lizard part of the brain which triggers the fi...more It's impossible to avoid US politics lately. It is, after all, am election year. However, if it seems to you that the two American parties are moving further and further apart, you are not alone. According to author Chris Mooney, the differences between the two parties may be grounded, not only in philosophy, but in the very workings of the brain. When brain scans have been conducted on self-described conservatives, they show a larger amygdala, that lizard part of the brain which triggers the fight or flight reflex. Self-described liberals, on the other hand, have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain associated with reasoning.

Put simply, conservatives are better at detecting threats and liberals are more adept at handling conflicting information and uncertainty. Conservatives tend to have a more Manichean outlook where things are perceived as black and white, good versus evil. They do not deal well with shades of grey. Liberals tend to be more curious, more willing to accept change, more able to tolerate and deal with contradictions.

According to Mooney, these differences may explain why Conservatives tend to be more anti-science, more likely to reject evolution and climate change. In fact, he found that the more highly educated a Conservative is, the more likely he is to reject science and to develop theories to 'disprove' it. That is not to say that liberals don't also have their own anti-science biases - just bring up vaccines in a group of liberals and watch the feathers fly - it is just that liberals are more willing to listen to the evidence on both sides of an argument and more willing to change their minds.

Mooney is careful to point out that both political types have their good and bad points. Conservatives may be more close minded but they are also more persistent, more ambitious, more decisive, more loyal and tidier. They are also more willing to put aside their differences within the group to work for a specific goal. Liberals may be more open minded, more curious and more rational but they are also more argumentative and less willing to compromise within the group.

Although the book is about American political parties, I suspect that these descriptions can be applied to any group of people. It is a fascinating read and will definitely make you think (at least if you a liberal. Conservatives have already lashed out at it). However, where I felt the book fell down was in the last chapter. Mooney makes it clear that it is unlikely the two parties will ever reach common ground. He, then, makes a plea for liberals to at least try to work together in the upcoming election to elect more Democrats. Although I agree (as a Canadian, one could argue that I have no dog in this race but what happens in the US has a profound effect on my country), it felt like, after spending 200+ pages, explaining the differences between the two groups including the unwillingness of liberals to come together for a single cause, he suddenly expected or, at least, hoped liberals would see that compromise is sometimes necessary within the group.

Still, I found this book a great read and, if you are as curious as I was to know what is driving the two parties so far apart, you will find this book completely engrossing and perhaps just a little bit sad and scarey.(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Aug 16, 2012 Ob-jonny rated it 4 of 5 stars

This book explains the psychology behind the various political ideologies and is essential in understanding the behavior of the political parties. The researchers proved through scientific studies that people who identify themselves as conservatives have a much lower degree of openess to new ideas and information and they are much more loyal. In other words, they identify with a group or team and only accept facts which supports that team. Liberals on the other hand are much more likely to accep...more

like · see review

Jun 22, 2012 Bryan rated it 3 of 5 stars

The book and the studies presented therein had the potential to get 4 or 5 stars from me (not that getting a good review from me really means anything). I was perhaps over-enthusiastic about this one, and maybe had too high expectations, and therefore was a bit let down.

Apart from that, I enjoyed many aspects of this book, and it helped me ask questions and think differently about political psychology more than ever before. Psychology is an interesting subject to me, probably because I know almo...more The book and the studies presented therein had the potential to get 4 or 5 stars from me (not that getting a good review from me really means anything). I was perhaps over-enthusiastic about this one, and maybe had too high expectations, and therefore was a bit let down.

Apart from that, I enjoyed many aspects of this book, and it helped me ask questions and think differently about political psychology more than ever before. Psychology is an interesting subject to me, probably because I know almost nothing about the field. I have the same relationship with politics. So reading this book was a fun armchair educational experience.

Do those on the Right have different brains than those on the Left? I've been saying "probably yes" for a while based on casual observances, personally. But when it comes to public truth, I'm not entirely convinced by the studies or evidence presented in this book, perhaps because of the way the evidence was presented. I found myself increasingly skeptical of the results of the numerous studies presented, which skepticism increased with Mooney's partisanship. Mooney clearly sees the Left having the corner on truth (and those of us leaning Left these days don't blame him for thinking this). Instead of a Left-Right spectrum, I got the sense that Mooney was trying to paint another picture, more of a spider-graph, with the scientifically-endorsed Left as the center of factual reality, with libertarians, Republicans, conservatives, Tea Party enthusiasts, etc., all falling outside of the central area of reality. I must admit,(whether or not that is truly the picture Mooney attempts to paint) I'm growing more fond of this view.

There is much talk lately about increased polarization in politics these days. It is my opinion, which is shared by the author, that conservatives are more aggressive in there polarization, and perhaps tend to strike first in their obstructionist ways. The Right seems to be off balance these days. If I were impartial I would have to say "it takes two to tango," but I've gone through my own movement myself, steering more to liberalism in response to some of the craziness I see on the part of neo-conservatives, which is why I was attracted to Mooney's book in the first place.

Because of that, I don't disagree with the conclusions Mooney makes about the conservative brain. I'm not convinced that there is a highly significant difference, as a blanket categorization, between liberal and conservative brains, but the question has been popping into my mind over and over again over the last few years as I've watched with dumbfounded awe some of the claims and some of the actions of conservative leaders, which actions and claims were addressed in this book.

So Mooney clearly has had the same questions, and I have him to thank for looking into the answer to that question, instead of sitting on the couch, like I did, waiting for someone to write a cheap book to read. Thanks Mooney, because truly you did a lot of research, even if it won't win the Nobel or a Pulitzer. If nothing else, it adds to the body of evidence that the GOP and posse are going to be historical figures which our children's grandchildren will look back on and say "let's not be like that again." But I tend to agree with you more, now that I've read your book, that even then they'll have the Republican Brain pushing against historical lessons of reality. So no thanks Mooney, because now I have less hope in the human race for overcoming unreasonableness. Before reading this book, I hoped for a not-too-distant future filled with enlightened minds which embrace empirical evidence and refrain from emotional outbursts which cloud the mind and obstruct our political process. Now I'm constrained to accept the good the Republican Brain can offer society, even if I'd almost rather throw the baby out with the bath water, as they say.

Most importantly, I recommend reading the conclusion, if nothing else.

Liberals, as established in this book, tend to satisfy their psychological needs through giving heed to facts, scientific reason, studies, and so forth (among other things), whereas conservatives tend to fulfill their psychological needs through obtaining solid closure, clear-cut paths between right and wrong, and achieving satisfactory emotional results which conform to their existing beliefs or opinions (in greater frequency than liberals). More on this subject please!!

Therefore, this book certainly wasn't written for the conservative brain, for it deals in nuanced uncertainty, filled with half-conclusive studies which may or may not be peer reviewed, and forces the reader to dwell in an obscure land of not knowing what is REALLY going on in the minds of their political foes. It would be easier to see the world through the conservative lens: liberals are wickedly acting on temptations of Satan, and are either knowingly or naively destroying our God-sanctioned nation. You can re-write that conservative viewpoint a hundred different ways, and they all sound concrete and clear-cut, even if the viewpoint is insane and counterproductive.

So because this book is written to the liberals, I say, hey, we all know Fox News is whacked, so let's talk more about psychology and less about surveys on the consumers of cable news. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Feb 12, 2013 Kerry rated it 4 of 5 stars

Quite an interesting read. As a left-wing climate scientist who is totally amazed at the right wing's ability to disregard and deny basic facts, this makes that whole process make more sense. The normal reaction up to now has been, well, they haven't heard enough facts, once they see enough then they will finally understand and change their minds.

Now with more research on the basic differences in brains of conservatives and liberals, it appears that is completely the wrong approach. Surprisingl...more Quite an interesting read. As a left-wing climate scientist who is totally amazed at the right wing's ability to disregard and deny basic facts, this makes that whole process make more sense. The normal reaction up to now has been, well, they haven't heard enough facts, once they see enough then they will finally understand and change their minds.

Now with more research on the basic differences in brains of conservatives and liberals, it appears that is completely the wrong approach. Surprisingly, better educated conservatives actually become more resistant to changing with the more facts they are given.

Differences in conservative brains (less curiosity, less openness to new information, greater need for quick closure on nuanced complex issues, resistance to changes, the need for order, greater need for authority etc.) go a long way to explaining the current state of the world and point to fatal flaws in the way the left normally responds to conflicts and debates over issues. Recent budget battles in the US pitting Tea Party GOPers determined to die fighting before giving any ground with Democrats who immediately work towards compromises show how foolish that tactic has been.

These brain differences explain nicely how the right is able to maintain absolute discipline with precise talking points while the left offers a diffuse front of varying opinions and internal disputes between each other. The Right is able to stand on a platform of mythical stories which have no basis in reality yet are completely resistant to the Left pointing out how completely devoid of facts they are. These stories stand because the Left is unable to understand how the Right wing brain works and offer new stories which are compelling. Lots of nuanced complex facts just bounce off.

But in order to save the world, we will need to figure out how to get past this. The world needs some pretty drastic changes pretty quickly. As long as the Left has no idea how the other half of the world thinks and feels, nothing is going to change. (less)

like · see review

Mar 30, 2012 Jorge rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: science, politics-economics, neuroscience

The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality by Chris Mooney

"The Republican Brain" is the latest contribution from bestselling author Chris Mooney. This interesting book tackles the psychology behind the anti-science stance that is currently typical of the political right. "We seek to understand how the political right could be so wrong". Mooney does a wonderful job of establishing his thesis and uses the best current science to demonstrate the thinking behind the Repu...more

3 likes · like · see review

Dec 12, 2012 Kurt Rice rated it 5 of 5 stars

A balanced look at the psychological and neurological underpinnings of political belief, Mooney tackles both conservative and liberal response to evidence, and goes some way to demonstrate how motivated reasoning, while manifest in all of humanity, is more entrenched in the GOP. Further, he argues we need both approaches in order to succeed as a nation and proposes some ways to break the extreme partisanship crippling our representative, democratic process. Of course, he doesn't expect the Tea P...more

like · see review

Jun 12, 2012 Katie rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: history-and-politics, social-science

Mooney makes an achingly thorough study of psychological, neurological, and genetic studies of political preference, bias, and reasoning. While the title correctly suggests his personal bias, Mooney not only looks at the psychology of conservative thinking, but also discusses the psychology and neuroscience behind liberal thinking. According to Mooney both have their usefulness and pitfalls, though ultimately he implies that liberal thinking is more useful and conservative thinking has more pitf...more

like · see review

Apr 25, 2012 Matthew Brotherton rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: political, the-mind

Mooney is honest in his statement that he is biased because he is a liberal. Still, he does a pretty good job of looking at the psychological science of politics and ultimately draws the conclusion that the personality traits being studied are necessary on both ends of the spectrum for healthy politics. His ultimate finding is that conservative and liberal ideology held too tightly is damaging to America and humanity as a whole.

I encourage anyone to read this book, as it gives a new insight int...more

1 like · like · see review

Oct 01, 2012 Jason rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: politics, science

The ideas in this book are so interesting and well researched that it's a waste that everything's presented in such a clearly biased way that ensures that no conservative--no one who could gain some personal insight from its conclusions--will ever bother reading it (although according to one of the book's studies, conservatives tend not to be the carefullest readers in general). Basically, Mooney demonstrates here that many of our political beliefs and values correlate with biological difference...more The ideas in this book are so interesting and well researched that it's a waste that everything's presented in such a clearly biased way that ensures that no conservative--no one who could gain some personal insight from its conclusions--will ever bother reading it (although according to one of the book's studies, conservatives tend not to be the carefullest readers in general). Basically, Mooney demonstrates here that many of our political beliefs and values correlate with biological differences in our brains (he doesn't imply causation), that conservatives tend to process information using the amygdala resulting in knee-jerk flight-or-flight responses while liberals tend to use their frontal lobes resulting in more careful consideration of multiple viewpoints, openness to new or contrary information and an overall valuing of facts, data, statistics and reason. At the same time, through his review of various peer reviewed studies in the fields of neuroscience and psychology, he also discovers that conservatives tend to engage in a lot more motivated reasoning based on alleviating cognitive dissonance (the conflicts between science/reality and their own illogical beliefs about the world) and that consumers of conservative media (Fox News, talk radio) tend to be less informed about most subjects than everyone else, and, most interestingly, that intelligent, sophisticated, highly-educated conservatives are typically the worst offenders in terms of denial, bias and motivated reasoning. This is useful information and explains an awful lot about conservative denial of science, particularly in the fields of climate change and evolution, but Mooney guarantees that no conservative will ever encounter it by being so blunt in stating how conservatives are wrong so much more often than liberals. I guess based on his understanding of research, he knows that only liberals will bother reading this type of book anyway.

In Mooney's defense, bias is not always a bad thing and overt bias can be better than disguised, disingenuous bias. And it's hard not to be biased sometimes when the other side is sometimes completely illogical, ignoring data and obstinately refusing to believe things that science, academia and the rest of the world knows to be true (climate change is only controversial for novice conservatives and a few contrary crackpots). It's often said that everyone has a right to his or her opinion, but denial of scientific fact (climate change, evolution, etc.) isn't an opinion but a completely mistaken belief: an error. This makes it pretty tough to stay neutral because it's possible through studies using the scientific method to quantify these mistaken beliefs and who holds them--conservatives. Mooney occasionally tries to be neutral, praising conservative strengths (decisiveness, loyalty to the group) and to point out the mistaken beliefs of granola liberals (that vaccinations can autism, for example).

Interestingly, reading through the reviews of this on Goodreads and Amazon, I couldn't help noticing the rebuttals. Most are ad hominem attacks on the author ("he's a journalist not a scientist") while others are vague and off base enough to suggest that the reviewers haven't read the book: two psychological responses to contrary information thoroughly demonstrated in the studies in the book. If conservative critics only knew they were arguing Mooney's points for him.

Most usefully and the reason for that fourth star are Mooney's recommendations for engaging conservatives about these issues. Coming at them with data, statistics, fancy names for logical fallacies (Occam's Razor, for example) aren't going to work because they're not particularly interested in demonstrable truth; more effective is to express one's own beliefs calmly and rationally without attacking them or their group, which research shows tends to lead them to hold mistaken beliefs more strongly and stubbornly and amplify their 'us vs. them' mentality. If you have conservative friends and family and are interested in a free exchange of ideas, this could help.(less)

like · see review

Apr 23, 2012 Christina rated it 4 of 5 stars

I'm a former Republican who turned Democrat during George W. Bush's first term (I always thought I was rare until reading in this book that many of the more fiscally-minded intellectual conservatives were jumping ship at this time as well).

I found this book to be well-researched and written, especially the conclusion of this book is very well written. Mooney describes dozens of neurological, psychological, and sociological studies on the differences in brain structure and thought between liberal...more

like · see review

Dec 23, 2012 Fabrice Auguste rated it 4 of 5 stars

I thought this book was very stimulating

I've never felt like I was a Liberal or a conservative. I've always felt somewhere in the middle, but felt pushed toward the liberal side for several reasons with the strongest being:

1. Their views against evolution (my degree is in microbiology I've done research on drug resistance developing in bacteria... it's evolution before your eyes lol)
2. Their views against homosexuals
3. Their views toward abortion

This book was definitely from a liberal point of v...more

like · see review

Sep 11, 2012 Ray rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Considering the title of this book, you can't help but consider this to be an anti-Republican, anti-Conservative and pro-Democratic, pro-Progressive book. Mooney claims that not to be the case. Rather, he writes that his point is simply to point out that people on the left and people on the right are simply two very different types of people, with two differing types of brains and personalities.

The book offers a different way of looking at people on the right and on the left. Through various st...more Considering the title of this book, you can't help but consider this to be an anti-Republican, anti-Conservative and pro-Democratic, pro-Progressive book. Mooney claims that not to be the case. Rather, he writes that his point is simply to point out that people on the left and people on the right are simply two very different types of people, with two differing types of brains and personalities.

The book offers a different way of looking at people on the right and on the left. Through various studies of how the mind works and psychological studies, Mooney tries to demonstrate that underlying personal traits are often keys to one's political outlook.

Mooney characterizes those more authoritarian as tending to the right, and those being more egalitarian as tending to the left. That alone may not be much of a revelation, but other personality traits also are keys to understanding political leanings. Mooney characterizes those who have a low tolerance of uncertainty, who have more need for closure, for rules, for strong sense of group and belonging, as the type of person who will favor conservative / Republican philosophy. Those individual, he states, are much more resistant to change, desire to manage uncertainty and fear, and can accept or rationalize inequality. The need for something stable, something unchanging to believe in, who like order in their lives (e.g., military and corporate America), will favor conservative ways of thinking. A strong sense of belonging to a group, of order, accounts for a much more unified philosophy by Conservatives. As an example, he contrasts the orderly and consistent dogma of the Tea Party as contrasted to a political opposite movement such as the Occupy Wall Street movement. Other positive characteristics Mooney finds more dominant in conservatives include decisiveness, patriotism, loyalty to friends and allies. On the other hand, they may have more of a tendency toward "group think", and be much quicker to dismiss scientific information which contrasts with their deeply held beliefs. He supports this, of course, with a variety of studies which he shares with the readers.

On the other hand, the more "open" a person is, the more willing to bend or compromise, someone who sees shades of gray in things, who is tolerant of various perspectives and values, will be someone who will drift toward Democratic philosophy. Liberals as a group tend to be more nuanced, more empathetic, open to travel and new ideas, etc. This makes them more likely the agents of change (and accepting and interested in new science), vs. the conservative trait of holding onto existing ideas and ways of life (and more dismissive of new science).

Family members often can have very different make-up, personalities, intuitions and responses, and those traits can often account for differences in political philosophy. But while Mooney states that these two groups exhibit complimentary strengths and weaknesses, and they're simply two different types of people, he clearly does favor the type of person most like himself, i.e., a liberal, open to science type of individual. Interestingly, he concludes by stating that he believes he's correct in his conclusions, but is open to change if further studies demonstrate otherwise.

One good point which he makes is he discussion of confirmation bias in our reading and sources of information, as well as other tendencies which can make us more like our group. If you're unwilling to challenge yourself, and seek contrary information in your beliefs (things he feels the more "open" type of person will do but a more "conservative" may not tend to do), you'll only become more close minded and set in your ways.

At any rate, Mooney offers new ways of looking at differences between those on the right and the left, and has a wealth of data and studies which he offers to make his point(s). It's a little different look at things, and he points out that it's not necessarily the facts of an argument which sways people to one belief system or the other, but more just part of their make-up, and facts can simply just get in the way (for some).

(less)

like · see review

Mar 08, 2013 Peter Mcloughlin rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites, politics, brains-and-behavior

This book confirms what many people have suspected. Liberals and conservatives are different kinds of people down to the level of the brain. On big five scores libs score higher on openness and Conservatives score high on conscientiousness. Or in negative terms conservatives are more closed minded and tidy and liberals are open but unreliable and messy.
The brain regions of libs and conservatives are different. Conservatives have a bigger right amygdala (fear and threat center of the brain) and...more

like · see review

Jul 25, 2012 Sarah Clement rated it 3 of 5 stars

I really wanted to love this book. I am a leftie and a researcher, however, so I read this with a very critical eye. Mooney basically says at the end that liberals all need to stand together and stop criticising each other, but I can't give him carte blanche just because America is extremely divided at the moment.

Ultimately, I felt that this should have been a journal article that could stimulate discussion and debate. It didn't have enough substance for a book, or at least the way he wrote it...more

2 likes · like · see review

Oct 27, 2012 Patty rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: kindle, non-fiction, 2012, science-writing, science, psychology, politics, conservatives, republican-party

I would not have picked this book up except my husband ordered it for our Kindle and once it was there I decided I should at least glance at it. I did more than glance - I found it fascinating. The human brain is an amazing thing; we know so little about it.

Mooney runs through an amazing amount of research and talks about it in laymen's terms. I can't believe what scientists will study. I mean that in a good way, since we need to know much more about the human body, psyche and everything else.

I...more

like · see review

Dec 29, 2012 Eve rated it 3 of 5 stars

A mixed review on this one. While it was provocative and provided some interesting data, I felt that it was far too partisan. Mooney makes a half-assed effort at the end of the book to explain why the Republican way of thinking (more decisive due to fewer shades of grey, more partisan and loyal due to authoritarian tendencies) has its benefits, but he also comes across as smugly liberal. I'm very liberal (and maybe smug) but I felt that the book was unbalanced. Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Min...more

like · see review

Mar 04, 2013 Evan Macbeth rated it 2 of 5 stars

This is more of an article than a book. Or, perhaps better said, a very interesting article stretched and filled to become a book, and in doing so made less compelling. This book contained a lot of repetition of main points, which was important for clarity in a few cases. But the majority of cases of repetition in this book, the author's thesis and points in support of it were clear and simple enough to not require the level of exposition and repetition he used.

I am glad to have read it, given i...more

like · see review

Jan 08, 2013 Jesse rated it 1 of 5 stars

Score: 1.5/5

I picked up this book off of Paul Krugman's recommendation, describing it as "not, as you might think, a partisan screed", so I nearly gave this 1/5 off the bat for being as one-sided as it was, until realizing I was judging it by Krugman's description. The book's introduction starts asking "Why are today's liberals usually right, and today's conservatives usually wrong?", which pretty neatly sums up how the book is going to go. This definitely seems to be a hot topic right now, espe...more Score: 1.5/5

I picked up this book off of Paul Krugman's recommendation, describing it as "not, as you might think, a partisan screed", so I nearly gave this 1/5 off the bat for being as one-sided as it was, until realizing I was judging it by Krugman's description. The book's introduction starts asking "Why are today's liberals usually right, and today's conservatives usually wrong?", which pretty neatly sums up how the book is going to go. This definitely seems to be a hot topic right now, especially in terms of trying to explain the far-right Tea Party and its popularity.

The book did, it turns out, raise some interesting points, and does a good job of making a coherent argument. It starts off with a handful of psychological studies linking personality traits with political ideology (interesting, though many of these are from the researcher John Jost and I wonder if it wouldn't be more productive to just read his papers), then goes on to try to apply those differences in personality traits to an array of charged political topics (climate science, teaching evolution in schools, the debt ceiling crisis, to name a few) and make generalizations about how members of each major political party handles those issues.

In terms of doing what the book sets out to do, it does a good job. If you're okay with the format of "Here is a moderately reasonable point. THEREFORE DEMOCRATS RULE REPUBLICANS DROOL!!!111", you might enjoy the book more than I did. For an author who self-identifies as liberal and spends a good portion of the book talking about how nuanced liberals are, this book is decidedly lacking in handling the topic professionally. If you're looking for a more nuanced, scholarly treatment of similar topics, I'd suggest the historian Richard Hofstadter's Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, though his is more of a historical treatment of right-wing views than psychological.

Mooney concludes the book by advising liberals to be more "conservative" in politics---by which he means more rigidly ideological, less compromising, and more stubbornly supporting their own party. But for those of us who identify as intellectual liberals, that is not only antithetic to our personality but insulting to suggest that that's a good approach to handling politics.(less)

like · see review

May 11, 2013 Lori rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: politics

I was really disappointed in this book. I was hoping for enlightenment that would help me peacefully coexist and agree to disagree. Like many liberals I want to understand them. They’re my neighbors and coworkers and relatives and I don’t like having the same unwinnable arguments. That’s time wasted that we could spend focusing on where we agree. And I certainly believe in tolerance and free speech and not allowing the majority to tyrannize the minority. BUT:

The consequences of their beliefs ar...more

like · see review

Feb 19, 2013 Dan rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Republicans. Anyone interested in politics or psychology.

Shelves: politics, science, psychology

"How could HE vote like THAT?"

If you've ever found yourself asking this question, or others like it, then this is the book for you.

This is a book that delves into the psychological underpinnings of why we think and vote the way we do. The book focuses on the 'Republican brain', but Democrats can learn something about themselves too. And who wouldn't want to understand themselves better? Well...

If Chris Mooney is right, not many of my fellow Republicans will want to read this book. That's a sha...more

like · see review

Nov 09, 2012 Brian rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: 5-stars, politics, north-america, nonfiction, psychology

Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
-Stephen Colbert

That's the opening quote to this book, and probably the best once-sentence summary of its contents.

I was originally thinking of giving it four stars, based on its somewhat limited scope--it mentions conservatives and authoritarians in other cultures occasionally, but not in any real depth--but the title is, after all, the Republican Brain. That wasn't the real reason that tipped me over, however.

The real reason was the behavior of the conserv...more

2 likes · like · see review

May 24, 2012 Jim Razinha rated it 5 of 5 stars

An excellent book that deserves more comments (to come later). I took off a half star for the maddening end notes - you discover them after you've read the chapter... I don't know what style that is, but if there are notes, I like to know about them when I am reading...not after I move on...Page number, sentence fragment to indicate the reference tie...I guess you have to flp back after the fact. Irritating.

Still, I gave back that half star because the book was so well sourced.

Another book that...more

like · see review

Oct 24, 2012 Marshall rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, politics, psychology

This book turned out to be surprisingly remarkable. I was expecting yet another liberal rant making fun of conservatives' silly anti-science. Though it's written by a liberal, with a liberal bias, this book turned out much more balanced and humble than the subtitle would have you believe. It also really helped me to understand my own political beliefs and the ways I've developed those beliefs.

It discusses the brain research done on liberals and conservatives which has uncovered underlying differ...more This book turned out to be surprisingly remarkable. I was expecting yet another liberal rant making fun of conservatives' silly anti-science. Though it's written by a liberal, with a liberal bias, this book turned out much more balanced and humble than the subtitle would have you believe. It also really helped me to understand my own political beliefs and the ways I've developed those beliefs.

It discusses the brain research done on liberals and conservatives which has uncovered underlying differences between the two, both genetic and cultural. Both perspectives have strengths and weaknesses. For example, liberals tend to be more open to new information, and better able to appreciate uncertainty and nuance. But conservatives tend to be more organized, steadfast, and loyal, which are necessary qualities for a strong nation.

Of course, the conservatives are shooting themselves in the foot with their science denial, but he gives some examples of ways liberals have also shot themselves in the foot. He also includes ways liberals also deny science, so he's not arguing that these personality traits are true across the board, just general tendencies. More of that liberal nuance for ya!

I've always found that liberals and conservatives are more interested in hating each other than understanding each other. That makes it really hard to work together, which they're forced to do in politics. This book is designed mainly to help fellow liberals better understand and appreciate their conservative brethren. The biggest mistake liberals make is what this book outlines in a story about Marquis de Condorcet, that all you have to do is show conservatives the facts, and they will see your side of things, and then you can work together to find compromises. That's just not how conservatives think.

I appreciate how hard he strives to be balanced in his treatment of this subject, and I admire that he's trying to use this research to decrease the political polarization we've been seeing. But the basic premise is still inherently hostile to conservatives: they tend to be dead wrong. So, although actually reading this book will help you better understand and appreciate conservatives, the truth is that most people--especially conservatives--won't read it, and for them, just the very existence of this book will serve to further polarize them.(less)

like · see review

title link	preview: The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality
avg rating	preview: The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality Goodreads rating: 3.91 (345 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12821470-the-republican-brain?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348207424l/12821470.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12821470-the-republican-brain?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality by Chris C. Mooney[/url]

The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science--and Reality

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (10)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Chris C. Mooney

Books by Chris C. Mooney

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The Republican Br...