From a comment on this video with 1.8K likes.
"Conservatives use common sense and logic, liberals use emotion and feelings." Agree or Disagree?
- 712 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
I can't agree or disagree, but I'm likely to agree and here is why. The political class in general are insufferable kunts. Few have set values that they display and adhere to... DINO'S and RINO'S in particular, and I understand their grift is just to make money.
Followers though... the left is just insane lately, but I was around long enough to remember when the right was insane. I think both cases of insanity was religion. Back in the day, the religious right trying to ban music, evolution teaching in schools, books, etc... it all just reminds me of the current left with their new non-thiestic religion. And I'll break it down like this... authoritarianism. The right was becoming too authoritarian by trying to force citizens to be this way or that and the left checked it. Now though the left is making the same damn mistake and trying to force citizens to be this way or that and I feel the right has been dropping the ball on putting that shit in check. I mean come on 'math is racist' just because particular people just are not as good at it? Put that kind of bullshit in check already. The idea of being on time was created by whites to keep everyone down? That stuff needs to get checked and put in it's place. Even most leftests think that's some bullshit. -->and that brings me to another conclusion as well. Those on the left are not doing enough checking their own on bullshit. The right now, currently do that a lot to their own. The right no longer give each other a free pass on anything just because they have that Jedio religion adherence check box checked off. I do see some leftists starting to check their own though... and point out shit like communism simply doesn't work, and anyone can be a racist (not just white people). But sheeple are sheeple and it's no overnight change. Just my two cents...
Most Helpful Opinions
-
As far as political stances in the vast majority of cases yes. That's why they more often label stances as moral or immoral, that you're immoral if you don't agree with their stance.
There's a logical conversation to be had in favor of liberal views. But they rarely do that. More often it's an appeal to emotion to make a feel good decision right or wrong.
Granted emotional arguments work. I can't hate it. Emotions beat logic everytime and that's why conservatives many times lose because they're using logical arguments in response to emotional arguments when they need to use emotional arguments aswell.
What Girls & Guys Said
9
Opinion
57Opinion
-
I’m a libertarian. I think politicians are crooks. No matter what side they are in , and America has been taken over by entitled , loud , morons. Common sense has left the building just like Elvis. Both side have aspects I like and some I don’t so much. I think things would be much better if we actually paid attention to the constitution however after this last few years I definitely do not care for democrats and liberals. Republicans are almost as bad in different ways but they are not trying to completely destroy America and rewrite history like the dems are attempting to do. Liberals control the media. There are globalists on both sides. The last two years the Republican globalists have outed themselves. You will see who they are because they will lose their seats in Congress this year as well as a bunch of those crazy leftists. Big changes coming Biden is the worst President ever he took the prize from Jimmy Carter who was a sweet person but a very ineffective president. Trump was more affective but I know a lot about him. He’s definitely not perfect but he was keeping promises and got a lot done. If you have a good conman turn him loose on other nations I always say. (A little secret Trump is not really a Republican.) I would love to see America start electing libertarians. I think we need term limits on every office. 2 terms and bye bye give someone else a chance. We need to outlaw special interests and big corporations from interfering in politics. Politicians who break the law need to be held accountable. All these radical groups destroying , looting , burning. Need to pay for it. Change should come through diplomacy and intelligent conversation, not very small very loud groups who are not a majority at all. Entitlements need to stop for able bodied people. People need to go to work if they are able. I personally don’t owe anyone anything and they owe me nothing as well. The government needs to be trimmed back as do prisons and cops. They have made a business out of incarceration and law enforcement. The need to get rid of private companies in law enforcement and incarceration. They need to actually do something to help minority communities and stop with the lying and manipulation that they have used for 50 years to get the vote they don’t deserve. The need to stop using race and gender issues as political opportunism. The first thing would be to stop discrimination against poor black brown and white people let us get ahead too. Stop punishing poor families for being in welfare. I wonder how many know that most states public assistance programs prohibits the male or father from living with his family if they are on welfare. That is not the answer. There is way to much to lust but I submit that’s a start.
- 3.6K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Don’t totally disagree, but I don’t think it’s that cut & dry. One thing I’d say…. humans are EXTREMELY emotional creatures. All of our moves, our thoughts, the majority of our actions and responses in life are consciously or subconsciously dictated by our emotions. Like I’d bet it’s in the high 90s%. Like the people using logic are still influenced by their emotions in their perception of what logic and facts are. Just because one person or group says something is factual and logical doesn’t make it so, that’s very often just our underlying emotions talking.
I get the “hard and fast logic” idea, I even used to think that for a time. A part of my brain wants life to be paint-by-numbers. You’re a physics man, right?😝 So I mean, you look at physics (please, no follow up questions about physics, I was a football player, they didn’t make me take that class, I had human biology with our strength & conditioning coach😂)…. from what I understand of it, it’s kind of just logical and factual information and theories about…. life, and matter, and movement, right? Half-credit at least? Lmao. Or math. One correct answer, and one correct answer only. There are things in life that facts and logic are good for, there’s a lot of room for that in life, engineering, all that science-y stuff.
I don’t think human behavior is the right arena for it though. Too many variables. Too many external influences. I think people are just highly emotional, and we’re supposed to be, otherwise we wouldn’t all be like this. And the guys yelling how unemotional they are are usually the guys I see getting the most emotional about shit lmfao. It’s whatever, I’m not trying to clown on anyone, I’m just saying I think it’s a pretty universal human characteristic, some of us are just more cognizant of it in themselves than others are.
So I think you can construct physical shit with facts and logic, but you can’t RUN behavioral/societal shit with facts and logic, because the former’s “facts and logic” are universally agreed upon and proven, the latter’s “facts and logic” are HIGHLY subjective and not at all a sure thing. - 400 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Definitely disagree. Whether you use logic or simply emotion comes from whether or not you understand the nuances and details of the policy positions you hold.
Like, a bad liberal might argue for universal healthcare because "if everyone had healthcare, the country would be a better place" or "because everyone deserves it". Yeah, the country would be better if everyone had a Lambo what's your freaking point? Like it's oversimplifying and molding things into an argument that can't be disagreed with. And that's if they aren't bending over backwards to use patriarchy theory to describe how candy bars are sexist.
The best was Nancy Pelosi kneeling in support of black American victims of police violence... like not 2 days after rejecting a bunch of bills on the matter. "LeTs KnEeL fOr PoLiCy ChAnGe" says the literal policy maker after rejecting policy change. But I guess she figures if she says "sorry I'm white" enough then she won't have to actually put in the work.
A good liberal might talk about healthcare should exist in the public sector because the supply and demand forces don't act as a check on costs if demand is inflexible. Similarly, the public sector generally seeks reduction while the private sector will do everything it can to grow its own necessity. Like, a lot of liberal economic policies have been tried and tested. Research papers, controls, the whole scientific method. Universal healthcare used to be pretty rare, but ended up being so successful that the US stands out as "barbaric" and "bloated" to other countries for many of our healthcare practices.
It's hard for me to find arguments of good conservatives at the moment after seeing the knots they would twist themselves in to defend Trump over their own values and ideologies. But Libertarians are up there, arguing for more checks on power, or arguing that power should be proportional to proximity to the governed.
A friend of mine used to be a "minarchist capitalist" and argue that the US should be essentially a relatively loose union of sovereign city-states surrounded by relatively anarchist rural areas. Public services could exist, but only through an opt-in system. That this is the only way social-contract theory works, is if you can literally opt into a social contract. Otherwise, "when did I sign this contract? Did I get a choice in the matter?" I could listen to him talk about this stuff all day even if we disagreed on more than half of it. Because it seemed logically backed up, saw its own weaknesses, and still attempted to address social and economic issues without treating everything like some "hoax".
But the idea that conservatives don't use "emotion and feelings" to make stupid arguments practically has me rolling. Fox News has conservatives by the balls. All they have to do is say "something something Jesus" or "they don't love Jesus" or "they hate the soldiers" and that's all it takes. It's a lot of completely rejecting new ideas for nothing more than "but this is America" or "that's not how I grew up". Watching them completely lose their shit because Colin Kaepernick kneeled for police brutality, as suggested BY A SOLDIER, was an absolute riot. Payed his respect to the flag using a different pose to make a point about police brutality? TrIgGeRrEd.
And you can NOT tell me that "logic and reason" is behind the "Trump actually won" conspiracy theory. The guy couldn't even win a popular vote against Hillary freaking Clinton, and you are totally unable to accept that he lost, so you'll hang on to some BS idea that "the elections were rigged". Not because of evidence. Not because of reason. Evidence and reason shot this down immediately in conservative courts, including a supreme court that Republicans packed. But simply because "Trump losing didn't feel right". And were able to dig yourself into such a hole that the "Respect America" party raided the Capitol and wanted to hang the VP. SO logic. Much reason. -
Yes and no. I think the terms are outdated. I also think the quote is misleading. Simply speaking: both can and should use both, but ultimately I think logic has been undercut. I think it's a matter of different principles, values, and premises that are not shared, or at least not similarly prioritised.
Here's an exampleof some such differences, but there are many high and low level concepts and values at stake between the left and right.
Both do and should use both logic and emotion. You can argue a conclusion, but it's far more difficult to argue a premise; you usually use emotion and cultural influence to combat those; people need to either personally experience and feel the total failure of a premise in order to release their faith commitments to it, or be so utterly immersed in a culture of contrary principles such that they accept them through conformity.
A point of agreement I can make with the sentiment in the quote is that the right has neglected institutions of cultural production, and has hence given it over to the subversive types of the left, which can then lead to the perception that the left uses emotion more than the right, because it's deeper territory being embattled with emotion and culture. A "culture war" that the right has been late to arrive at. - 352 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
Those we TODAY consider to be 'Conservatives' are ONLY concerned with 'conserving' their amassed wealth and purloined privilege. They favor 'selective tax breaks' and seek to keep their contributions to the social structure they enjoy not to their 'fair share' but instead to getting over, and to the minimum that avoids prosecution.
Whereas 'Liberals' espouse trying to actually abide by the principles our predecessors enshrined in our founding documents we allegedly hold as 'noble' and 'sacred'. Pragmatists acknowledge the 'ideal' is not always fully achievable and yet must hold 'Conservatives' restrained from becoming 'de facto' pseudo-New World privileged robber baron 'Nobility'. This vigilance must be never-ending.
Recently, this was manifest in the bare-faced Louis XIV credo:
"Etate es Moi" (I AM the State!) by Donald Trump, fomenting riots to perpetuate his 'privilege' despite scrupulous investigation of allegations of a 'rigged' re-election.
This is highly reminiscent of the South American 'banana republic' armed dictatorships and their 'privileged' ruling families. SOME actually ordering armed militias into their congressional chambers to intimidate their officials during critical voting!
Conservatives as manifest today, are vehemently opposed to congressional term limits and ending the filibuster which might infringe and end their "best laws that election PAC money can BUY" (Bribery corruption by any other name)
Legislative debate, negotiation and compromise has been replaced by 'gerrymandering' and leveraging voting impediments.~ Republican's "Hail to the Cheeto!" Can't wait to see HIS customary 'presidential library' filled with REDACTED documents and 'spin'. -
I disagree. I am not anti-conservative, but conservatives do still believe in things like religion, like Christianity, and being pro-life, which aren't at all based on common sense and logic, and are most definitely based on nothing more than emotion and feelings.
Yeah, modern-day "liberals" operate on pure emotion way MORE, but once upon a time (2000-2012), liberals in America used to be the common sense, logic, Constitutionalist group in the country. Politics are a pendulum, with one extreme and crazy side holding power every 12-16 years or so. And when the crazies get in power, they do... Well, crazy things.
In all honesty, most human beings operate on emotion and feelings, which is why you get the world we have today, where countries around the world are panicking over COVID and stripping away their citizens rights and most people are willing to obey their government, after their government (specifically, politicians) failing them time and time again.
So no, people operating on emotions and feelings is not a political thing. Most humans have this flaw about them. Very few of them seem to use common sense and logic. - 5.4K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
I'd replace "common sense" with "pragmatism" or "historical precedent." When under scrutiny, failures from the right tend to stem from looking at an issue as an if ___ then ____ (logic), which may achieve the primary goal, but often leads to other, unplanned problems because they wanted the simplest solution. Cookie-cutter solutions are really a pipe dream though as the more complex dynamics of economics and infrastructure evolve, even if they are mostly (>51%) successful.
The liberal take is 100% accurate though, because it relies heavily on shock value and knee-jerk reactions without context and often in spite of precedent; decisions that seem right in the heat of the moment, but rarely work out as advertised because they aren't based on tried and true methods or were never really about solving the problem anyway. The Democratic doctrine right now is to pretty much milk every crisis for every drop of power they can, and has been the case at least as far back as the Great Depression, which gives very little incentive to actually solve a problem but instead exploit emotional reactions to achieve other ends, more often than not falling back on the Republican pitch (or a modification of it) when it has run its course, and claiming it was their idea in the first place. This is actually happening in real time right now in regards to COVID as the chosen narrative continues to shift. - 639 opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
That is the most fatuous and ridiculous claim ever. Maybe in world history. Anyone who knows logic. I mean actually studies it. Studies argumentation. Claims, Evidence, Warrants. Can tell in two minutes that so called conservatives are the biggest suckers on planet earth.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/AEHysSqrcAE
They live for the herd. Appeal to emotions. Appeal to popularity. Appeal to law. Appeal to belief. Fallacy of Composition. Appeal to Fear. Appeal to tradition. Ad hominem. Division. Black and White thinking. Putting the burden of proof on everyone but themselves. They are the most illogical pack of imbeciles ever to howl at the moon.
They lose their minds when anyone doesn't walk, talk, act, speak and think EXACTLY like them. They hate communism but act like a bunch of commies. They always think they are right. Everyone who disagrees with them is wrong, and not just wrong, but inhumanly stupidly wrong. It is the biggest pile of psychological projection on the planet.
Conservatives live in their rarefied terrarium. They never engage in argumentation. Actual real arguments. They rely solely on insults, mockery, gaslighting and loudmouth intimidation. I mean conservatives are "logical" only if you stay inside their little lunatic asylum. They long ago lost any connection to Burke or Locke or Adam Smith much or any "logic" associated with their so called conservative tradition. They're closer to Nazis now.
I'm not saying modern US liberals are heads up better in many ways at all. But the claim that conservatives are Logical may be the biggest joke in the history of humanity. -
Strongly disagree. Sociologists, statistics, and empirical data prove that minorities are put at great disadvantage, but conservatives don't feel this to be true, so they vehemently deny it and forbid the teaching of it.
Climate change has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, but again, conservatives do not feel this to be true, so they deny it.
Covid-19 is a serious issue being tackled by every government in the world. Conservatives didn't feel it was true, so they began by denying the existence of it, and when they could no longer do that, they moved on to denying the statistical data regarding covid vaccinations and covid hospitalizations.
Biden won the election, and the votes were counted, recounted, and certified by all 50 states. States where the race were close were recounted a third time and carefully combed through for signs of fraud. None was found. But conservatives don't feel that they could be wrong, so they continue to deny that there was no widespread voting fraud, despite there being no evidence to support their feeling.
It's proven that nations that do not have access to guns have lower rates of crime and violence. Conservatives feel that if they didn't have guns, guns would somehow magically appear and people would suddenly start coming after them. There is no evidence to support this feeling, but they still fight hard for access to guns anyway, despite frequent mass shootings (many of which occur in schools).
I could go on and on and on. Conservatives are driven purely on feelings. Facts anger them, so they deny anything that doesn't align with what they already believe. No matter how much evidence repeatedly proves them wrong. -
Moderates use common sense and logic.
Those at either end of the political spectrum use emotion and feelings - just not the same ones.
Conservatives, as the name implies, don't want change (and in fact, would quite like to reverse many of the changes made in the last century), and so they mainly use fear, paranoia and anger. The immigrants will steal your jobs! The black people will rape your daughters! That sort of thing. Naturally, they also use a lot slippery slope arguments - a small change might not sound so bad, but it's bound to lead to a much bigger and worse change soon!
Liberals on the other hand, do want change, and so they have to demonstrate that there is a problem to begin with; that people are suffering because of something that needs to change, which generally involves appeals to sympathy. They also need to demonstrate that there is a better alternative that could work, which means appealing to people's hope, optimism and perhaps naivety. 
People that go around discrediting things (values, emotions, beliefs) that don't conform to 'logic' are the same people that make poor road trip companions.
I'm not going to argue about the empirically shortest route. Assuming the GPS is actually correct, we can assume for context that the 2-3 provided routes are 'facts.'
Now the person who espouts only 'logic' often only continues on believing that (the best route) = the shortest route (a). Wherein, (the best route) = infinite options (ex. Route with most ice cream shops).
To reach a constructive compromise, both parties must combine and refine definitions of "the best route" in a way that is suitable to both parties in play.
Ex. The best route = the shortest distance (the most fuel efficient) which also passes the most ice cream shops a (min of 4 and max of 6).-
I disagree. Liberalism/Austrian economics is extremely logical and understands that society is made up of individuals with their own self interest. Communists who pretend to be liberals however are very emotional and flock oriented... Fear and delusions drive much of their decision making. Conservatives are also emotionally oriented in their religious beliefs. The communist worship the state and the conservative worships their God and both want to blanket their worship over everyone regardless of their individual interests.
-
I voted "A".
I am biased in many ways. Logic and common sense have been the rule and guide of my life. I have always put my trust in thinking, education, and logical resolutions to the problems of life, living, and the pursuit of satisfaction there-in.
As a conservative, I tend to favor individual responsibility and smaller, limited government. The Constitution is a limit on government, so by nature it is a conservative document, and one that I support.
There are websites available that explain the difference between liberal and conservative much better than can I, given the size limitations of the GaG posting system.
One of them is:
Conservative Vs. Liberal - 8 Key Differences (differencecamp. com)
My logic and sense agree with the linked list among other similar thought sites. Therefore, I consider myself conservative. -
I think everyone uses emotion to drive their sense of values and judgments. The biggest difference I find between conservatives and liberals is accountability. Liberals tend to lean on society between accountable for the homeless person and conservatives tend to lean on the homeless person being accountable for being homeless. Conservatives tend to lean on the idea that wealthy people earned their income, and liberals tend to lean more towards the idea that they somehow stole or inherited it all.
-
Gender divide on this one. Smdh.
Easy to go down the rabbit hole on this. But it all comes down to two categories of people: this who care about BEING right and those who care about WHAT is right.
Nowadays more often then not I see leftists being the former. They don’t want to debate. They see debate as hate. Don’t believe me? Then why is leftists are much more likely to avoid being friends with, dating or even associating with people of differing views? Who usually throws out insults and labels first? Who tries to censor and cancel more? - 8.5K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
... xD lmfao no, both of those groups are some hyper emotional dipshits. One focuses on stupid crap like perpetually being offended over movies from the 80s, and the other gets so goddamn emotional over stupid shit like flags and anyone that cries while talking about Jesus.
Fucks sake, it's embarrassing, but also funny. Keep it up guys. -
They use it to stay in office they use it to keep us confused if you really stand back and listen to each one of them has to say they all want the same thing they just say it different that's all if they can keep us confused then they can keep doing what they're doing and that's getting away with fucking murdered it's a form of manipulation but really listen to what they have to say they want the same thing they just said differently that's all and they use emotion behind it to keep us confused
-
To an extent. Liberals tend to attack the character or their adversaries. Republicans tend to attack the policies of their adversaries. Confirmation bias is prominent in anyone’s political theology, but I’m almost certain this isn’t just entirely my confirmation bias. I see it time and time again. This is a perfect example I saw the other day.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/IXyP-H80puQ -
Liberals live in an echo chamber, similar to a cult. Liberals believe they are intellectually, morally and spiritually superior to everyone else, because that's what their echo chamber tells them. Because of that, their view of the world revolves around them and the way they feel. They're never compelled to self analyze why they believe the things they do because perfect people don't need to do that. Conservatives don't have the luxury of an echo chamber, so their opinions tend to form naturally by being inquisitive, asking questions and challenging narratives. Liberals tend to have the same opinions with little to no deviation. Having an individual thought is discouraged. Conservatives can have differing opinions on various topics because not being in a cult allows them to form their own opinions.
-
I agree, that is why most conservatives are male while most women (especially feminists) are liberals.
but of course we are never gonna get a straight answer out of this cause liberals claim that their believes are common sense and logic itself
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions