Monday, June 27, 2005

New neuro-con on the block

With a name like "Neuro-con," how could I not pay attention? He or she (I don't really know which at this point) is a new blogger who has chosen to remain anonymous for this reason.

Neuro-con is a conservative with a PhD. in psychology, working in the field of neuroscience research. I don't know whether Neuro-con is also a neocon--much less a neo-neocon--but I welcome Neuro's expertise in the field of research, as well as his/her stylish writing. (Neuro, please, are you a man or are you a woman, so I can quit this tedious he/she business already?)

See Neuro's take on that NY Times article about politics being at least partly genetic. I wrote about the topic briefly here, but Neuro has read both the Times article and the original research on which it was based, and therefore has some very interesting observations to add. Neuro also seems to be starting up what looks to be a series of posts on the topic of the politics of genetics.

Welcome, Neuro, to that small but stalwart group: the psycho-bloggers.


At 11:49 AM, June 27, 2005, Blogger goesh said...

Yeah, I found him via Shrinkwrapped. The problem with bloggers is there are just too many good ones.

At 12:36 PM, June 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You guys, with all of your reasoned and reasonable posts, might just get me to "believe" again in your "science". Odd as this post is (and as I am), it is a compliment made with a huge grin.

At 1:32 PM, June 27, 2005, Blogger goesh said...

Anonymous 1:36 - I have always voted the person and not the party, and always will. I find the Liberal approach, and much of the Democratic approach, to combatting islamic extremists not only inadequate, but dangerous. We don't have the luxary of taking the moral and political high ground anymore with these folks - they want us, our children and our way of life dead, and will not hesitate to use a suitcase nuke or dirty nukes. The Liberal mentality that gives the benefit of the doubt to known and proven enemies of this ilk cannot be allowed at this particular juncture to be predominant in our collective affairs.

At 7:27 AM, June 28, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Goesh, you misunderstand. I am and have always been at heart a conservative, though I have some amazingly liberal views. I have always voted Rebublican, even though secretly I wanted to be able to say to myself that I was balanced enough to have voted for a democrat. The only democrats for whom I have voted were state judges. I just never could find a democrat who, in my mind, merited my vote over his opponent. Contrast this with my wife who voted for Jessie among others and you have a fairly broad spectrum at home, but it seems that my oldest son inherited the conservative gene and I am forever explaining that his views (at 14 yrs) are his own and not representative of mine. I think that I disagree with you in that I believe that what we are doing in Iraq and elsewhere constitutes taking the moral and political high ground. Anywho, my anonymous comment was directed at the post which was about practitioners of the psychological arts, a science which I have invariably prefaced with "pseudo" in the past, never without a smile, but always more than a little serious. Although there is truth in each of these statments, you can just as easily supply a smiley face after each sentence.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger