3.8 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biology and political orientation | 3/3 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_political_orientation | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T15:50:05.051352+00:00 | kb-cron |
== Evolutionary psychology == From an evolutionary psychology perspective, conflicts regarding redistribution of wealth may have been a recurrent issue in the ancestral environment. Humans may therefore have developed psychological mechanisms for judging their chance of succeeding in such conflicts which will affect their political views. For males, physical strength may have been an important factor in deciding the outcome of such conflicts. Therefore, a prediction is that males that have high physical strength and low socioeconomic status (SES) will support redistribution while males that have both high SES and high physical strength will oppose redistribution. Cross-cultural research found this to be the case; for females, their physical strength had no influence on their political views. A study on political attitudes among Hollywood actors found that, while the actors were generally more left-leaning, male actors with great physical strength were more likely to support the Republican stance on foreign issues and foreign military interventions. An alternative evolutionary explanation for political diversity is that it is a polymorphism, like those of gender and blood type, resulting from frequency-dependent selection. Tim Dean has suggested that we live in such a moral ecosystem whereby the advantage gained by having any one particular moral strategy diminishes as it becomes very common, causing evolution to produce individuals with a diversity of moral strategies. Alford et al. posit that political variation could offer groups different strategies of solving problems, thus variation is maintained by virtue of being adaptive at the group level.
== Criticism == Studies linking genes and biology with political ideology have been criticised. Evan Charney publishing in Perspectives on Politics argues that Alford et al.'s research is methodologically flawed, their data does not support their conclusions, and the creation of 'liberal' and 'conservative' 'phenotypes' is untenable. Furthermore, Doron Shultziner has also criticised the methodology and interpretation of twin studies used in the research supporting a connection between genetics and political ideology; arguing that identical twins are more likely to have similar political views is because they react to the environment in the same way. Shultziner further argues that the usage of the term "heritable" in the research has been questionable.
== See also == Biology and political science Biological determinism Genopolitics Neuropolitics
== References ==
== Further reading == "Study that links Biology to politics". "JSTOR." "Some Politics May Be Etched in the Genes". The New York Times. "Political Views Reflected in Brain Structure". ABC News "Liberals and conservatives don't just vote differently. They think differently." The Washington Post "Body politic. The genetics of politics. Slowly, and in some quarters grudgingly, the influence of genes in shaping political outlook and behaviour is being recognised". The Economist, October 6, 2012. Hatemi, Peter K.; Medland, Sarah E.; Klemmensen, Robert; Oskarsson, Sven; Littvay, Levente; Dawes, Christopher T.; Verhulst, Brad; McDermott, Rose; Nørgaard, Asbjørn Sonne; Klofstad, Casey A.; Christensen, Kaare; Johannesson, Magnus; Magnusson, Patrik K. E.; Eaves, Lindon J.; Martin, Nicholas G. (May 2014). "Genetic Influences on Political Ideologies: Twin Analyses of 19 Measures of Political Ideologies from Five Democracies and Genome-Wide Findings from Three Populations". Behavior Genetics. 44 (3): 282–294. doi:10.1007/s10519-014-9648-8. ISSN 0001-8244. PMC 4038932. PMID 24569950.