Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Abhijit Naskar

Quote by Abhijit Naskar

Work

The Constitution of The United Peoples of Earth

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Abhijit Naskar

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Abhijit Naskar. more

You May Also Like

“Why didn't the Democrats accomplish more right after the 2006 elections that gave them control of Congress? It wasn't just that they didn't have votes to override a presidential veto or block a filibuster. They didn't use their mandate to substantially change how the public--and the media-- thought about issues. They just tried to be rational, to devise programs to fit people's interests and the polls. Because there was little understanding of the brain, there was no campaign to change brains. Indeed, the very idea of "changing brains" sounds a little sinister to progressives-- a kind of Frankenstein image comes to mind. It sounds Machiavellian to liberals, like what the Republicans do. But "changing minds" in any deep way always requires changing brains. Once you understand a bit more about how brains work, you will understand that politics is very much about changing brains-- and that it can be highly moral and not the least bit sinister or underhanded.”

PoliticsPsychologyPolitical Psychology
Book:The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
Create image

“It's fashionable among progressives to wonder why so many "red state" voters don't vote in their own economic interests. This is simply another symptom of 18th-century rationalism, which assumes that everyone is rational and rationality means seeking self-interest. [...] People are not 18th-century reason machines. Real reason works differently. Reason matters, and we have to understand how it really works.”

Political PsychologyPoliti
Book:The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
Create image

“The brain is not neutral; it is not a general-purpose device. It comes with a structure, and our understanding of the world is limited to what our brains can make sense of. Some of our thought is literal- framing our experience directly. But much of it is metaphoric and symbolic, structuring our experience indirectly but no less powerfully. Some of our mechanisms of understanding are the same around the world. But many are not, not even in our own country and culture.”

Political Psychology
Book:The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
Create image

“The brain is not neutral; it is not a general-purpose device. It comes with a structure, and our understanding of the world is limited to what our brains can make sense of. Some of our thought is literal- framing our experience directly. But much of it is metaphoric and symbolic, structuring our experience indirectly but no less powerfully. Some of our mechanisms of understanding are the same around the world. But many are not, not even in our own country and culture. Our brains and minds work to impose a specific understanding on reality, and coming to grips with that can be scary, that not everyone understands reality in the same way. That fear has major political consequences. Since the brain mechanisms for understanding reality are mostly unconscious, and understanding of understanding itself becomes a political necessity.”

Political Psychology
Book:The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
Create image

“Since language is used for communicating thought, our view of language must also reflect our new understanding of the nature of thought. Language is at once a surface phenomenon and a source of power. It is a means of expressing, communicating, accessing, and even shaping thought. Words are defined relative to frames and conceptual metaphors.”

Political Psychology
Book:The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
Create image

“Democracy is illogical at the moment, because the masses are not qualified to choose anything. If they are given the choice to elect either a lesser known scientist or a pop-star, who do you think the majority of them would elect? Isn’t it obvious? Now the real question is - is this kind of democracy, where the majority most proudly and happily choose glamour over wisdom, really a progressive system?”

GovernmentDemocracyPolitical Psychology
Author:Abhijit Naskar
Create image