Are individuals diagnosed as pathological liars disproportionately more likely to identify with the political-ideological Left?
Pathological lying—also known as mythomania—is a serious mental disorder characterized by an uncontrollable urge to lie; it often entails long-term negative personal consequences, particularly in social interactions.
Evidence for the condition has moved beyond mere psychiatric symptom description; neurological correlates¹ (indicate a chemical imbalance in the brain—specifically a significant asymmetry in the density of white matter relative to gray matter -white matter connects the brain's various regions-. This imbalance would explain both the group's facility for fabricating stories and their progressive difficulty in distinguishing fact from fiction). and with potential psychometric evidence (studies¹ have found a correlation between a cognitive profile marked by a verbal IQ higher than performance IQ and pathological lying—which, in turn, would explain the group's "strength" in creating or elaborating narratives, that is, their excessively promiscuous relationship with language).
However, there is a major problem—one I am not sure others besides myself have noticed: the high degree of political subjectivity involved in determining what counts as a lie that can be psychiatrized or diagnosed as a symptom of a mental disorder. For while lies of a more personal nature are the ones most frequently cited as evidence—particularly for diagnosing pathological lying—those that tend to be more peripheral to the individual's identity (political, social, cultural) do not fall into this category. And that is where, in my opinion, a major problem lies; because this way of defining truth and falsehood through a psychiatric lens limits the capacity of psychiatry itself (and science in general) to identify other individuals exhibiting similar or identical disorders. After all, when we lie (or believe lies), we do not do so solely regarding personal facts, but also regarding matters to which we are attached—matters viewed as variably "secondary" depending on their proximity to our core identities. For instance, a "cisgender" person might adopt the trans-activist falsehood that "gender identification transcends biological sexual determination"—essentially the idea that a woman can be a man if she identifies as such, and vice versa. Similarly, a person who identifies as "trans" generally adopts this falsehood as a personal fact; the difference is that for them, it manifests as a personal reality, whereas for the "cisgender" person, it tends to appear as a secondary or "impersonal" fact—one that might even be adopted not as a true belief but as a "white lie" for the sake of "empathetic support" or even "political" reasons. Yet, this does not redeem the stance—especially from a rational perspective—if a fact continues to be denied in favor of a lie. It is also interesting to note how volatile this political imposition of "truth" can be; not long ago, the falsehoods of trans activism were not vying for hegemony against objective truths—quite the opposite, in fact, as they were viewed precisely as manifestations of mental insanity...
However, this tendency among many individuals who identify with the political-ideological Left to embrace falsehoods is not limited to the example of radical trans activism; they generally prefer believing what appeals to them emotionally over prioritizing facts above their subjective personal impressions. They employ numerous logical and moral fallacies, as well as factual distortions, to defend their viewpoints. This makes it seem almost inevitable that one might perceive a positive correlation between pathological lying and a left-wing political-ideological affiliation. Not that pathological liars cannot be found among those who identify with the Right—I do believe there is significant variation and disparity across the political spectrum. Yet, the phenomenon appears more significant—or statistically centered—within the Left itself, bordering on a foundational relationship. After all, even conservative religious fundamentalists do not deny certain extremely basic facts (often the most influential and important ones) in the way leftists do—even if the two groups might be considered comparable in their adherence to forms of ideological fundamentalism (a comparison that could arguably be applied to fanaticism regarding any other ideology).
Psychometric evidence of a positive correlation
Aside from the evidence itself contained in the various lies and half-truths
that predominate in leftist belief systems, there is also potential psychometric evidence of a positive correlation with pathological lying. As noted earlier, individuals with this disorder appear more prone to a cognitive profile marked by an asymmetry between verbal-linguistic intelligence and general intelligence—at least according to IQ tests. Specifically, they tend to show a higher verbal IQ than performance or general IQ—precisely the cognitive profile that appears common or disproportionately present among self-identified leftists, according to various studies finding a positive correlation between verbal IQ and left-wing political-ideological affiliation². It is also interesting to note the aesthetic-linguistic appeal of progressive narratives: an excessively sophisticated and even poetic use of language—investing words with an importance beyond what they ideally ought to carry (a phenomenon I have termed "semanticalism"). This may partly explain why some—or many—of the most "linguistically intelligent" individuals tend to identify politically with the Left...
Humanities professors, journalists, and artists—all professions with a strong ideological leaning toward the Left, and which are also more prone to exhibiting this verbal tilt...
ANOTHER group, and a stereotype "more recently" condemned by the media and other "traditional institutions" of the Western world...
What other group has been stereotyped—and for a much longer time in the past—as being "gifted in the art of lying"??
Yes, it is the Jews who have been persecuted for centuries—and, if those who feel strongly about this topic will forgive me, no persecution so historically extensive and constant occurs without some minimally logical reason. This holds true regardless of how unjust it may be to persecute an entire people without acknowledging exceptions or, at the very least, specifying the subgroups most closely linked to accusations—or even evidence—of criminal activity; it is akin to persecuting any Sicilian because of the Italian Mafia, which shares the same ethnic origin...
And—setting aside problematic, sweeping generalizations—the same potential indicators (drawn from everyday observations and psychometric data) suggesting a positive correlation between pathological lying and leftism also exist regarding this group, particularly its majority subgroup, the Ashkenazim. After all, Jews—especially their intellectual "elites"—have played a significant role in modern leftism, as well as in ideologies on the opposite end of the political spectrum, such as libertarianism. Even when they are not the original creators, they have actively participated in the philosophical distortion or warping of these ideologies—with rare, usually individual, exceptions that appear to seek enlightenment rather than distortion...
But why do they do this?
Their very own asymmetric cognitive profile (verbal IQ << performance IQ) might explain—at least partially—the correlation found between pathological lying and "Gentiles" (such as many, or perhaps the majority, of self-declared leftists of other ethnicities or races). This could also, in part, offer a form of exoneration—assuming this is one of the countless cases that likely exist among us—regarding an inability to exercise full "free will" or reflective judgment. This arises from a specific cognitive profile reflecting a dominant pattern of brain organization that may favor lying over truth, or excessive linguistic complexity over a clearer, more objective use of language...
A complementary explanation is that, as part of an ancestral cultural reflex, they learn to organize and rally around narratives (and lies) crafted by their "elites"—narratives designed to advantage them over other human groups (indeed, the majority of them?). This mirrors the dynamic seen in virtually every human group, where only a minority manages to transcend instinctive and learned cultural impulses—as well as the social or tribal structures that validate these impulses as reliable paths to individual comfort and/or collective support. The difference here lies in their high level of organizational or political cohesion, geared toward a struggle for hegemony against "outsiders" and underpinned by superior average intelligence. This inevitably raises the question of the extent to which they—on average—actually believe in the very narratives and lies they project to deceive, confuse, or indoctrinate other groups...
Furthermore, it is interesting to note the political-organizational similarities between leftists and Jews; both operate like political-ideological sects—not unlike sects stemming from any other ideological background, including... of course, the many organizations..typically conservative religious organizations... Yet these "two"¹ differ from other existing sects in the nature of their beliefs and in the levels and types of cognitive profile they exhibit...
¹ Exceptionally close...
Displaying this cognitive profile (verbal IQ >> performance IQ) does not necessarily indicate that one suffers from pathological lying.
Possessing the ability to craft narratives or stories, or to argue a point, does not necessarily imply a progressive inability to refrain from lying or to distinguish lies from facts or truths. While there is a correlation—in that a typical pathological liar tends to be an excellent storyteller—it does not follow that everyone with "verbal intelligence" asymmetrically superior to their "general intelligence" (or IQ) suffers from this disorder. However, it is possible or even probable that there is a disproportionate number of pathological liars—or individuals falling somewhere on that disorder's spectrum—among those with this profile; most remain undiagnosed for the political reasons mentioned earlier in the text. They simply go undiagnosed due to political-ideological convenience, which does not mean they are not more prone to inventing, believing, and/or spreading lies. Indeed, this is another crucial point: pathological lying is not limited to fabricating lies and believing them; it also involves a heightened vulnerability to believing lies invented by others—especially those perceived as personally advantageous—thereby conflating them with "personal facts" and potentially permanently corrupting one's capacity for moral and intellectual discernment...
Returning briefly to the statement in the third subheading and adding another potential claim: the very profile associated with the ability to craft (often convincing) narratives may also be the one that, when combined with other equally.intrinsic factors—specifically "non-cognitive" ones (personality traits)—that are nonetheless at odds with the mythomaniac profile, contribute to producing an opposite profile. This profile is likely linked to a superior linguistic capacity specifically suited to the factual description of elements—both concrete and abstract. It is a fundamental characteristic** which, when coupled with an excessively subjectivist* psycho-cognitive profile, undergoes a corruption of its own: it shifts from functioning as the sole ideal pathway for the objective expansion of understanding regarding the world and its phenomena, to serving instead as a cognitive support for the compulsive rationalization of one's own beliefs...
* I have previously sought to distinguish between two broad groups of linguistic capacities: the aesthetic and the functional. The aesthetic is directly reflected in one's manner of writing and speaking, while the functional is directly reflected in the use of language to understand the world and communicate effectively. I have also noted in other texts that correlations between high verbal IQ and certain ideologies—such as left-wing views—tend to relate specifically to the aesthetic aspects of language; after all, it makes little logical sense for someone who is heavily ideologically biased—and thus far more prone to corrupting their perception of the world—to exhibit healthy development of that capacity, given its inevitable link to language...
** Or a type of bias contrary to the one that drives the systematization of reason as a model of thought—based on my view that rationality itself is a form of subjectivizing perception, albeit one directed toward objectivity and impartiality; the type most...paradoxical
¹
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry/article/prefrontal-white-matter-in-pathological-liars/35A3EB7AA604A278BBEBDE6C1CB20DB2
²
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289624000709
Beyond the *g* factor: Verbal and performance IQ as predictors of sociopolitical attitudes
Highlights
•
Verbal IQ predicts political attitudes with twice the strength of performance IQ.
•
The importance of verbal IQ holds true even when comparing members of the same family.
•
Individuals with higher verbal aptitude are more likely to vote and report civic engagement.
•
The *g* factor is not the only component of cognitive abilities relevant to attitudes.
Abstract
Measures of intelligence predict sociopolitical attitudes and behaviors, such as liberalism, religiosity, and electoral participation. However, little is known about which cognitive abilities are responsible for these relationships. Using multiple cohorts from the *Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research*, we tested the predictive performance of different broad cognitive abilities. Through multiple regression comparing verbal IQ and performance IQ (derived from intelligence tests...
...Wechsler), we find that verbal IQ is a stronger predictor of voter turnout, civic engagement, traditionalism, and measures of ideology. On average, the correlation between verbal IQ and the sociopolitical attitudes analyzed is twice as strong as that observed with performance IQ. This pattern persists after controlling for educational attainment and after conducting a sibling-pair analysis. This implies that the relationship is neither fully mediated by education nor entirely confounded by upbringing or family environment factors. Positive and negative controls were employed to test the validity of our methodology. A key finding is that verbal IQ and performance IQ exhibit equivalent predictive power regarding the ICAR-16, a distinct measure of general intelligence. The results suggest that variations in cognitive abilities—independent (orthogonal) of general intelligence—influence sociopolitical attitudes and behaviors. The role of verbal ability in attitude formation may help explain the ideological leanings associated with specific professions. Its association with voter turnout and civic engagement suggests that individuals with higher verbal aptitude may exert greater influence on politics and society.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário