Politična biologija in nevroznanost sta zanimivi znanstveni disciplini. Poskušata ugotoviti ali so razlike v političnem (ideološkem) dojemanju sveta pogojene z biološkimi razlikami. Da pač naši možgani določene informacije različno sprocesirajo in zaradi tega različno reagiramo na družbene pojave in na določene javne osebnosti. Da na vse pretege poskušamo racionalizirati stališča ali odnos do oseb, za katere nam naši možgani pošiljajo “pozitivne” ali “negativne” signale. Priporočam v branje tale članek Lydie Denworth v Scientific American.
In 1968 a debate was held between conservative thinker William F. Buckley, Jr., and liberal writer Gore Vidal. It was hoped that these two members of opposing intellectual elites would show Americans living through tumultuous times that political disagreements could be civilized. That idea did not last for long. Instead Buckley and Vidal descended rapidly into name-calling. Afterward, they sued each other for defamation.
The story of the 1968 debate opens a well-regarded 2013 book called Predisposed, which introduced the general public to the field of political neuroscience. The authors, a trio of political scientists at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Rice University, argued that if the differences between liberals and conservatives seem profound and even unbridgeable, it is because they are rooted in personality characteristics and biological predispositions.