Is there any valididity to the recent study that conservatives are likely to read opposing arguments?

We're forced to watch liberal nonsense every time we turn on t.v., regardless of what channel it is. We have to see Obama's face slapped on the cover of every magazine in the grocery store. It's everywhere.

Is the study valid? I don't know, the story didn't go deep enough into their methodology or analytical methods and yes, I did click on the link that went to the full story. I know that this is probably valid enough to get a psychology or sociology professor a large grant and the grad students who do the work a couple of papers and their PhD's. I would say that 156 students who only spent 5 minutes on the computer would not be a large enough, or long enough, sample to draw a definitive conclusion. I can think of multiple ways to make this study better, but I'm an engineer, not a shrink. It's interesting as a preliminary result used to generate further funding. One weakness of the study that I see is that both viewpoints were given equal likelihood of being chosen. What if the subjects had to search for stories? What sites would they go to, and what would they decide to read then? Monitoring student's personal computer access over a semester or school year would give a better result.

Oh, here's the link for the full story quoted in your link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090608/sc_li...

I doubt a link like "hotair.com"... (which, coincidentally, the first pop-up to show when I clicked the link was Ann Coulter) is exactly a non-biased source. Anyway, probability is an inductive argument so the term validity doesn't apply. Also, even if you consider yourself to be a part of that statistic, it proves nothing. Statistics literally have no meaning when speaking of individuals.

I mean none of this as a blow against you or your thoughts in any way... I'm simply telling you how these things work.

With extremely few exceptions, the self identified conservatives on this site don't.

In fact, most of the conservatives I know (all on the West Coast) don't tend to read about politics at all, generally they keep abreast of the news by television and radio.

Not any Conservative that I've met so far; and I live in South Carolina, so I come across quite a few of them.

But I have not met one that is willing to read or listen to anyone else that does not fit in specifically with what they believe. So far, they won't even read something that does agree with their stances, but is seen as a "Liberal" idea--such as the Qu'ran.

The Qu'ran teaches much the same as the Bible does, is against abortion, is no more bloody than the Bible is, but also teaches peace and love for fellow humans. In essence, on every important value that matters to the Religious Right in particular, but all Republicans, the Qu'ran agrees with them.

They attack it anyway, because Liberals believe that Muslims should have the right to believe as they believe.

I have seen no effort on any part by the Republicans, in particularly the Religious Right (the most influential of Republicans on party lines), to learn anything about anyone else that disagrees with their beliefs in any way.

I saw that also, and I think it is true I know I read and listen to opposing views ! I think that by not doing so you're being very closed minded, and really not giving yourself a chance to form an educated opinion

People who say they don't read opposing arguments 'because it makes me laugh' really need to get a grip of their lives. I make an attempt to research both sides of every argument and some of the opposing arguments I find certainly don't make me laugh. I find them disturbing and wrong.

For example abortion: I'm 100% pro-choice and while forming my opinion I watched the silent scream, researched facts on conception and fetal heartbeat/pain awareness etc. I also read the religious propaganda websites that market themselves as neutral, for example abortionfacts, and anyone who finds the brainwashing and guilt-tripping of vulnerable women under the guise of religious do-goodery to be amusing needs their head looked at in my honest opinion.

To those people - stop trying to be flippant by saying opposing arguments are comedy to you, it simply comes across as poorly thought-out, arrogant and ignorant.

I prefer to get several angles of an argument and then form my own opinion - not be spoon-fed what I should think and believe by the talking heads on TV.

Absolutely. I'm a Christian, and as a Christian I love to read anti Christian books by authors such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Carl Sagan. Reading the oppositions books has only served to strengthen my faith and give me a better understanding of their twisted thinking. This applies to the politics side of my life as well, I read the oppositions books and watch them on TV, however I must say it's very hard to read and watch the opposition, because they seem to be more interested in personal attack than actual policy and content, but I watch them none the less. I was also once a radical liberal myself when I was a young man, so I have that experience as well. God bless.

Sure. It is important to know what the opposition is up to.

And sometimes I really learn a lot.

If this website is a barometer then no. Any legitimate questions are answered with knee-jerk snotty comments about socialism, muslims, pied pipers, and laziness.