The Psychology Behind Talking Politics.

Published

Noting patterns in behavior is one way in which we can predict future behaviors. To be able to predict future behaviors allows us to plan our reaction thereby giving us a sense of security.

I've noticed some behavioral patterns here on this website, and one of the most recent ones is congregation. Where once the most heavily trafficked forum was General Nursing, one of the most heavily trafficked areas is now Politics.

I get this data through empirical endeavors. For example, a recent thread in General Nursing where I had submitted a post sat at the most recent post position for 5 1/2 hours. Politics rarely sit without a new post being submitted for more than an hour. As example, this morning, Politics had been posted on less than 30 minutes earlier.

Why the shift in interest from Nursing to Politics on a nursing website?

Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).

This Friday is National Retirement Day!

Specializes in Med-Surg.

Happy Retirement Day!  I hope to join your ranks in about five years!

I think when the other side for politics closed down and some of us regular political posters came over here that's when the increase in traffic occurred in the political forums.  It's not that it's suddenly increased it's that it moved from one website to here. That and that my self-imposed break from talking Politics ended a few days ago and I've posted a lot.  ?

In my opinion.

Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).

If Labor Day is a Holiday, then Retirement Day needs to be a labor day.

It's one of the he bad things about retirement. We don't get a day off from it.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Davey Do said:

If Labor Day is a Holiday, then Retirement Day needs to be a labor day.

It's one of the he bad things about retirement. We don't get a day off from it.

I don't mind most of my labor now. It's mostly done on my schedule, my way.  I rarely need a day off from doing what I want.  

7 hours ago, heron said:

Davey … my life experience isn’t hearsay.


You are of course absolutely correct.

 

I must confess that I don’t understand what ”the majority of knowledge in talking politics” that Davey referenced, even is?! What it is exactly that has to be experienced empirically in order to not be hearsay he said/she said? What does that even mean? 

If you follow current news/affairs and study history you gain knowledge about politics. By simply being alive each and every one of us experience it, or its effects, every day. When you listen to and talk to other people, you gain insight into their feelings anf thought processes. 

For example, one certainly didn’t have to be physically present at the Capitol on January 6 last year to realize that Democracy and the Rule of Law are under attack. It was obvious even from across the Atlantic Ocean. I don’t understand what the he said/she said thing is all about. 
 

Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).

Empirical knowledge is knowledge gained through direct observation. There's a great discussion about this in this thread:

Social Media’s Impact on Health Information: What Can Nurses Do? - General Nursing, Support, Stories - allnurses

The word hearsay was never used in conjunction with anyone's life experiences.

Specializes in Travel, Home Health, Med-Surg.

I enjoy talking politics (and always have) with people and hearing different perspectives and opinions. Been doing it for years in person. Just don’t like it on this site for a few different reasons! In person people tend to use their manners a bit more and are more prone to having a actual discussion, vs just being argumentative. In person discussions are much better than living/having an echo chamber with a few people who agree with each other.  Maybe more people are involved on the political side because they are bored with the nursing side and/or they just like the drama, IDK. 
 

Happy Retirement Day, DD!!

9 minutes ago, Davey Do said:

Empirical knowledge is knowledge gained through direct observation.


I know what the word empirical means. 

You started this thread and I’m assuming that you thought the statement that ”the majority of knowledge in talking politics” isn’t empirically learned, was a point worth making? What bearing on the discussions in this forum do you think it has? 

I’m curious, is having watched the insurrection at the Capitol on TV hearsay? Or is that sufficiently empirical to be able to have an opinion about the incident?

And I still don’t understand the he said/she said argument.

Specializes in Travel, Home Health, Med-Surg.
4 minutes ago, macawake said:


I know what the word empirical means. 

You started this thread and I’m assuming that you thought the statement that ”the majority of knowledge in talking politics” isn’t empirically learned, was a point worth making? What bearing on the discussions in this forum do you think it has? 

I’m curious, is having watched the insurrection at the Capitol on TV hearsay? Or is that sufficiently empirical to be able to have an opinion about the incident?

And I still don’t understand the he said/she said argument.

If the definition of empirical knowledge is having direct observation than I would say no you do not have empirical knowledge because you only saw a very brief snippet of the entire protest/riot/insurrection ( what ever one calls it), and it was only which clips and commentary the media decided to put on their show (not direct knowledge gained through observation).  There are literally thousands of hours on tape that the gov will not release. But of course we all can form our own opinion based on that TV news show. 

Specializes in Public Health, TB.

I rather enjoy the political discussions on this forum because of opinions from different regions and countries! 

We limit political discussions at work, and other than family, who mostly agrees with me, I don't really get to interact with others whose view point differs from mine. 

I do find it boring however, when posters repeatedly post the same talking points, as if you can convince others by constantly ragging on some half-truth or label. 

Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).

This forum inspired me to make a few political ink stamps.

 

WIN_20220905_16_36_54_Pro.jpg.8a7d23b120c7e466b42e799871ce7136.jpg

Specializes in Med-Surg.
3 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

If the definition of empirical knowledge is having direct observation than I would say no you do not have empirical knowledge because you only saw a very brief snippet of the entire protest/riot/insurrection ( what ever one calls it), and it was only which clips and commentary the media decided to put on their show (not direct knowledge gained through observation).  There are literally thousands of hours on tape that the gov will not release. But of course we all can form our own opinion based on that TV news show. 

I don't know what tapes you're referring to, but the news media was covering live when it happened all day, including when it was peaceful.  Also many people were covering it on their social media sites.  But yes, in the follow up they only showed the sensational.  There might be a case that the committee investigating Trump is showing only those that support their theory and case.  But it is compelling.  But I'm not buying into a conspiracy theory that the government is hiding thousands of hours of evidence that makes the insurrection look like anything other than what it was.

I imagine the "thousands of hours of tapes" were reviewed by the committees and law enforcement agencies investigating the day.  Many convictions were made.  

But I agree that yes, for the most part, the things I and others, and I venture you too, discuss about politics, and form opinions about, isn't from direct observation, it's from where we get our information.  

One of the things I like about these forums is that I get a lot of information here.  

+ Join the Discussion