Exercise History And Attitude Questionnaire: Fill & Download for Free

Scope of Psychology:The field of psychology can be understood by various subfields of psychology making an attempt in meeting the goals of psychology.1. Physiological Psychology:In the most fundamental sense, human beings are biological organisms. Physiological functions and the structure of our body work together to influence our behaviour. Biopsychology is the branch that specializes in the area. Bio-psychologists may examine the ways in which specific sites in the brain which are related to disorders such as Parkinson’s disease or they may try to determine how our sensations are related to our behaviour.2. Developmental Psychology:Here the studies are with respect to how people grow and change throughout their life from prenatal stages, through childhood, adulthood and old age. Developmental psychologists work in a variety of settings like colleges, schools, healthcare centres, business centres, government and non-profit organizations, etc. They are also very much involved in studies of the disturbed children and advising parents about helping such children.3. Personality Psychology:This branch helps to explain both consistency and change in a person’s behaviour over time, from birth till the end of life through the influence of parents, siblings, playmates, school, society and culture. It also studies the individual traits that differentiate the behaviour of one person from that of another person.4. Health Psychology:This explores the relations between the psychological factors and physical ailments and disease. Health psychologists focus on health maintenance and promotion of behaviour related to good health such as exercise, health habits and discouraging unhealthy behaviours like smoking, drug abuse and alcoholism.Health psychologists work in healthcare setting and also in colleges and universities where they conduct research. They analyse and attempt to improve the healthcare system and formulate health policies.5. Clinical Psychology:It deals with the assessment and intervention of abnormal behaviour. As some observe and believe that psychological disorders arise from a person’s unresolved conflicts and unconscious motives, others maintain that some of these patterns are merely learned responses, which can be unlearned with training, still others are contend with the knowledge of thinking that there are biological basis to certain psychological disorders, especially the more serious ones. Clinical psychologists are employed in hospitals, clinics and private practice. They often work closely with other specialists in the field of mental health.6. Counselling Psychology:This focuses primarily on educational, social and career adjustment problems. Counselling psychologists advise students on effective study habits and the kinds of job they might be best suited for, and provide help concerned with mild problems of social nature and strengthen healthy lifestyle, economical and emotional adjustments.They make use of tests to measure aptitudes, interests and personality characteristics. They also do marriage and family counselling, provide strategies to improve family relations.7. Educational Psychology:Educational psychologists are concerned with all the concepts of education. This includes the study of motivation, intelligence, personality, use of rewards and punishments, size of the class, expectations, the personality traits and the effectiveness of the teacher, the student-teacher relationship, the attitudes, etc. It is also concerned with designing tests to evaluate student performance. They also help in designing the curriculum to make learning more interesting and enjoyable to children.Educational psychology is used in elementary and secondary schools, planning and supervising special education, training teachers, counselling students having problems, assessing students with learning difficulties such as poor writing and reading skills and lack of concentration.8. Social Psychology:This studies the effect of society on the thoughts, feelings and actions of people. Our behaviour is not only the result of just our personality and predisposition. Social and environmental factors affect the way we think, say and do. Social psychologists conduct experiments to determine the effects of various groups, group pressures and influence on behaviour.They investigate on the effects of propaganda, persuation, conformity, conflict, integration, race, prejudice and aggression. These investigations explain many incidents that would otherwise be difficult to understand. Social psychologists work largely in colleges and universities and also other organizations.9. Industrial and Organizational Psychology:The private and public organizations apply psychology to management and employee training, supervision of personnel, improve communication within the organization, counselling employees and reduce industrial disputes.Thus we can say that in organizational and industrial sectors not only the psychological effects of working attitude of the employees are considered but also the physical aspects are given importance to make workers feel healthy.10. Experimental Psychology:It is the branch that studies the processes of sensing, perceiving, learning, thinking, etc. by using scientific methods. The outcome of the experimental psychology is cognitive psychology which focuses on studying higher mental processes including thinking, knowing, reasoning, judging and decision-making. Experimental psychologists often do research in lab by frequently using animals as their experimental subjects.11. Environmental Psychology:It focuses on the relationships between people and their physical and social surroundings. For example, the density of population and its relationship with crime, the noise pollution and its harmful effects and the influence of overcrowding upon lifestyle, etc.12. Psychology of Women:This concentrates on psychological factors of women’s behaviour and development. It focuses on a broad range of issues such as discrimination against women, the possibility of structural differences in the brain of men and women, the effect of hormones on behaviour, and the cause of violence against women, fear of success, outsmarting nature of women with respect to men in various accomplishments.13. Sports and Exercise Psychology:It studies the role of motivation in sport, social aspects of sport and physiological issues like importance of training on muscle development, the coordination between eye and hand, the muscular coordination in track and field, swimming and gymnastics.14. Cognitive Psychology:It has its roots in the cognitive outlook of the Gestalt principles. It studies thinking, memory, language, development, perception, imagery and other mental processes in order to peep into the higher human mental functions like insight, creativity and problem-solving. The names of psychologists like Edward Tolman and Jean Piaget are associated with the propagation of the ideas of this school of thought.Methods of Psychology:Psychologists use many scientific methods for research purposes to understand various psychological issues more scientifically. These scientific methods reduce bias and errors in understanding various behavioural aspects.The relevance of these scientific methods extends beyond testing and evaluating theories and hypotheses in psychology. Though there are many such methods used by psychologists, each has its own advantages and disadvantages.Some of the important methods are:a. Introspection methodb. Observation methodc. Experimental methodd. Case study methode. Questionnaire methodf. Interview methodg. Survey methodA. Introspection Method:Introspection or self-observation may be considered as a old method but it is something we are doing almost constantly in our everyday life. Introspection is a method of studying the consciousness in which the subjects report on their subjective experiences. It is a method that requires long and difficult training. It gives in-depth information about the individual.In introspection, the subject is taught to achieve a state of “focused attention” in which he can closely observe his own conscious experiences. He will be able to report the smallest possible elements of awareness. Thus the goal of introspection is to learn about the basic building blocks of experience and the principles by which they combine to give us our everyday consciousness.Limitations:1. It is not possible to observe one’s own behaviour and at the same time experience it. If such an attempt is made, the experience disappears. Thus the subject has to depend upon memory which itself may be subject to distortions, omissions and commissions.2. The results obtained from introspection are subjective and so lack scientific validity. They cannot be verified and have to be accepted at face value.3. The method cannot be used to study children, animals, insane people, feeble­minded and those who are not good at verbal expression.4. Because experiences are unique, they cannot be repeated and so introspection cannot be repeated.5. Many experiences are either partly or wholly unconscious and cannot be observed consciously and analyzed.6. All experiences cannot be verbalized.B. Observation Method:This is the most commonly used method especially in relation to behavioural science, though observation as such is common in everyday occurrences, scientific observations are formulated in research places. It is systematically planned, recorded and is subjected to check and control its validity and reliability.In this method we not only ask the subject to report his experiences but also gather information by direct observation of overt behaviour. When observations are carried out under standardized conditions they should be observed with a careful understanding of the units, that is the style of recording observed information and the selection of dependent or related data of observation concerned, then it is called structured observation. But when observation takes place without these consideration it is called unstructured observation.Structured observation is useful in descriptive studies, while unstructured observation is useful in exploratory studies. Another way of classifying observation is that of participant and non-participant types of observation. In participant observation the observer makes himself a member of the group which is being observed.In non-participant observation the observer detaches himself from the group that is being observed. Sometimes, it so happens that the observer may observe in such a way that his presence is unknown to the people he is observing. This is called disguised observation.The method of participant observation has a number of advantages, the researcher can record natural behaviour of the group and he can gather information which cannot be easily obtained; if he stays outside the group, and also he can verify the truth of statements made by the subjects in the context of schedule or questionnaires.The other way of classifying observation is that of controlled and uncontrolled observations:a. Uncontrolled observation:It is that which takes place in natural setting. Here no attempt is made to use precautional instruments or methods. Here the major aim of this type of observation is to get a spontaneous picture of life of the persons.b. Controlled observation:In this, behaviour is observed according to definite pre­arranged plans involving experimental procedure. Here mechanical or precision instruments are used to aid accuracy and standardization. This provides formulized data upon which generalizations can be built with considerable accuracy. Generally, controlled observation takes place in various experiments which are carried out in labs under controlled conditions.Limitations:1. It is expensive with respect to time and money.2. The information’s provided by this method is very less or limited.3. Sometimes, unforeseen factors may interfere with observation.Merits:1. If observation is done accurately, subjective bias is eliminated.2. The information obtained under this method relates to current happenings. Either past behaviours or future intensions, do not complicate it.3. This method is independent of the subject willingness to respond and so does not require active participation of the subject. Because of this, the method is especially suitable to subjects which are not capable of giving verbal reports of their thoughts and feelings.Naturalistic observation method which is the systematic study of behaviour in natural settings, can be used to study the behaviour of animals which are in wild or in captivity. Psychologists use naturalistic observation whenever people happen to be at home, on playgrounds, in classrooms and offices.In observation method of studies, it is important to count or measure the behaviour. Careful record-keeping ensures accuracy and allows different observers to crosscheck their observations. Crosschecking is necessary to make sure that observations are reliable or consistent from person to person.C. Experimental Method:The experimental method is most often used in laboratory. This is the method of observation of the behaviour or the ability of the individual under controlled condition or fixed circumstances. It is the performing of an experiment that is a tightly controlled and highly structured observation of variables.The experimental method allows researchers to infer causes. An experiment aims to investigate a relationship between two or more factors by deliberately producing a change in one factor and observing its effect on other factors. The person who conducts the experiment is called the experimenter and the one who is being observed is called the subject.An experiment begins with a problem. Problem is the relationship which experimenter wishes to study between two or more variables. Then a hypothesis is formed; it is a suggested answer to the problem under investigation, based on the knowledge that existing in the field of study. To test the hypothesis, relationship between variables is examined. Variables are the factors that can change.There will be two variables. An independent variable is a variable that the experimenter selects. He can control this variable according to the requirements of the experiment. The dependent variable is the factor that varies with the change in the independent variable that is subject’s behaviour.Experimenters will not wait for the behaviour to occur in nature rather the behaviour will be created in situation by presenting a stimuli to the organism. The behaviour that occurs will be co-related with the stimulus.From this, it is possible to predict the nature and types of response or responses that may occur to a given stimulus. The changes observed in the dependent variable may be influenced by a number of factors. To establish a clear-cut relationship between a stimulus and response, all other possible influences must be eliminated.Conditions of Experimental Study:a. The control groupb. The experimental group.If experiment has to be successful, the subjects (patients/clients) must be selected carefully. This is called sampling. A random sample is one where every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. When this is not the case, the sample is said to be biased sample (manipulated). A random sample of entire population is not always necessary or even desirable.For instance, an experimenter may begin by conducting experiment on a particular population and then repeat the experiment on broader or more representative samples. Once the experiment has been conducted, the results have to be summarized and a conclusion drawn.a. Control group provides a base line against which the performance of experimental group can be composed.b. The group that receives the experimental treatment is called the experimental group (The group that receives no treatment is called the control group).Limitations:1. The situation in which the behaviour is studied is always an artificial one.2. Complete control of the extraneous variables is not possible.3. All types of behaviour cannot be experimented.4. Experimental method requires a laboratory and is expensive.5. We cannot accumulate information from abnormal people using this method.Merits:1. The results are clear and straight forward.2. The results are usually expressed in terms of numbers which makes it convenient for comparison of performance and analysis.3. The experiment can be replicated by other researches and verified.4. Highly dependable cause-effect relationships can be established.D. Case Study (History) Method:It is a detailed description of a particular individual. It may be based on careful observation or formal psychological testing. It may include information about the person’s childhood dreams, fantasies, experiences, relationships and hopes that throw light into the person’s behaviour.Case studies depend on client’s memories of the past and such memories are highly reliable to understand the problems. As case studies focus on individuals, so we cannot generalize about human behaviour.E. Questionnaire Method:Questionnaire is an instrument of data collection. It is a method of data collection through which both qualitative as well as quantitative data can be collected by formulating a set of interrelated questions.A questionnaire consists of a number of questions printed or typed in a definite order, one set of forms to which the respondents are supposed to answer unaided, by writing the answers in the space provided for the purpose. Where this questionnaire is mailed to the respondents instead of directly administering it is called a mailed questionnaire.This method of data collection is especially popular when large scale enquiries have to be made. The questionnaire is sent to the person concerned with a request to answer the questions. It consists of a number of questions printed in a definite order which the respondents have to answer. It is considered as the heart of survey operation. In order to construct a good comprehensive questionnaire, some points have to be kept in mind.They are:1. The general form2. The question sequence3. Question formulation and wording.1. The general form:This refers to whether the questionnaire is ‘unstructured’ or ‘structured’. Questionnaire which include definite, concrete and predetermined questions and highly structured questionnaire is one in which all questions and answers are specified and comments by the respondents are held to the minimum.In an unstructured questionnaire the researcher is presented with a general guide on the type of information to be obtained, but the exact question formulation is not set. Thus the structured questionnaires are simple to administer and relatively inexpensive to analyze.2. The question sequence:In order to make a questionnaire effective the question sequence must be clear and should have smooth flow. The relation of one question to another should be readily apparent to the respondent.The first few questions are particularly important, because they are likely to influence the attitude of the respondent. Questions which are causing very much strain on the memory, personal questions and questions related to personal wealth, etc. should be avoided.3. Question formulation and wording:Each question must be clear because any kind of misunderstanding can harm the survey. Questions must be impartial and constructed to the study, the true state of affairs. They should be simple, easily understood and concrete. They should convey only one thought at a time. They should conform as much as possible to the respondent’s way of thinking.Limitations:1. The method can only be used when respondents are literate and cooperative.2. The questionnaire is not flexible because there is no possibility of changing the questions to suit the situation.3. There is possibility of ambiguous responses or omission of responses to some questions.4. Interpretation of omissions is difficult.5. It is difficult to know whether the sample is really representative.Merits:1. When the sample is large, the questionnaire method is economical.2. It is free from the bias of the interviewer.3. Respondents have adequate time to give well though-out answers.4. Large samples can be used and so the results can be made dependable and reliable.F. Interview Method:This involves collection of data by having a direct verbal communication between two people. Personal interviews are popular but telephone interviews can also be conducted as well. This method is also called face to face method.In personal interviews an interviewer asks questions generally in a face to face contact with the person being interviewed. In direct personal interview, the investigator collects information directly from the sources concerned. This has to be used when intensive investigation is required.But in some cases, an indirect examination is conducted where the interviewer cross-examines other persons who are supposed to have knowledge about the problem under investigation. This is used where ever it is not possible to directly contact the required person to be interviewed.Types of Interview:a. Structured interview involves the use of predetermined questions and standardized techniques of recording. The interviewer follows a rigid procedure asking questions in a framed prescribed order.b. Unstructured interview is flexible in its approach to questioning. Here it does not follow the system of predetermined questions and standardized techniques of recording the data. Here the interviewer is allowed much greater freedom to ask supplementary questions or to omit some questions if required and he may change the sequence of questions.He also has a freedom while recording responses, whether to include some aspects and exclude others. This may lead to lack of comparability and also difficult in analyzing the responses.Other types of interviews are:i. Focused interviewii. Clinical interviewiii. Non-directive interview.i. Focused interview:In focused interviews the attention is paid on a given experience, and its effects on the respondent. This is generally used in developing the hypotheses and constitutes a major type of unstructured interview.ii. Clinical interview:In clinical interviews concern is given to the feelings or motivations of individuals life experiences. Here the interviewer simply encourages the respondent to talk about the given topic with a minimum of direct questioning.iii. Non-directive interview:The researcher acts as a catalyst to a comprehensive expression of the subject’s feelings, belief and of the frame, of reference within which such feelings which are expressed by the subjects personal significance.Limitations:1. It is a very expensive method.2. Interviewer bias as well as respondents bias may operate while gathering information.3. Certain types of respondents may not be available for interviews.4. This method is relatively time consuming.5. Because the interviewer is present on the spot, the respondent may become overstimulated and give imaginary information just to make the interview more interesting.6. Selecting, training and supervising the field staff is very complex.Advantages:1. More information about the subject can be obtained in greater depth. The interviewer can obtain a perfect idea about the subject through other means of assessing. As the person is directly accessible he can use other means of communication to assess the individual.2. First hand information can be collected about the subject’s background, economic and educational considerations.3. The overall personal aspect of an individual can also be assessed.G. Survey Method:This method involves in asking large numbers of individuals to complete the given questionnaires or through interviews by interviewing people directly about their experiences, attitudes or opinions.That is for example, survey on healthcare reform, or economic reform, voting preferences prior to elections, consumer reactions to various products, health practices, public opinion and complaints with safety regulations and so on. Surveys are often repeated over long period of time in order to trace the shifts in public opinion. Surveys can provide highly accurate prediction when conducted carefully.H. Testing Method:This method makes use of carefully devised and standardized tests for measuring attitudes, interest, achievement, intelligence and personality traits. Intelligence tests measure the intellectual capacity of an individual and achievement tests through light on achievement of student in various subjects they are studying.So by adopting all these methods, psychology collects information about behaviour, which helps us to study the behaviour systematically. There are the different methods used in psychology to study the behaviour.For more details you visitNotes on Psychology: Definition, Scope and Methods

Falklands secret: when France said enough to Margaret Thatcher"Alló, Monsieur President, "was Margaret Thatcher's greeting to François Mitterrand when answering his telephone call at nightfall on Saturday, April 3, 1982." I am calling you to express my solidarity. I do not want you to think that France, as a close friend and neighbor, is not with you, "the French president replied.After the British Prime Minister thanked her for the communication and commented on the difficult time her country was going through, Mitterrand said: "I want you to know that if there is anything we can do to help, we would like to do it. Of course, I know that Britain is big enough to find its own solutions to this problem. But it is important for you to know that others share its opposition to this type of aggression. "The French offer of help was like music to Thatcher's ears. This seemed to be a promising first step in the relationship between the two countries during the Malvinas conflict. France was a supplier of arms to the Argentine military regime, and military intelligence was eager to obtain as much information as possible.In her memoir The Downing Street Years, Margaret Thatcher recalled this conversation: "I was especially grateful to President Mitterrand who, along with the leaders of the Old Commonwealth, was among the stalwarts of our friends and who telephoned me personally on Saturday to pledge his support. . (…) I never forgot the debt we owed him for his personal support on this occasion and during the Falklands crisis. "A few years after the conflict ended, the then British Defense Minister, John Nott, described in his book Here Today, Gone Tomorrow how that support would materialize: "In many ways, Mitterrand and the French were our greatest In previous years we had equipped the Argentine Navy with destroyers, while the French had supplied them with Mirage and Super Etendard planes. The ships, especially the Belgrano, and the planes were equipped with modern Exocet missiles. " (Author's note: the cruiser ARA General Belgrano did not have Exocet missiles, but in a deception action in 1978 wooden drawers had been installed simulating the launchers of these missiles).In his June 30, 1982 report to the Foreign Office on France's attitude towards the Malvinas issue, the British ambassador in Paris, John Fretwell, noted: "The initial reaction of the French government was admirable. Mitterrand immediately ordered full support to Great Britain, an order that translated into French aid to establish the arms embargo and on trade from the European Community, and French support for Resolution 502. We received valuable practical information from the French armed forces related to the performance of French weapons systems in service with Argentine forces. Mitterrand deserves substantial credit for this reaction. I doubt if Giscard (or Chirac) would have responded so well. "President Mitterrand greeting Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on an official visit to FranceIt did not take long since the conversation between the leaders for the French Defense Minister, Charles Hernú, acting on Mitterrand's express instructions, got in touch with his British colleague to make a Super Etendard and a Mirage available, so that the Royal Air Force pilots could train and obtain valuable information while the Task Force ships headed towards the South Atlantic. The British eagerly awaited these trainings, as well as all the detailed technical information on the Exocet missile.On April 7 in the afternoon, one of the military attachés at the British Embassy in Paris was received in person by Hernú, who said that "we will do everything we can to help them with information since we are on their side", ratifying the commitment assumed by Mitterrand. Following this introduction, the British officer was taken to another office by two senior civil servants and invited to ask questions. Textually they were the following:A. Could the French give us the full list of military sales to Argentina and specify any modifications / limitations imposed on the systems?B. How many Super Etendards are modified to carry the AM-39; How many missiles do they have and what is their operational status?C. Do the Argentines have Crotale and / or Roland, and if so, how many systems and missiles?D. Radius of action of the Mirage 3 and 5, armament capacity, attack navigation system, probable index of operation, consumption of spare parts and known limitations, and aptitude of the Argentine pilots if they were trained by the French.At the end of the interview, the officials emphasized that their government supported "les Anglais" and that the answers would be ready for the following day at 7:00 p.m. The British officer stressed that all the information provided would be treated with the utmost discretion and that its source would not be revealed.Message of April 7, 1982 from the Defense Military Attaché at the British embassy in France, addressed to the Ministry of Defense, reporting the meeting where information was requested on weapons supplied to ArgentinaThat same day, the French Foreign Minister, Claude Cheysson, obtained the ratification and support of the Council of Ministers for the decision to impose an embargo on the supply of arms to Argentina, adopted immediately after the invasion and that was applied especially to contracts in execution course in relation to airplanes and missiles.On April 9, Cheysson telephoned his British counterpart, Francis Pym, to express his solidarity with the British and to let him know that he would be available at any time if they needed to call him. Pym appreciated the support received from the French, especially mentioning the Prime Minister's gratitude for the call she had received from President Mitterrand on April 3.On the basis of a coordinated exercise prior to the Argentine military operation over the Malvinas, but which was now taking on vital importance, the meeting was held between the aircraft of both countries. British crews of the 1st Fighter Squadron could train against the types of aircraft they would likely face in a few days. The Armée de l'Air sent two Mirage III BE aircraft to Coningsby Military Air Base from Dijon-Longvic on the morning of April 22. That day and the next, the two-seater Mirages carried out several missions against the GR3 Harriers, while three British Sea Harrier pilots from Naval Air Squadron 809 managed to fly, in turns, in the back seat of one of the Mirages. At least this gave them an opportunity to assess the Mirage's combat capabilities before coming face-to-face with it in the South Atlantic. Super Etendard planes from the French Aéronavale were also involved in the training, but they did not land in the UK, to avoid prying eyes noticing their presence.The relationship begins to strainEverything seemed to be in order between the two countries. Information flowed, exercises were carried out, trade and arms embargoes were maintained. However, a few minutes after 11 a.m. on May 4, an event would occur that would change the history and tactics of air-naval warfare. An Exocet missile struck the starboard side of the destroyer HMS Sheffield, causing it to sink a few days later as it was towed into safer waters.The French had assured the British that on April 2 their technicians received the instruction to suspend aid to Argentina, and that the Super Etendard-Exocet weapons system was not operational. In Great Britain, members of Parliament and some journalistic media began to raise doubts about the French attitude and loyalty, beginning the first resentments in the relationship.With that the inevitable happened. Information began to leak to newspapers on both sides of the English Channel.The French Defense Ministry's cabinet adviser, François Heisbourg, complained to the British naval attaché on the journalistic report of The Mail on Sunday of May 23, entitled "British pilots tested enemy aircraft", detailing French military aid to the United Kingdom. He insisted that the article cited that the information came from "a high-level source in the British Ministry of Defense", and that France was likely to have a storm with this.On the other hand, with the British actions in the South Georgia Islands at the end of April, it emerged that the frigate Lieutenant Alfredo Astiz had been taken prisoner. Immediately after the news was known, the French asked the British government for his extradition to make him appear in trials for his participation in the disappearance of the nuns Alice Domon and Lèonie Duquet. However, from the outset, the British assumed that they could not comply with the French request without violating the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war, so they decided to delay their response as long as possible.Cover of the Letter Rogatory delivered by Judge Philippe Texier to the British Government with the interrogation of Alfredo Astiz in relation to the illegal arrest and kidnapping of people with French nuns as victimsFrance insisted on requiring the delivery of the prisoner, so the delay in obtaining a concrete response only managed to further strain the relationship that was beginning to walk down a critical path. Finally, they had to settle for sending a questionnaire for the prisoner to be questioned by the British military police at the Sussex barracks.Peru enters the sceneAlthough the French had imposed an embargo on the delivery of Exocet missiles to Argentina, the British carried out an immense deployment of intelligence and espionage on a world scale aimed at preventing more missiles from reaching Argentine hands. Peru had a firm purchase order for AM 39 Exocet missiles pending delivery, and was now demanding their delivery from the factory.On May 13, the Defense Attaché at the British Embassy in Paris informed the Ministry of Defense, in response to a request the day before, that it had confirmed with Minister Hernú's cabinet that the Peruvian government had rented a plane to pick up at Chateauroux ordered four AM 39 missiles ready for delivery.Ministry officials confirmed that they had managed to stop the shipment, but asked how long the conflict was estimated to last, as they felt unable to delay delivery any longer or cancel it permanently. They argued that they would lose credibility as arms suppliers and that they risked a possible political tightening by showing that they did not trust Peru. Although the end-user certificates prevented the transfer of the missiles to other countries, these officials sought to justify that the Peruvian government knew well that if they did not know the conditions of the certificate they would risk a complete suspension of weapons delivery in the future. In addition, they ventured that with a Peruvian Secretary General in the United Nations, there would be no possibility for them to pass them on to the Argentines without compromising their person.In any case, they implied that the missiles would be sent by sea and that this would only be at the end of May, which clearly justified the question about the duration of the conflict.Meanwhile, on May 25, the Exocet would claim a new victory in the South Atlantic. Two missiles hit the container ship Atlantic Conveyor, causing the biggest logistical disaster of the campaign for the British. And the prospect of Argentina receiving more French missiles through Peru was unacceptable to Margaret Thatcher.A new call from MitterrandOn May 29, President Mitterrand telephoned the Prime Minister to discuss the problem of France's contract to supply Exocet missiles to Peru. He said that he had delayed the matter as long as he had promised and that a Peruvian ship had recently arrived in France to receive the missiles but had been fired empty. Now Peru was protesting to France for the breach of a signed contract, and anticipated that another ship would arrive next Tuesday.The Prime Minister asked if there was a condition in the contract that the missiles were not passed on to third countries. Mitterrand confirmed that this was the case and that naturally France would follow up. Thatcher replied that she had good reason to believe that Peru was offering extensive aid to Argentina and that it would be a very serious matter if the Exocets were delivered to Argentina via Peru. Mitterrand said he had little faith that Peru would observe the transfer ban.Mitterrand, for his part, went on to explain about the French problem with the breach of a contract and suggested that it would be several days before the missiles could be used against the British, assuming that the Peruvians transferred them to them. He insisted on having an idea of ​​how soon he could take Port Stanley, hoping that this would be the end of hostilities and that he wanted - if possible - to withhold delivery until then.It was then that the tone of the conversation changed. The Prime Minister expressed her great concern about the issue and that since they were speaking on an open line, she said that she preferred to send the President a message by other means.After the conversation, Margaret Thatcher discussed the issue with several of her cabinet colleagues and with the Chief of Defense Staff. All agreed that it was essential that the missiles be held for a longer period.It was then that it was decided to send a message to Paris to Ambassador Fretwell to deliver urgently to Pierre Bérégovoy, Secretary General of the Presidency, with the request that she immediately contact Mitterrand's knowledge. The Prime Minister had decided that her message should be strong in order to convince the president that the missiles should not leave France. The text was as follows:Dear Mr. President:1. You may have realized how seriously concerned I was about your phone call about the possible delivery of Exocet missiles to Peru. This afternoon I discussed the matter with my Cabinet colleagues most closely involved in the Falkland Islands dispute and with the Chief of Defense Staff.2. I must tell you that everyone was dismayed at the prospect of France delivering these missiles to Peru when, as you acknowledged, there can be no doubt that Peru will transfer them to Argentina. You will have seen since we talked about the resolution adopted in the Organization of American States, which specifically requires the States parties to provide the Argentine Republic with the support that each one considers appropriate to assist it in this serious situation. Peru would take it as a complete justification to pass the Exocets that you propose to deliver. They have already been employed with deadly effect against our ships.3. I understand the problem you are facing in relation to the contract with Peru, but I must ask you with all the emphasis and urgency within my reach, to find a means to delay the departure of these missiles from France for at least one month. Naturally, we would prefer that they not be delivered, but the next few weeks are going to be particularly crucial: we cannot be sure how fast operations to Port Stanley will be, or whether Argentina will accept a full ceasefire, even if they are forced to withdraw from the Falklands.4. I was very reassured when you told me in No. 10 that you had decided that the fulfillment of the Exocet contract would be delayed as long as necessary and, as you know, we have been very encouraged by the unconditional support of France both in public and in private. If this were known, as it surely will be, that now France is delivering weapons to Peru that will surely be passed on to Argentina to use against us, an ally of France, this would have a devastating effect on the relationship between our two countries. In truth, it would have a disastrous effect on the entire alliance. This is the last thing either of us would wish for. Consequently, I very much hope that for the moment you can find some way to keep these missiles in France.With best wishes, Margaret Thatcher.The message was delivered immediately, and Thatcher's harsh warning got Mitterrand to manage to delay the delivery of the missiles to Peru until July.Training for defense of the "Falklands"Produced the Argentine surrender in Argentine Port, the British accelerated the planning of the defense measures of the islands before the refusal of the formal declaration of the cessation of hostilities. Among these measures was the repair and extension of the air base runway to allow the operation of the F-4 Phantom fighter-bombers. These aircraft had been deployed to the island of Ascension, and now awaited the completion of the works in Malvinas to begin their deployment.The Argentine threat was still latent, and the Royal Air Force foresaw the need to reissue the training with French planes, this time for the Phantom pilots.On June 23, a request was raised to the Ministry of Defense with the idea of ​​qualifying a group of 16 pilots at Coningsby air base, with a minimum of 8 sorties, ideally 16, for each type of aircraft. The aircraft should be representative of those of the first line with the same radar signature and capabilities of the Argentine Air Force aircraft in the theater. In the Foreign Office consultation, the Defense Ministry requested "opinion on the political implications of these proposals, as the French could still be somewhat sensitive as a result of the note in The Mail on Sunday about their assistance in providing training for the Harriers. ".On July 3, the British Defense Attaché in Paris contacted General Bernard Capillon, Chief of Staff of the French Air Force to inquire "if it was possible to prepare an F4 detachment against Mirage / Super Etendard in the near future to air combat training ". The French general's response was encouraging, "but it should have political approval", and that he would have to apply to the Aéronavale for the Super Etendard, but that he considered there would be no problems to fix it.Perhaps by simple coincidence, or fulfilling Thatcher's omen that it would be publicly known if France delivered arms, while the delivery of the Exocet missiles to Peru was prepared, on July 25 the Sunday Times published a report by Isabel Hilton in It was stated that French experts continued to show Argentines how to use Exocet missiles even after the conflict began.The news hit public opinion hard and angered the French authorities. The report revealed that a team of nine French technicians from Dassault and Aérospatiale had assisted the Argentine Navy to prepare the Super Etendards for combat, collaborating and supervising the readiness of the Exocet missiles. More embarrassing was the mention that the president of Aérospatiale was General Jacques Mitterrand, brother of the president of France. "I am sure that Mr. Mitterrand will never have told Mrs. Thatcher, but in the bottom of her heart she must have been very, very happy," an Argentine naval officer told the British journalist."French team helped to adjust the killer Exocet", Report published by "The Sunday Times" on July 25, 1982, which provoked the fury of the FrenchIn a July 26 radio interview with Geoffrey Pattie, Under Secretary of State for Defense, about the Exocet controversy, journalist Chris Lowe posed a series of questions whose responses by the official compromised the French.Pattie said on the air that the French "sent planes for our Harriers to train against them before the Task Force left because we were not familiar, particularly with one of the two types of aircraft that the Argentines had. (...) Well, no. we were particularly familiar, in particular, with the Super Etendard, and the French Air Force was prepared to provide us with one of these aircraft to allow us to familiarize ourselves with the performance of that aircraft, so that our pilots knew exactly what to do and what not to do and, how I mean, that's the kind of activity one might expect from a friend and ally. " When asked if the French had worked for both sides, Pattie responded evasively, but without denying the information: "Well, those are… those are their words, not mine. I mean, I don't… ah… I repeat that the French government has stated its position. They refused to send any more weapons to Argentina or supply any personnel. If there were any people in Argentina who remained there, I am not in a position to say so. "It was then that Heisbourg, an adviser to the French defense minister, told one of the British military attachés in Paris that Hernú had been shocked by Mr. Pattie's recent remarks about French assistance to the Royal Air Force during the Malvinas crisis and considered it regrettable that a confidential topic had been mentioned publicly.Heisbourg said he hoped the Sunday Times affair would now be closed and that the investigation in France had now ended. Even though his government wanted to turn the page on the episode, French arms manufacturers had been singled out as the culprits, who felt they had been unfairly accused. The French official warned his interlocutor that the committed industrialists claimed to have elements that, if they were known, would divert the blame elsewhere.They privately alleged that during the conflict, an Italian firm that manufactured under license from a British company had supplied spare parts for the ejector seats of the Argentine Mirages; that a Rolls Royce team had already returned to Argentina to discuss the sale of aircraft turbines; and that the Argentine procurement mission posted from London had been established in Hamburg and was busy negotiating with German arms companies. There was considerable resentment in the French arms industry over what was seen as petty treatment by the British press after all the efforts made.The Sunday Times struck again. On August 1, it published a new report pointing out the omissions and doubts that remained after the denial of the French government, and that this did nothing more than confirm the original report. Under the title "Smokescreen in Paris" the newspaper editorial noted: "The official French statement on the report does not actually turn out to be a negative. Instead, it resorts to insults, using phrases such as 'wrong' and 'biased' , without indicating the supposed errors and prejudices. The French authorities should have acted with better elegance if they had admitted in them duplicity or incompetence. Those are the only two conclusions to draw ".But patience had a limit. The French Defense Minister had decided to postpone the training with planes from both countries without date.On August 4, the Deputy Chief of the French Defense General Staff, Air General Jean Paul Arbelet, personally visited the Defense Attaché at the embassy in Paris to explain the decision taken by Hernú. It was directly motivated by The Sunday Times saga of articles on French aid to Argentines and the failure of the British government to deny the claims contained therein.Arbelet explained that Hernu was very upset with Mr. Pattie's statements revealing that the Super Etendards had been available for training with the British Harriers prior to their departure to rejoin the Task Force. Hernú saw it as a breach of trust and a deliberate attempt to compromise France's arms trade with South America.Ambassador Fretwell sent his suggestion to the Foreign Office: "I'm not sure we can to persuade Hernú to change his mind after he has formally communicated his decision to us through the Defense Attaché, but you could consider with the Ministry of Defense if a ministerial message could be sent explaining again the context in which Mr. Pattie spoke and expressing the hope that air combat training can be re-established at an early date. "Air Commodore JMA Parker, Defense and Air Attaché at the British Embassy in Paris, sent a copy of the letter delivered by General Arbelet confirming the indefinite postponement of the exercise, noting that "the situation is sensitive at this time and I consider that it will not subside until it is too late to conduct this exercise before the squadron departs for the South Atlantic.In the Ministry of Defense, Secretary RJ Harding concluded on August 6 that "this is a peculiar French reaction to the situation and that nothing will be obtained by continuing the discussion of the matter. In these circumstances, disappointing as it turns out, I think we should stop let the subject rest for a while. "A special relationship about to breakIn his report on "France's Action on the Falklands", Ambassador John Fretwell noted that "the greatest pressure on the government to break ranks with the UK came from the arms industry lobby. There must have been pressure from other sectors as well. due to the importance of arms sales in France's balance of payments ", and that in order to assess France's attitude during the conflict" we must also take into account that at the time of greatest British concern during the crisis of the Falklands, Mitterrand chose to go against us somewhat ruthlessly in the Community, on the issue of farm prices and the budget; and he kept threatening us gratuitously with a crisis over the nature of British involvement. So without having to be rude, we should be on guard against the French taking undue advantage of our gratitude for the support they extended to us. "Perhaps of greater relevance, was his assessment of the French position on the sovereignty of the islands: "The French do not accept the British claim on the Falklands. It is likely that they will again ask us to negotiate with Argentina if a stable government arises there. Probably not They will be convinced by the arguments that we advance to justify our position on sovereignty, but it could respond to the warnings about the danger of undermining long-standing territorial agreements and the simple argument that we assume that the French do not expect us to tell them what to do with their overseas possessions. "The relationship between Great Britain and France during the conflict, although it seemed to be optimal in April, progressively deteriorated as the Super Etendard – Exocet pairing began to operate. With the sinking of the destroyer HMS Sheffield, the misgivings that persisted even after the conflict began, with the British pressuring the French government to suspend deliveries of missiles, first to Peru, and then to Argentina, after lifting the arms embargo. France ended up frustrating those wishes, complying - albeit belatedly - with the signed contracts.Despite British protests, nine Super Etendard aircraft were secretly embarked at the port of Saint-Nazaire, while a shipment of five Exocet missiles flew by air to its destination in Argentina on the night of 20/21 November 1982. .The French did so with great discretion in order to "avoid British interference."

Why do I have a hard time understanding liberal arguments on a lot of issues?It might be because liberals and conservatives do not agree about what the basic premises are that we should use to argue about public policies. To some extent, liberals and conservatives do not even agree about whether rational argument should guide policy.(Consider Donald Trump as an example of a conservative who dismisses rational argument. He claims, “I’m a very instinctual person, but my instinct turns out to be right.” Read President Trump's Interview With TIME on Truth and Falsehoods. So, in his view, policy should depend upon the instincts of leaders who tend to have “good” instincts. That view makes rational argument unnecessary. How do you know who has good instincts? Ask someone with good instincts. People who assume their instincts are really good, conclude that rational argument is a waste of time, and so nothing is left to prove their instincts are bad. Its a recipe for narcissism).Let us get back to my main point which is that Liberals and Conservatives do not start with the same premises. All arguments depend upon premises. Consider this example showing the logic of an argument:If A exists, then BA exists.Therefore, BIn this argument, 1. and 2. are the premises. 3. is the conclusion.Here is an example of a policy argument with content:If we want humanity to have a happy and long future, then, generally, we should strive to limit climate change.We want humanity to have a happy and long future.Therefore, generally, we should strive to limit climate change.To understand the argument, you must understand why someone would want to assert 1. and 2. You must attribute to 1. and 2. the meanings people have when people assert that these premises are true. Then, you must attribute to 3. the meaning it has as a conclusion from 1. and 2.Conservatives have trouble understanding liberal arguments because they do not understand why liberals assert the premises they do. Research has shown that liberals and conservatives start with different attitudes about what is good. As Harvard Professor Martin V. Day says,… liberals are more likely to explicitly agree with moral and political statements that concern harm (e.g., compassion for those who are suffering is the most crucial virtue) and fairness (e.g., when making laws, the number one principle should be ensuring fair treatment) than the other three moral foundations. Conservatives are more likely to agree with statements that reference ingroup loyalty (e.g., loyalty to one’s group is more important than one’s individual concerns), authority (e.g., law makers should respect traditions), and purity (e.g., the government should help people live virtuously), compared with the other two moral foundations (Graham et al., 2009).(Emphasis added). https://wws.princeton.edu/system/files/research/documents/Fiske_Shifting%20Liberal%20and%20Conservative%20Attitudes%20Using%20Moral%20Foundations%20Theory.pdfThe Cato Institute published some interesting data about the last election that supports this description of the difference between liberals and conservatives. (Donald Trump Supporters Think about Morality Differently than Other Voters. Here's How.)First they had supporters of various candidates rank themselves on the question of how liberal or conservative they are. This is the results:Then they had people answer questionnaires designed to bring out how strongly they felt about four “foundations” of morality: Care (empathy, compassion), Proportionality (People should get what they deserve), Liberty, and Loyalty-Authority-Sanctity (the group of moral foundations that Day identified as being shared by conservatives, but not by liberals). They used the resulting data to create the graph below.On the graph, the candidates are listed in order based on how liberal or conservative their followers report themselves to be, with the most liberal on the left and most conservative on the right.The traditionally recognized highest values of liberalism are liberty and equality (by which liberals mean that the happiness of each person is equally important to the happiness of every other person). Since liberals believe that the equality of the importance of persons obligates us to care for each other, it is no surprise that those on the liberal side of the chart rate care/compassion higher than those on the conservative side.The results with regard to liberty do not seem to follow the expected pattern. Rand Paul, who is on the right, gets a higher score for liberty than anyone, and Clinton on the left gets a lower score for liberty that the three most conservative candidates. Why?A liberal would say that liberty from legal interference by government by itself is not enough to constitute genuine liberty. Many other situations can limit one’s liberty. Liberals realize that liberty becomes much more extensive when the law reflects compassion for all. Such laws establish the conditions under which liberty is much greater than it is without such laws.The liberty valued by those on the far right is a liberty that would not be guided by compassion (note that those candidates all have low care/compassion scores). Thus the liberty valued by those on the right is the liberty of the powerful to do what they want without regard to its effects on everyone else. That is a liberty that actually contracts liberty because it tends to destroy the conditions for liberty for most people in society. Thus, the better way to measure attitudes toward genuine liberty would be to add a candidate’s blue “care/compassion” bar to their yellow “liberty” bar. When that is done, it is clear that conservatives value liberty as a basis for morality far less than liberals do. On that measure, the democratic candidates both end up with higher liberty ratings than any of the republicans.One thing conservatives are known for is their belief that people should “get what they deserve”. Criminals should be punished harshly and no one should have to give the money they earned to the government in taxes. (Or at least, taxes should by minimal).The graph shows a clear correlation between how conservative a candidate’s followers are, and how important they think “just deserts” are as a foundation of morality.Why do liberals rate this factor lower? They know that this factor is designed to give power to those who get to decide who deserves what ( the powerful people get to decide). When the corporate elite self-servingly decide that their work is worth hundreds of times what your work is worth, or when someone acquires great wealth through dishonest or immoral means, or through luck or monopolies, then liberals are going to say that extreme wealth should be moderated by taxes, and the liberals who are rich agree with them. Liberals can see that an extreme, unmoderated “just deserts” policy leads to extreme inequality and is, therefore, is a recipe for oligarchy, and thus a negation of the value of both freedom and the equality of importance of everyone’s happiness.While liberals generally agree that there should be some correlation between effort/productivity and earnings, it does not follow that people actually deserve outrageously different incomes when they are each contributing honestly and beneficially to the economy.The final factor in the graph are the items identified by Martin Day as characteristic of conservatism: loyalty-authority-sanctity. The red bars generally point up on the right side of the graph (conservatives), and downward on the left side of the graph (liberals). Rand Paul is again the exception. His followers do not rank these values highly, but because they do value liberty unrestricted by compassion, the liberty they value is basically a green light to would be tyrants and oligarchs to gather the power to install themselves into government at which point they will do what they wish. Rand Paul’s strategy may sound different, but it is just another way of destroying freedom, equality, and happiness and replacing those goods with authoritarianism and suffering.In conclusion, the data gathered by Cato and Day show that liberals are oriented toward policies that support liberty, equality, compassion, and happiness, while conservatives are oriented, as Martin Day informed us, toward the values of loyalty, authority, and purity. Cato’s research suggests we should add “just deserts” as another prized conservative value.If you stop and think how these conservative values fit together, they give us a recipe for tribalism. Persons are expected to adopt the virtues, especially loyalty, that promote the ingroup, especially the authorities whose wishes are supposed to govern what we should do. This, of course, frees the authorities to exploit the rest of the tribe. The “just deserts” policy preference then requires that those who show loyalty and submit to authority should be rewarded, while those who do not should be punished.What kind of policies would one expect based on those notions?Reduce regulation on the powerful. (Cut regulation of businesses. Pretend climate change is not real)Everyone must display their loyalty (Do not take a knee during the national anthem at a football game. Say the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of the school day including “one nation under God”. Treat the flag as a sacred object.)High birth rate within the tribe to make the tribe more powerful (No abortions. Those outside the tribe will not listen to this rule, so this will be stated as a universal rule to make sure all tribal members understand their duty to have children)Do not take from the powerful anything that makes them powerful (Cut taxes on the wealthy. Do not interfere with their businesses, so eliminate regulation of businesses)Make all benefits of the tribal membership conditional on loyalty to the tribe (Therefore, eliminate or reduce social welfare programs like food stamps, medicare, social security, universal health care, public education, etc., so that working for, submission to, and loyalty to, the powerful members of the tribe will be the only way to survive)Insofar as reasoning may lead to different conclusions about how we should live our lives, reason is inferior to tribal wisdom and customs (so long as tribal wisdom and customs assert 1. through 5.).“Fairness” only applies within the tribe, and the meaning of “fairness” is defined by policies 1. through 6.the prevention of harm and compassion apply only within the tribe and are secondary to policies 1. through 7.Conservative principles 1. through 8. pretty well predict what the Republican policy will be on any given issue. In contrast, liberals see 1. through 8. as being a blueprint for evil.Who is right? Who starts with the right premises?Evolution and the Origin of the Divide between Liberals and ConservativesHumans lived in hunter gatherer communities for most of the time they have existed on earth. Consequently, they developed instincts that helped them survive in that situation. As a result, our instinctual impulses are suited to helping people survive in hunter gatherer groups, but are not necessarily well suited to provide us with good lives in the modern world.The divide between liberals and conservatives came about based on the way different people reacted to that pervasive fact that controls our existence: the human condition.The Liberal Strategy in Response to the Fact that our Instinctual Impulses are often not Well Suited to the Modern WorldIs there a premise we can all agree on? How about:Trust what is trustworthy. Do not trust what is untrustworthy.You must determine which is which. If you rely upon those parts of yourself, and those of your beliefs, that are untrustworthy, then you will fail, so pay special attention to recognizing what methods of thinking are trustworthy. Those methods of thinking that are trustworthy have been called "reason". Thus, as you try to figure out what is trustworthy, depend on reason. Depend on the reason you find in yourself. Depend on the reason you find in others.Reason and experience will tell you that by nature you seek your own well being and the well being of all persons you care about. But it will also tell you that all people do the same, and the success of your pursuit is not more important than the success of theirs. Thus, reason teaches us that we are all equally important.Consequently, reason requires that we seek to bring about a world in which generally we will all tend to live better lives. For that purpose, it is reasonable to establish a division of labor under which each of us has primary responsibility for ourselves, our family, and our friends. However, that responsibility should not be exercised in a way that disregards our secondary responsibility to others. We should go to the aid of others in need, just as we would want them to come to our aid in time of need. (The Golden Rule, as a rule of reason, applies).Reason also recognizes that we must seek to develop within ourselves the motive to meet our obligations to others. In other words, reason requires that we must seek to develop compassion.Together, reason and compassion are the best guides for how to live in the world. Consequently, reason and compassion, when joined together, are what is most trustworthy.Reason and compassion will then guide us, pointing out what further virtues we should develop, what choices we should make, and what actions we should perform.What is true of our reason and compassion is equally true of the reason and compassion of others. Other people are trustworthy to the extent that they are also guided by reason and compassion. When multiple people are rational and compassionate, they develop rational compassionate communities. Since two minds are better than one, the joining of rational, compassionate people into communities yields more wisdom than can be developed by isolated individuals. Thus, rational compassionate communities are likely to be even more trustworthy than isolated rational compassionate individuals.If reason and compassion are the characteristics of trustworthy people and communities, what are the characteristics of untrustworthy people and communities?Humans lived in hunter gatherer communities for most of the time they have existed on earth. Consequently, they developed instincts that helped them survive in that situation. As a result, our instinctual impulses are suited to enabling us to survive in hunter gatherer groups, but are not necessarily well suited to provide us with good lives in the modern world.People who are guided by such impulses, and who do not moderate them under the influence of reason and compassion, are not trustworthy. Their impulses are suited for small groups so they tend to be more tribalistic than rational compassionate people. They tend to regard loyalty as more important than compassion. They are more retributive, because without compassion for those excluded from the tribe by their bad acts, tribalistic people see little need to moderate the extent of punishments. Furthermore, their loyalties are less permanent than compassion. They are less forgiving, because tribal membership depends upon the whim of the tribe rather than on the rational rights of sentient beings. Those who are part of the tribe today can get excluded tomorrow, and without a commitment to reason to limit such exclusions, no one is safe.As between Compassion and Reason or Tribalism (Loyalty, Authority, and Purity), which Provide the Better Starting Point for Rational Discussion of Public Policy?One way to experimentally determine whether it is better to give priority to compassion and reason, or the tribal virtues like loyalty, authority, and purity might be to compare the historical periods in which such priorities existed, and then determine which priorities rendered greater human well being.Human history can be seen as generally shifting from a strong preference for the tribal virtues in prehistoric times and early history, to a growing preference for reason and compassion. Compassion and reason have become most prominent in modern times. Only in the modern era have we abolished slavery, established democratic governments with protected human rights, established widespread public education, and outlawed discrimination based on race, national origin, gender, or disability.To test whether conservative values or liberal values lead to more human well being, we only need compare human well being in early human history where conservative values were predominant, to modern history where liberal values are predominant.Steven Pinker’s book, The Better Angels of our Nature, provides extensive evidence that violence has been steadily decreasing over the course of human history. He makes his point in this TED Talk:The surprising decline in violenceClearly the huge reduction in violence he documents indicates a significant improvement in well being, not only because it means people live longer with less tragedy, but also because reductions in violence indicate a reduction in the things that cause violence: fear, robbery, abuse, exploitation, feuds, and high levels of dissatisfaction.One can identify other factors that show progress from the ancient to the modern world: technology, longevity, less infant mortality, education, less slavery, etc. So long as you prefer the life in the modern world for yourself and your family, including all of the benefits that human cooperation based on reason and compassion have provided us, then you should opt for the liberal priorities of reason and compassion over the conservative priorities of loyalty, authority, and purity. The lesson of history is that it is better that reason and compassion moderate our tribal instincts.Conclusion:The reason that conservatives have trouble understanding liberal arguments is that they do not share the same basic principles as liberals. Liberals start with reason, compassion, and the assumption that we are equal in the sense that each person’s happiness is as important as one’s own. Conservatives give greater priority to the tribal virtues: loyalty, submission to authority, and purity.Conservatives would be well advised to change their priorities. History has demonstrated that reason and compassion deliver better results than the tribal virtues. Loyalty, submission to authority, “just deserts”, and purity are good in the limited situations where reason and compassion say they should still be allowed to function.Related Answers:The fundamental moral split between liberals and conservatives shapes not only our political differences, but also our religious differences. I have discussed the religious aspect of the split in Bryer Sophia-Gardener's answer to Which one comes first, religion or ethics?