• Eager Eagle
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    They are both mentalities

    Who defines political orientation as a property of the brain? It’s socially established.

    • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      So is crime, ultimately both stem from a sense of self interest vs right and wrong, or lack of it.

      • Eager Eagle
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        idk what Phrenology or crime have anything to do with the study and I’m yet to see an argument for it

        • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The headline is clearly false, you can’t tell political affiliation just by looking at a persons face.
          Maybe in USA you have a slightly better chance than random, because age and gender alone will give a statistical difference. But the claim of the headline remains false.

          The claim of the headline is reiterated in the article:

          A study recently published in the peer-reviewed American Psychologist journal claims that a combination of facial recognition and artificial intelligence technology can accurately assess a person’s political orientation by simply looking at that person’s blank, expressionless face.

          Further down:

          So, according to this theory, if you have a tiny face, you’re probably a progressive. Or, by contrast, if you have a big fat face, there’s a good chance you might be a Trump voter.

          This simply can’t be true, if it was the attempt at a Phrenology/Craniology science would have detected it 200 years ago.

          • Eager Eagle
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 months ago

            100% a response to the headline, which clearly must be false

            It is, my bad - I thought that was obvious. The headline and the article conclusion contradict the study itself, it’s just clickbait.

            But the study is not invalid because of it.