Well, considering politics during your thinking is quite important, as often you can't get a correct answer (e.g. to why a thing is certain way or why a potentially promising course of action is actually unlikely to succeed) without taking politics into account.
In most cases where you'd want to convince others about something, the political connotations of various arguments matter just as much (or even more) as how sound these arguments are logically.
Obviously, there are certain avenues of thinking where we'd want to perform a pure rational, impartial analysis while explicitly disregarding any politics. However, that's a minority of the cases, and even then when trying to communicate that analysis, politics becomes relevant once again. Even the desire to carefully describe a particular analysis as apolitical is driven by political motivations i.e. to make that analysis more convincing to others with different political alignment.
As Aristotle said, "Man is by nature a social animal" - it makes all sense that our default mode of thinking and the associated decisionmaking shortcuts are heavily driven by social and political aspects, because in many circumstances the social impact and political perception of some statement is more important than whether it's technically true.
I didn't mean politics, this is a dirty field to do science/logic. Conservatism bias is a real thing, but this doesn't mean that we should throw off our past. Just reconsider its weight in our decisions.
Anchoring bias is a better name for this flaw. Either way, the handful of examples provided here are.. random? This post has poor depth and breadth, akin to a listicle
Curiously, what set of reading would you say that would make a liberal person become a conservative? If you're belief is that it's logical, it must be an argument we can discuss, backup with data - etc.
So to that end, the reason i'm liberal is that i believe there is a balance between social safety nets and capitalist incentives. In my view, we are currently the conservative dream. Very few protections for workers, less and less than years past - with increasing benefits for corporations that see little to no benefits trickled down to the workers. Walmart and Comcast are what i see as the natural result of conservative practice.
I simply want what will result in the least suffering. Yet i see suffering in mass in the very pro-0.01% behavior. Walmart does great in this environment - it's employees, less so. Worse yet if you lose your Walmart job, as the safety nets are being dismantled left and right by conservatives.
So, what reading would you recommend i do to show me that fiscal conservative behavior here and that further more reducing lower/middle class protections is beneficial to them?
I certainly do not claim to know all, or any, answers. All i know is the state of the poor is very unsettling to me in America. What reading would you suggest?
One problem is that you are just repeating straw men ('trickle down') and stating things that are flatly wrong ('Very few protections for workers, less and less than years past'). No, generally the regulations 'protecting' workers have gone up and up and up. The nutty expansion of UC in recent months is one example. As for 'social safety nets', for people who learn to navigate the system, there is basically work-free living available. Between Section 8, SNAP, SSDI, Medicaid, etc, the 'social safety net' is beyond anything imagined a few decades ago.
In addition, your attack on Walmart is lazy and typical. When Walmart moves into a neighborhood the first group to get hit are whatever retailers already exist in the area--because all the best workers immediately line up to work at Walmart instead. Better pay, better benefits, etc. Just a typical case.
So, what should you read? Anything but /r/politics would probably help some.
Sowell's "Controversial Essays" was helpful for me to understand the conservative mindset a little more. He comes from the Chicago School and Milton Friedman.
> Very few protections for workers, less and less than years past
(Assuming you’re talking about the US)
Which worker protections have been rolled back? What do you think workers aren’t protected from now that they were protected against when there were no overtime, minimum wage, or really any safety laws?
Conservativism (sic) is a flaw (in human thinking) because what it means is "resistance to change"... and as Heraclitus said, "change is the only constant in life."
