I have a fundamental problem whenever a group gets treated unfairly. What that generally means is that I speak in defense of ethnic minorities, women or the LGBTQ community but today that means speaking in defense of Donald Trump supporters. I'll admit it's somewhat surreal, but when I see such a one-sided ignorant attack as this, I can't just take it in silence (especially if others are trying to propagate it). So what's the offense? A neuroscientist claiming what "may be wrong with Trump supporters' brains." I generally detest making sweeping generalizations of a group, and I especially detest when science is used to justify bigotry, so here we go.

The neuroscientist, Bobby Azarian, lists four things that may be "wrong" with Trump supporters. Spoiler alert: These are common to all humans, not just Trump supporters. However, I like to go point by point for the sake of not missing anything.

1. The Dunning-Kruger Effect:

Simply put, the Dunning-Kruger effect is that people who know a lot about something underestimate their knowledge while those who know little overestimate. The way Dr. Azarian explains it as, "They're not smart enough to realize they're dumb," is, at best, condescending. However, research in 2013 by Dr. Dunning and Kruger (yes, the same people who the effect is named after) showed that driving force of this effect isn't necessarily a lack of knowledge or intelligence, but confidence in the rules someone applies to a problem. For example, let's say someone told you that Pi is 4 instead of 3.14. If you were confident in that knowledge, you'd apply that in every problem that required Pi without ever realizing you were wrong. You have knowledge of Pi and are applying it consistently therefore are confident that you're doing it right, even though objectively you're calculations would be wrong.

So instead of saying Trump supporters are falling victim to this effect, we can talk about what rules they follow in decision making that Trump opposers don't share. I know I rely very heavily on scientific studies and am much more confident about something if I read it in one. That can lead me to make mistakes if my data is wrong or if I read a study that was later overturned by other ones. We all fall victim to this effect, the question is simply how.

So instead of essentially calling Trump supporters dumb or ignorant, we acknowledge the differences in thought that result in differences of opinion.

2. Hypersensitivity to Threat

The studies here are legitimate (to the best of my knowledge): Conservatives display more reactivity to threat than liberals. My biggest issue here is that there are a lot of conservatives who absolutely hate Trump and, if the alternative wasn't Hillary, would vote against him in a heartbeat. If all conservatives backed Trump, then this argument might have merit. However, unless there is a study done showing that, even among conservatives, Trump supporters display a greater sensitivity to threat, then this claim simply falls flat.

3. Terror Management Theory

See above! The science here is true and solid (again, as far as I am aware), but this claim falls short simply because not all conservatives back Trump, especially if you take Hillary Clinton out of the equation. Unless there is a study showing that the enthusiasm of one's support for Trump is correlated with greater terror management responses, then this is pure speculation and a pretty terrible application of science.

4. High Attentional Engagement

I'm sorry, the idea that Trump supporters agree with him because he is entertaining has no basis in the science Dr. Azarian cites. True, he is objectively more engaging than Hillary Clinton, that science seems sound. However, that doesn't mean that is a significant factor in why people vote for or support him. There is an unsupported leap in logic there.

Largely, the science cited is solid even if the application is unbalanced. However, the article displays a few biases on its own such as confirmation bias (the tendency to accept information that agrees with your worldview and reject alternatives) and even the blindsight bias (the tendency to not notice our own biases). As much as those of us (myself included) would love to believe in our own intellectual superiority, it simply doesn't exist. The only demonstrated difference between those who support Trump and those who don't is populism. Even then, populism is about attitudes and values rather than intelligence or knowledge, so sorry, but there is no intellectual high-ground here.

I have a large number of problems with Trump and his supporters, as I've written about before. However, that doesn't mean I'll sit quietly by while a group gets falsely attacked. I do it for every other group (most of them groups that Trump supporters have attacked at one point or another), and Trump supporters are no exception.

So let's remember to check our biases and do our best to treat everyone fairly, regardless of how we might feel about them.