The study of political attitudes and behaviours is important from a cognitive point of view and carries considerable practical implications. Therefore, researchers should consider the widest possible spectrum of factors determining the participation of individuals in politics. Their analyses, however, are usually limited to the effects of environmental factors, ignoring or marginalizing the impact of genetic factors. An approach called 'genopolitics' has been trying to fill the resulting knowledge gap for over a decade. The aim of this article is to provide a synthetic description of genopolitics based on institutional, methodological, epistemological and social criteria. The main points of consideration are the assessment of the explanatory utility of genopolitical research, as well as the analysis of the cognitive and non-cognitive conditions and barriers to the development of genopolitics.

No abstract

No abstract

In this article we analyse one of the most fascinating paradoxes of mass politics. Based on the data from the studies of neurobiologists, neurologists, social psychology, cognitive and evolution studies we answer the question specified in literature as the Simon's puzzle: How is it possible that citizens have their opinions about politics, if they know so little about it? We began our analysis from the criticism of the economic rationality approach. To do this, we referred to the Allais paradox, cognitive dissonance theory, Ellsberg paradox, the concept of bounded rationality, conjunction fallacy and prospect theory. Next, we described the evolutionary processes shaping the minds of Homo sapiens and characterised cognitive mechanisms, thanks to which people can make political choices, especially in view of the shortage of time and information. The following heuristics are referred to herein: affect, recognition, judgment and imitation.

No abstract