==Paper=====The question===Deliberate democracy aims at involving all the citizens in rational-communication which will help them make decisions according to reliable information that was produced in the intersubjective experience. While in the deliberation process we hope that people will change their minds according corroborated and reliable theories and evidences that stood the test of critical thinking, and will chose together the most suitable solution. Yet we know that large proportion of the population is conservative in mind, and according to research tend to resists change in world view, even in light of new information. This conflict between large scale participation and the resistance to change by substantial portion of the population is a challenge deliberative democracy developers need to address. I suggest that if we will understand the mechanisms of resistance to change in the neurocognitive, psychological and social levels, we will be able to create better deliberation settings which will advance change of mind. In this paper I will focus on the neurocognitive mechanisms of rigidity of mind, and according to them I will suggest some basic deliberative settings which will promote more flexible thinking by participants of the deliberation process. In a following paper I will suggest how social settings and psychological settings may create more Rome to change of mind. Conservatism is a social and psychological phenomena that is part of society. In every culture there are large proportion of people who resist changes in society. The proportion of [[conservatism in society may change according to many factors. |Conservatism level may differ among cultures, and in the same culture in different times. Yet even in societies that are thought to be more liberal ]] and in time the [[liberalism dominates the culture, conservatism, is strong and influential. ====Properties of Conservative==== From the early 50s, the causes of conservatism was the scope of wide research. Jost et al<ref>Jost et al. 2003...</ref> has done extensive literature review and summed the findings from 88 samples, involving a near of 23,000 participants from 12 countries. They have found that conservatism is correlated to several factors related to cognitive needs, and to existential motivation. They found that conservatism is associate with mental rigidty, increased dogmatism and intolarance to ambiguty, decress |Liberalism]] in cognitive complexity, decreased openness to new experience, uncertainty avoidance, personal need for structure and order and a need for closure. In the existential needs, low self esteem may promote resistance to change. Fear anger and anxiety, fear context of death, hard economic periods and the instability ofthe economic system were all found to promote conservatism. ====Suggested causes of the properties====(explain how these correlations are caused by fear and managing uncertainty)Jost et al speculated that the properties of conservatives are the product of two basic needs. The first is the need to mange fears and to handle threats, and the second deliberation is to achieve certainty.(explain how this is corrolated). For instance dogmatism and a need to closure, will help a person that needs certainty, to reduce the complexity states of options and information and achieve decisions more easily. It may not be the best option or the most subtle decision, but it will ease up decision making.  A closed mind is also useful in cases of threats. During the evolution most of the threats needed fast reactions that depend on quick decision making. If a gazelle will not react properly to a threat in splits of a second, it may become the next meal of a predator. In light of a threat complex thinking is not adaptive and strait and simple thinking is needed. Evolution drove creatures to develop a system that will produce fast reactions to threats. This system is widely spread in the animal world, and is also part of the create diffrent reaction system of humans. It is called "fight or flight". In the human world some of the threats can evolve slowly or may take much more time to affect, yet probably because the fight or flight reaction is so conserved, people will use it even in light of slow evolving threat. People may react with anger to news in the media about rape or some misdeeds, although there is no immediate threat, and therefor no immediate need to reaction.  So although part of the threats we conceive do not need quick decision making, the reaction that was evolved through evolution still take charge, and people will look for more simple and strait-forward thinking while perceiving a threatdeliberation. Dogmatism and closed mindedness are just these simple thinking, in a reaction to a threat, and because conservatives perceive the world as more threatening, they will be more dogmatic as a reaction to a perceived menace.  Decreased openness to experience are also the product reaction to threat and reducing uncertainty. When seeking to find working solutions, new experience may may take time and usage of brain process needed to evaluate the different established options that can produce a more certain solution. New experience may be thrilling, but to establish high certainty based on new solution need experiencing the... solution time after time.... Also, when in danger, seeking for new experience is not adaptive. While in danger, we have to decide fast, and try to decide according to our already established knowledge, which actions to take. Therefore, people who perceive the world as more dangerous, will seek certainty, and will try to avoid the ambiguity that came along with new experience.