On Fear

Shawn

Fear seems to me to be irrational. If it is conditioned into an individual, then that seems outright evil.

It has been pointed out by many, that fear is one of the strongest emotions known to man. Quite unfortunately, the United States has adopted fear as a strategy to control, coerce, and maintain power over the fearful. To have an enemy, which the US adores in some ways more than its own citizens, I find the use of fear as repugnant to instill a sense of urgency and threat foreign or unknown.

The war on terrorism will continue to fail as long as there is no terrorism on US soil, which I hope never comes to be. The point I am making is that fear is the worst way to instill patriotism, cohesiveness, and camaraderie among a population. The issue is essentially about power and control.

All of this seems Machiavellian and should be rejected upon the emotional response that the mass media, paranoid and conspiratorial paranoid web stories from unverified sources instills. The depolarables did not only elect Donald Trump, and besides, as the problem of weaponized fear has been going on for quite some time. I believe this phenomenon of fear has been handed down from the Cold War paranoia about total annihilation.

I don't feel like bringing the issue of good vs. evil, which is a story the US absolutely loves more than any other; but, it deserves a mention. Think about this for a moment... if fear is so rampant and widespread among the population of the US, then are we winning the battle against "evil" or winning it? It seems to me that psychologically there's a certain element of downright evil in the minds of many leaders to actually create "evil" out of thin air.

The problem of fear is that it leads to poor decision making. Critical thinking skills are hampered by an overly fearful mind. People become stupefied and retarded by the appeal to such a (potentially) destructive emotion. I don't really know how can one strip oneself of the fear response; but, by all means should not be encouraged or drilled into the minds of the innocent and gullible.

So, what do you think? When do we step back and propose that a should can be substituted as an is here? Is that possible in this instance?

Shawn

The natural follow up here, seems to be the lack of existing threat. In a nation that prioritizes the need for force and power over other issues, there's a perpetual need for the machine to face down any threat.

I believe, that what naturally follows here is that anxiety and fear get interchanged in a strange manner.

Would you agree with such a characterization?

Changeling

Shawn

I think that deep down, most if not all Americans desire to feel free from fear.

Pinprick

↪Shawn

Fear seems to me to be irrational. If it is conditioned into an individual, then that seems outright evil.

Not if there is a tiger behind you, then it is perfectly rational. What are you suggesting is evil? It seems that the “it” in your statement is referring to fear, which would mean that you are claiming that fear is evil. Is this what you mean?

The point I am making is that fear is the worst way to instill patriotism, cohesiveness, and camaraderie among a population.

Depends on what you mean by worst. It seems to be quite an effective method, no?

I believe this phenomenon of fear has been handed down from the Cold War paranoia about total annihilation.

I believe it is much older than that. Irrational fear of the “savages” is partially what justified the genocide of the Native Americans.

The problem of fear is that it leads to poor decision making.

Again, this depends on context.

So, what do you think? When do we step back and propose that a should can be substituted as an is here? Is that possible in this instance?

Depends. What “should” are you suggesting replace what “is?”

Tzeentch

Not if there is a tiger behind you, then it is perfectly rational. — Pinprick

You're suggesting fear has a function. Maybe. Though, I'm not so sure.

Would a fearful mind make better decisions in such a situation than a rational one? Doesn't a rational mind already know that a tiger is dangerous?

Fear, to me, seems an altogether unpleasant thing. It has a way of governing people's lives, consciously and subconsciously. Aren't reason and rationality all that we need to establish what is a threat and what isn't? Why do we need fear to control us so, and keep us from happiness?

xyzmix

There's a beneficent side to fear. I wish I grew up with more of it around me - being entirely fear-less is discord. Fear teaches great lessons, there are shapes I fear.

What the OP equates to is over hopefulness and cowardice.

Children who are abused by parents, have bad parents. What defines a bad parent is not fear, but stupidity.

Though, there is a point where you should overcome your fear.

If I could teach my child through fear, he/she would one day look at the world and think "none of this scares me."

It's a similar thread to 'On Pressure' and saying too much pressure on the head is bad. Saying all pressure is bad is wrong.

Pinprick

↪Tzeentch

The problem I see with this line of thinking is that you’re essentially saying that instinct is not needed, which isn’t true. In order to make rational decisions, you must have prior experience of that particular object. If you’ve never encountered a tiger before, how would you make the rational decision to flee (or fight, play dead, etc.)? The point is choices made out of fear are more likely to be incorrect (such as mistaking leaves being blown for a tiger), but they are quicker and ultimately safer. Generally speaking, of course. Fear is unpleasant, but perhaps not as much as being mauled to death. The issue with it governing people’s lives has more to do with people exploiting our innate fear response than fear itself. Wouldn’t you agree?

xyzmix

I say to my kid, 'watch yourself when you put a plug in the socket' - 'or you might die' - in effort to fear it into perfection. If it was completely fear-less, maybe it would electrocute itself. Being fear-less requires prestige, or it's stupidity. Estimate the levels of fear required, don't panic at plug sockets but fear the consequence.

There is a special way fear is handled. Don't put your hand near the metal and socket, or do, and show you can take the pain - that you don't fear it. If something scares you, get over it. Thankfully energy in plug sockets isn't always in our face. You fear or don't fear it relative to the time.

Tzeentch

The problem I see with this line of thinking is that you’re essentially saying that instinct is not needed, which isn’t true. In order to make rational decisions, you must have prior experience of that particular object. — Pinprick

Or we infer it from other things. Most people don't need to first encounter a tiger to realize it is dangerous. Maybe instinct has some part in that process, but I think parenting and rational inference have a much larger role.

Ultimately the instincts we are supposedly born with aren't enough to keep a child from playing with sharp objects, or hitting its head when it is crawling around. Come to think of it, would a young child find a tiger scary, based on its instincts alone? I'm not so sure.

Maybe you could provide an example that shows the necessity of instincts.

The issue with it governing people’s lives has more to do with people exploiting our innate fear response than fear itself. Wouldn’t you agree? — Pinprick

I'd say it's about a 50/50 split. It takes a twisted mind to exploit people's misery to get what they want, but it takes a lazy and ignorant mind to never question its own emotional responses. Shame on the exploiter for exploiting people. Shame on the exploitee for letting themselves be exploited.

Pinprick

↪Tzeentch

Just a quick search turned up these: https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/29/health/science-of-fear/index.html

https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/six-things-were-born-to-fear

Or we infer it from other things. Most people don't need to first encounter a tiger to realize it is dangerous. Maybe instinct has some part in that process, but I think parenting and rational inference have a much larger role.

We certainly do infer and generalize our experiences to inform us about our environment. Yet we still seem to have need of fight/flight/freeze responses. Particularly in situations that call for immediate action where careful rational decision making is too slow to ensure our survival. I’m not entirely confident enough to hazard a guess as to which has a larger role. I would assume you’re correct though just based on the psychological and physiological issues that occur with prolonged triggering of fight/flight/freeze responses, such as PTSD as an example.

I'd say it's about a 50/50 split. It takes a twisted mind to exploit people's misery to get what they want, but it takes a lazy and ignorant mind to never question its own emotional responses. Shame on the exploiter for exploiting people. Shame on the exploitee for letting themselves be exploited.

With this, I’m not sure how effective this sort of “mind over matter” approach is at overcoming fear. I can’t speak to mild fears or phobias, but typically some sort of therapeutic technique is needed (flooding, exposure therapy, etc.) to overcome an irrational fear in general.

leo

Is fear really rampant among the "deplorables" who elected Trump, or among those who oppose him? Is Trump fearful? Who is really fearful?

There is a real existing threat, which most people refuse to open their eyes to, but we don't have to fear that threat. We can face it with hope and faith. Fear itself is part of the threat.

IvoryBlackBishop

By fear, if you mean on a biological level, then it isn't necessarily "bad" and serves useful purposes (e.x. if a person didn't experience fear, they might stand in the middle of a highway with an 18-Wheeler driving towards them at 60 MPH and not feel any impetus to get out of the way).

Though it is well documented, that much of mass media is sensationalist and primarily about selling fear or anger to people like a "drug" of sorts, much as how people acting emotionally, impulsively, or in "the heat of the moment" regards of "politics" or "ideology" tend to think and act less rationally under said conditions.

Deleted User

Fear seems to me to be irrational — Shawn

It's non-rational. It is a very effective pattern of mobilisation of the body. It is an evolved facet of animals. It is different from rational thought, but not necessarily at all irrational. In fact it would be irrational to remove a pattern that is so necessary and useful to the most complicated species on earth.

On Fear

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions