> For example, if someone is bitten by a dog, he or she may become anxious around dogs of all breeds and sizes
While often not helpful, this doesn't seem like a brain defect. If a class of things causes you severe trauma it seems the natural response would be to recoil from that class of things in the future.
My uncle’s dog grabbed me by the foot and put me on the ground when I was three. The whole incident was over in about two seconds. I wasn’t physically hurt. But I was afraid of dogs for years afterward.
I think the “defect” part is that the panic and anxiety remains even in the face of a vast amount of new information and change. It makes a lot of sense for three-year-old me to fear that dog and be at least cautious of other dogs. It didn’t make any sense for teenage me to be afraid of obviously friendly, familiar dogs who I’ve seen interact with family or friends countless times.
It is not a defect and it is a defect. I mean there is a big reasons behind such a response, but these reasons are often do not justify the severity of a response. Moreover bad memories could become worse with a time passing -- each act of reminding triggers an emotional response which becomes a part of memories.
So it is a valuable mechanism increasing fitness and survivability, but it is not perfect. Especially it is not perfect in a modern environment where there are very little hope to face a mortal danger. I believe it worked better 100k years ago for hunter-gatherers.
I dream sometimes that scientists found a way to fine tune a human mind for a modern environment to increase fitness. How humans would behave after such a tuning? Though it wouldn't work, I'm afraid, because society is obsessive about safety and if people started to behave recklessly, than society would try to create even safer environment for them. A few more iterations of fine tuning and there would be no fear of death at all.
It’s a defect if it causes a person’s brain to have an illogical stress response. For instance, the vast majority of pet dogs are harmless. But, my daughter, who was nipped by a dog when she was a toddler, will probably always be somewhat fearful of dogs (as I am, for the same reasons). Some people have a greater risk for trauma from these types of events. And, while useful at one point, it is now problematic for modern living.
[+] [-] colordrops|6 years ago|reply
While often not helpful, this doesn't seem like a brain defect. If a class of things causes you severe trauma it seems the natural response would be to recoil from that class of things in the future.
[+] [-] cgriswald|6 years ago|reply
I think the “defect” part is that the panic and anxiety remains even in the face of a vast amount of new information and change. It makes a lot of sense for three-year-old me to fear that dog and be at least cautious of other dogs. It didn’t make any sense for teenage me to be afraid of obviously friendly, familiar dogs who I’ve seen interact with family or friends countless times.
[+] [-] ordu|6 years ago|reply
So it is a valuable mechanism increasing fitness and survivability, but it is not perfect. Especially it is not perfect in a modern environment where there are very little hope to face a mortal danger. I believe it worked better 100k years ago for hunter-gatherers.
I dream sometimes that scientists found a way to fine tune a human mind for a modern environment to increase fitness. How humans would behave after such a tuning? Though it wouldn't work, I'm afraid, because society is obsessive about safety and if people started to behave recklessly, than society would try to create even safer environment for them. A few more iterations of fine tuning and there would be no fear of death at all.
[+] [-] afpx|6 years ago|reply