4 ms·

The difference in mortality rates between teenage drivers and middle age drivers suggests a number of factors, but one that springs to my mind is that the teena

The difference in mortality rates between teenage drivers and middle age drivers suggests a number of factors, but one that springs to my mind is that the teenagers don't have a fear level that reflects the danger accurately enough. Edit: Also, this book by a threat assessment specialist talks about problems faced by women in particular who have the fear response in mild form, but suppress it. His conclusion is that the emotional response can actually be a lot clearer and more accurate than the intellectual one in a dangerous situation and it is wise to listen to it. If that man chatting you up is making you nervous, it's a sign you ought to be careful. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gift-Fear-Survival-Signals-Violence/dp/0747538352 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gift-Fear-Survival-Signals-Violence/... The lesson from the book is that fear is a second signal (in addition to reasoning) that may heighten perception of a dangerous situation and should not be ignored.

sridca 11y ago
Okay then ... name one instance of fear being a second signal (in addition to reasoning) heightening perception of a dangerous situation. And consider how effective such a course of action is, in minimizing the risk of that dangerous situation, in comparison to handling it with no fear at all. While I haven't read the book, I bet Mr. Gavin de Becker never considered the option of "no fear" (not ignored fear) in all his threat assessments.
- summerdown2 11y ago
  I think maybe you need to read the book. Your question is the essential topic it deals with, and the author comes down heavily on fear being a net positive in those life threatening situations. One example: a girl is being chatted up by a guy. He seems nice, says all the right things. Intellectually everything seems fine. But there's a feeling nagging at her that something isn't right. A feeling of fear. Mr De Becker is saying that in all the cases he's examined, the women went on to ignore their fear - eg by the socially expected action of returning reciprocated trust. Someone tells you a bit of information, you return it. Someone reveals a bit more, you do the same. Ultimately, these women put themselves in danger by not listening to their fear. Now I'm not sure what you mean by the difference between "no fear" and "ignored fear." Plainly they have ignored their fear. But if a situation seems off due to a feeling of fear, not having that feeling isn't going to help in any sense. Its a signal that is no longer available, so you lose one data point to make a decision. Decisions with less data tend to be less reliable.

sridca 11y ago

Okay then ... name one instance of fear being a second signal (in addition to reasoning) heightening perception of a dangerous situation. And consider how effective such a course of action is, in minimizing the risk of that dangerous situation, in comparison to handling it with no fear at all. While I haven't read the book, I bet Mr. Gavin de Becker never considered the option of "no fear" (not ignored fear) in all his threat assessments.

summerdown2 11y ago
I think maybe you need to read the book. Your question is the essential topic it deals with, and the author comes down heavily on fear being a net positive in those life threatening situations. One example: a girl is being chatted up by a guy. He seems nice, says all the right things. Intellectually everything seems fine. But there's a feeling nagging at her that something isn't right. A feeling of fear. Mr De Becker is saying that in all the cases he's examined, the women went on to ignore their fear - eg by the socially expected action of returning reciprocated trust. Someone tells you a bit of information, you return it. Someone reveals a bit more, you do the same. Ultimately, these women put themselves in danger by not listening to their fear. Now I'm not sure what you mean by the difference between "no fear" and "ignored fear." Plainly they have ignored their fear. But if a situation seems off due to a feeling of fear, not having that feeling isn't going to help in any sense. Its a signal that is no longer available, so you lose one data point to make a decision. Decisions with less data tend to be less reliable.