3 ms·

Interesting, "Terror management theory" is not what i expected it to be. Probably influenced by the modern history and current dynamics, I didn't expect it to b

Interesting, "Terror management theory" is not what i expected it to be. Probably influenced by the modern history and current dynamics, I didn't expect it to be about evolutionary psychology or death-related cognitions, I expected macro-economics and political theory.

H8crilA 7y ago
Well according to that theory things like nation states or big economic interests or religions exist because of death anxiety. So yeah, going to a political rally or protesting civil rights abuses even if you're not abused, participating in wars, etc. is triggered by death anxiety and the need to do "something more". "We go out of our course to make ourselves uncomfortable; the cup of life is not bitter enough to our palate, and we distill superfluous poison to put into it, or conjure up hideous things to frighten ourselves at, which would never exist if we did not make them." Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, Charles Mackay, 1841
- rinchik 7y ago
  > things like nation states or big economic interests or religions exist because of death anxiety Interesting, it makes sense on the surface but not if you dig dipper. I doubt that this fear has ANY impact on nation states or big economics, fear of death is very well situated and certain conditions must be met to trigger it, meaning it's not predictable, not constant, and can not be a major driver in global politics or economics. Sex and mating on the other hand, is a completely different story, I find the idea of sex being the major factor, influencer, and driver behind global trends and economics a lot more plausible (I'm a Freud's fan)
  - AQuantized 7y ago
    Much of the evidence supporting TMT shows things such as people behaving significantly differently when even subtly primed with thoughts of their mortality, such as driving past a graveyard. At the end of the day it's always going to be a theory within which that evidence finds its explanation, but it's perhaps more compelling than the alternatives.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    I on the other hand can't find any visible connection between sex and just about anything important, except negatively - in the sense that a significant job of societies, governments and religions is limiting how people can express their sex drive. It's the first time I've heard of TMT, but it does seem intuitively reasonable to me. Fear of death and its inevitability leads to search for meaning and symbolic immortality, and from that you can derive most of civilization, up to and including everything that happens in geopolitics. So the connection seems much more obvious.
  - v64 7y ago
    > I find the idea of sex being the major factor, influencer, and driver behind global trends and economics a lot more plausible (I'm a Freud's fan) Sex and death are often viewed in opposition. Psychotherapist Esther Perel has described eroticism as "an antidote to death" and the essay "Why Men Love War" [1] describes the use of sex by soldiers to forget about the death and destruction around them. TMT would argue that the influence of sex in society is precisely due to its effectiveness at distracting us from death. [1] https://public.wsu.edu/~hughesc/why_men_love_war.htm https://public.wsu.edu/~hughesc/why_men_love_war.htm
    - rinchik 7y ago
      Oh nice! Great argument! But correlation does not imply causation. When you are talking about feared solders, you are most definitely talking about a war. Wars are about the assertion, or defense of the right to power (mostly done/triggered by political elites), and there can not be more sexual thing other than power, even pre-historically, we can agree that power gives you freedom, freedom of choosing your mate. It gives you options. Gyms, healthy diets, financial success, fashion, entertainment, all these are driven by sex, by desire, desire to mate. Sex is not about distraction, sex is about power. when we are talking about politics or macro-economics, fear of death is not relevant or even considered at all. Your argument actually confirms how powerful sex is. A lot more powerful than what we give it credit for.
      - solidsnack9000 7y ago
        Association does not imply causation either. Your entire argument is simply association. You say soldiers and then you associate war; you say war and then you associate power; you say power and then you associate sex. What you are not being plain about is that you choose each association. You could have chosen another; there is no reason offered for why we have to consider this particular chain of associations. This is how so much psychoanalysis worked, by the way, and is part of why that school lost credibility. Your final point, turning the commenters argument around on itself, is a masterful example of rhetoric but not of argument or explanation. Of course, you leave open the question of why sex is important to us; of what it draws its importance from.

H8crilA 7y ago

Well according to that theory things like nation states or big economic interests or religions exist because of death anxiety. So yeah, going to a political rally or protesting civil rights abuses even if you're not abused, participating in wars, etc. is triggered by death anxiety and the need to do "something more". "We go out of our course to make ourselves uncomfortable; the cup of life is not bitter enough to our palate, and we distill superfluous poison to put into it, or conjure up hideous things to frighten ourselves at, which would never exist if we did not make them." Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, Charles Mackay, 1841

rinchik 7y ago
> things like nation states or big economic interests or religions exist because of death anxiety Interesting, it makes sense on the surface but not if you dig dipper. I doubt that this fear has ANY impact on nation states or big economics, fear of death is very well situated and certain conditions must be met to trigger it, meaning it's not predictable, not constant, and can not be a major driver in global politics or economics. Sex and mating on the other hand, is a completely different story, I find the idea of sex being the major factor, influencer, and driver behind global trends and economics a lot more plausible (I'm a Freud's fan)
- AQuantized 7y ago
  Much of the evidence supporting TMT shows things such as people behaving significantly differently when even subtly primed with thoughts of their mortality, such as driving past a graveyard. At the end of the day it's always going to be a theory within which that evidence finds its explanation, but it's perhaps more compelling than the alternatives.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  I on the other hand can't find any visible connection between sex and just about anything important, except negatively - in the sense that a significant job of societies, governments and religions is limiting how people can express their sex drive. It's the first time I've heard of TMT, but it does seem intuitively reasonable to me. Fear of death and its inevitability leads to search for meaning and symbolic immortality, and from that you can derive most of civilization, up to and including everything that happens in geopolitics. So the connection seems much more obvious.
- v64 7y ago
  > I find the idea of sex being the major factor, influencer, and driver behind global trends and economics a lot more plausible (I'm a Freud's fan) Sex and death are often viewed in opposition. Psychotherapist Esther Perel has described eroticism as "an antidote to death" and the essay "Why Men Love War" [1] describes the use of sex by soldiers to forget about the death and destruction around them. TMT would argue that the influence of sex in society is precisely due to its effectiveness at distracting us from death. [1] https://public.wsu.edu/~hughesc/why_men_love_war.htm https://public.wsu.edu/~hughesc/why_men_love_war.htm
  - rinchik 7y ago
    Oh nice! Great argument! But correlation does not imply causation. When you are talking about feared solders, you are most definitely talking about a war. Wars are about the assertion, or defense of the right to power (mostly done/triggered by political elites), and there can not be more sexual thing other than power, even pre-historically, we can agree that power gives you freedom, freedom of choosing your mate. It gives you options. Gyms, healthy diets, financial success, fashion, entertainment, all these are driven by sex, by desire, desire to mate. Sex is not about distraction, sex is about power. when we are talking about politics or macro-economics, fear of death is not relevant or even considered at all. Your argument actually confirms how powerful sex is. A lot more powerful than what we give it credit for.
    - solidsnack9000 7y ago
      Association does not imply causation either. Your entire argument is simply association. You say soldiers and then you associate war; you say war and then you associate power; you say power and then you associate sex. What you are not being plain about is that you choose each association. You could have chosen another; there is no reason offered for why we have to consider this particular chain of associations. This is how so much psychoanalysis worked, by the way, and is part of why that school lost credibility. Your final point, turning the commenters argument around on itself, is a masterful example of rhetoric but not of argument or explanation. Of course, you leave open the question of why sex is important to us; of what it draws its importance from.