2 ms·
I guess that just beggs the question of why anger is so engaging, and why people haven't adopted behaviors and norms that suit themselves better.
by s1artibartfast 3y ago
I guess that just beggs the question of why anger is so engaging, and why people haven't adopted behaviors and norms that suit themselves better.
- 93po 3y agoi'd say emotions are engaging, anger is just the easiest one to evoke by people who want to monetize your attention
- kibwen 3y agoEvolution takes generations. Society might adapt, if given enough time, and assuming that society can survive that long while trillion-dollar companies are incentivized to exploit human emotion in such a destructive way.
- schneems 3y agoAlso evolution doesn’t happen due to stimulus unless it affects fitness (just because we don’t like a trait, if people with it keep having babies at the same rate as others, then it won’t go away).
- schneems 3y agoThese aren’t conscious decisions people are making. It’s baked into our chemical systems (read thinking fast and slow for some more context). Millions of years of survival instincts don’t go away overnight. We are wired to pay more attention to negative things so we don’t get eaten. That wiring is exploited at scale in ways we never dreamed of. Even in the days before the internet, nightly news crews knew: if it bleeds, it leads.
- fifticon 3y agoI'd say anger IS a prime engagement mechanism, its purpose is almost to 'engage' ("I must take action to fix this now/it is on ME to engage with this now). The problem is that it can be co-opted and misused to drive up numbers for people sitting in San Francisco, outside of its original purpose in a huntergatherer society.