3 ms·
>Humans are built to thrive in danger, chaos and instability. I think a good chunk of humans go insane in a safe and stable environment and resent the things th
by genghisjahn 2y ago
>Humans are built to thrive in danger, chaos and instability. I think a good chunk of humans go insane in a safe and stable environment and resent the things that allow them to live mundane, safe lives -- technology, medicine and rational thinking.
And yet science says the opposite. The prevailing evidence suggests that humans are generally better suited to stable and safe environments, with danger and chaos typically leading to detrimental effects on mental health.
- jazzyjackson 2y agoThe safest and richest societies are also the most highly medicated, so I would question to what prevailing evidence you refer. For an extreme example one might consider soldiers / warfighters. Very high rates of trauma and suicidality after returning from war, and this is only anecdotal not first hand but I would be interested to know what the mental health of deployed soldiers looks like in comparison (certainly there is a range of environments between 'deployed at a desk in japan' vs combat units living in 'danger, chaos and instability', so it might be a good context to study within)
- ceejayoz 2y ago> The safest and richest societies are also the most highly medicated... That, alone, could point to two very obvious but very different conclusions. One is that people in those societies need medications more. Alternatively, people in these societies get needed medications more. I suspect the average American gets more therapy than the average Afghan, but I suspect the Afghans would still benefit from it.
- pksebben 2y agoI think Maslow would have a point to make, here. Privileged societies are more medicated because the most pressing issues to them are (somewhat) soluble using medication. Because they are not imminently worried about housing and sustenance or violence. Would be odd to consider medicating for fibromyalgia or depression when you're starving and/or being bombed / shot at.
- wussboy 2y agoThe word "generally" is the important one in your sentence. Genes don't know what environment they will be born into, and so they include various strategies to cope with the unknown in the hope that some will survive. Generally, humans are better suited to stable and safe environments. But it would be irresponsible of genes not to include, occasionally, humans who did better in chaos because chaos frequently happens.
- jon_richards 2y agoI believe there was a study that showed a mix of behaviors because populations with cooperative individuals out-compete in plentiful times and selfish individuals out-compete in scarce times. Hard to Google now because of selfish gene theory.