Knowing No Fear: Curse or Blessing? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Knowing No Fear: Curse or Blessing?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Sheffields_Park
Dec 19, 2010 2:24:54 It seems that scientists have discovered a woman with a rare genetic disease (called Urbach-Wiethe disease) and as a result, suffered damage to the amygdala part of the brain, and now can't experience fear.

www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/6769...

My question to you is, would you find the inability to experience fear to be a blessing or a curse?

#2
Qmark
Dec 19, 2010 2:25:55 Fear is an essential component of not getting dead.
#3
pluisjen
Dec 19, 2010 11:55:20 It's a curse for her, as mentioned before fear is an important and required instinct. But it can be a blessing for other people, as this enables her to do things that other people might not... of course those things would most likely involve them putting her in danger so whether those are ethical are a different discussion.

Probably very interesting research topic though, they could potentially use people like this to find answers to irrational fears that many people are bothered by.
#4
adun_irving
Dec 19, 2010 13:10:07 Despite the negative rap it gets, fear is a very good thing. Fear is an essential component in rationality, and without fear this woman could jump to some pretty startling conclusions or come up with some crazy ideas. I don't want to be around her when she goes into the military surplus store to see if she can make a better fried turkey...
#5
EscherEnigma
Dec 19, 2010 13:41:32
My question to you is, would you find the inability to experience fear to be a blessing or a curse?

If it wasn't for fear, I would have joined the wrestling team in high school, might have had a date to prom, wouldn't have been suicidally depressed from the age of 12 to 20, would have graduated years ago, would have tried years ago to get into the Navy as an officer, would have...

... you get the point.

So yeah. I would say that I would be a much happier person if I hadn't been able to experience fear.

On another note, isn't there a Grimm's Fairy Tales story about a boy that knew no fear? I think he ended up marrying a princess and getting a butt-load of gold.

On another-another note, lack of fear does not mean lack of rationality. You can still say "yes, this is a dangerous situation, I had best be cautious" without knowing fear.

What you cannot be, however, is brave.
#6
iqwinn
Dec 19, 2010 15:37:58 Fear is a normal reaction to an unfamiliar, potentially dangerous situation. Moving forward in spite of the fear can be considered courage, if you have a reasonable chance of surviving, or even if your non-survival results in the survival of others. However, going up against a red dragon with nothing more than a dagger, unless you are a level 30 monk, is nothing short of grave stupidity (pun intended). In that case, avoidance is the best alternative.

For some reason, I'm thinking of Shrek grabbing the dragon's tail.
#7
zombie_babies
Dec 20, 2010 13:13:08 I think living without fear would be ok. Compared to living without pain - something that a lot of people think would be pretty sweet - living without fear would be just fine. Those poor kids born without the ability to feel pain don't last very long. And they get so, so mangled, too. Not knowing fear would be a walk in the park in comparison, I think.
#8
pluisjen
Dec 20, 2010 14:17:24 Living without pain is almost hell... it's very difficult and often you die very young.

Regarding the "no fear" though... everyone says that without fear you're still rational... but how can you be rational about new things without fear? I can imagine that you know you shouldn't jump off a 15 story building because that's rationally a bad idea... but what about fidgeting with some loose wires? Would you still have the instinct that says "those might be live. you might shock yourself, be careful" or would you just not care and go mess around?

I think in any situation where people say to themselves "hmm, I should proceed carefully" are going to be much harder when you don't know fear... as you've a lot less reason to be careful.

Granted I might be wrong, but I don't think it's as easy as it sounds.
#9
zombie_babies
Dec 20, 2010 14:28:44 No fear != not understanding consequences, though.
#10
Ragnar_Lodbrok
Dec 20, 2010 14:34:13 No one instinctively knows not to mess with live wires. We haven't had them as part of our environment anywhere near long enough for that .
#11
homicidal_squirrel
Dec 20, 2010 15:27:00
Living without pain is almost hell... it's very difficult and often you die very young.

Regarding the "no fear" though... everyone says that without fear you're still rational... but how can you be rational about new things without fear? I can imagine that you know you shouldn't jump off a 15 story building because that's rationally a bad idea... but what about fidgeting with some loose wires? Would you still have the instinct that says "those might be live. you might shock yourself, be careful" or would you just not care and go mess around?

I think in any situation where people say to themselves "hmm, I should proceed carefully" are going to be much harder when you don't know fear... as you've a lot less reason to be careful.

Granted I might be wrong, but I don't think it's as easy as it sounds.

Also...
The article mentions that this lady turned her back and walked away (calmly) from someone who had just threatened her with a knife, and when she was presented with several poisonous snakes and spiders, she wanted to pet them.
#12
EscherEnigma
Dec 20, 2010 15:48:54 Also from the article...
“What that suggests to us is that perhaps the amygdala is acting at a very instinctual, unconscious level,” says Feinstein. “Without this area, instead of just losing your interest in things, you do the very thing that’s opposite. She tends to approach the very things she should be avoiding.”

So it's not just that she doesn't feel fear. It might not be possible in humans to be immune to fear without these other behavioral alterations, but that wasn't the question.

Not to mention that it's very dangerous to generalize from a case study to... well, anything.
#13
pluisjen
Dec 20, 2010 17:09:29 If I remember correctly there was also a test once with mice... they removed the fear center. These mice then were no longer afraid of cats and would infact go up to them and just eat next to them.

The most interesting part wasn't really the mice.. it was the cats. They refused to eat the fearless mice.

Ah well.
#14
adun_irving
Dec 20, 2010 18:41:22 That, at least, makes sense. Fear does have a scent, or at least a pheromone associated with it, so that predators know what is prey. As can be seen in the wild, if you're fearless or angry enough, you can even cow a hungry bear into not attacking you.

Unfortunately, animals that attack defensively will probably be even more likely to kill you...
#15
zombie_babies
Dec 21, 2010 8:41:32 I'm pretty sure it's more related to sight than scent. Predators key on movement - to find what they're looking for and to know what to do when they find it. If the mouse simply walked up to the cat, sat there and ate calmly, it would not be behaving as a prey creature. It would not inspire the cat to action because there would be no chase. It's why you're not supposed to do things like run from bears, big cats, etc or even jump away from an aggressive venomous snake. The movement - rapid, evasive - keys them to attack. Standing your ground can help but it's no guarantee of safety. It is, though, a better bet than running away from something faster than you.

You can get a cat to chase down the dot presented by a laser pointer - but only if you move it. The cat will run the thing down, swinging and biting at it in order to 'kill' it or, at the least, 'knock it down'. As far as I know, a laser pointer has no fear and, therefore, no smell of fear to give off.

EDIT: Fear also keys the fight or flight thing. As such, I can't see it as a good indicator of behavior or suitability as a snack. The thing may run offering you a chance at chasing it down or it may stand and fight. Scared ****less, but fighting cuz that's what the adrenaline has it doin'. Yeah, I'm not really buyin' the 'scent of fear' thing. I believe it's far, far more sight related and the animal or whatever keys on body language, posture, etc rather than some smell.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Sheffields_Park Dec 19, 2010 2:24:54	It seems that scientists have discovered a woman with a rare genetic disease (called Urbach-Wiethe disease) and as a result, suffered damage to the amygdala part of the brain, and now can't experience fear. www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/6769... My question to you is, would you find the inability to experience fear to be a blessing or a curse?
#2 Qmark Dec 19, 2010 2:25:55	Fear is an essential component of not getting dead.
#3 pluisjen Dec 19, 2010 11:55:20	It's a curse for her, as mentioned before fear is an important and required instinct. But it can be a blessing for other people, as this enables her to do things that other people might not... of course those things would most likely involve them putting her in danger so whether those are ethical are a different discussion. Probably very interesting research topic though, they could potentially use people like this to find answers to irrational fears that many people are bothered by.
#4 adun_irving Dec 19, 2010 13:10:07	Despite the negative rap it gets, fear is a very good thing. Fear is an essential component in rationality, and without fear this woman could jump to some pretty startling conclusions or come up with some crazy ideas. I don't want to be around her when she goes into the military surplus store to see if she can make a better fried turkey...
#5 EscherEnigma Dec 19, 2010 13:41:32	My question to you is, would you find the inability to experience fear to be a blessing or a curse? If it wasn't for fear, I would have joined the wrestling team in high school, might have had a date to prom, wouldn't have been suicidally depressed from the age of 12 to 20, would have graduated years ago, would have tried years ago to get into the Navy as an officer, would have... ... you get the point. So yeah. I would say that I would be a much happier person if I hadn't been able to experience fear. On another note, isn't there a Grimm's Fairy Tales story about a boy that knew no fear? I think he ended up marrying a princess and getting a butt-load of gold. On another-another note, lack of fear does not mean lack of rationality. You can still say "yes, this is a dangerous situation, I had best be cautious" without knowing fear. What you cannot be, however, is brave.
#6 iqwinn Dec 19, 2010 15:37:58	Fear is a normal reaction to an unfamiliar, potentially dangerous situation. Moving forward in spite of the fear can be considered courage, if you have a reasonable chance of surviving, or even if your non-survival results in the survival of others. However, going up against a red dragon with nothing more than a dagger, unless you are a level 30 monk, is nothing short of grave stupidity (pun intended). In that case, avoidance is the best alternative. For some reason, I'm thinking of Shrek grabbing the dragon's tail.
#7 zombie_babies Dec 20, 2010 13:13:08	I think living without fear would be ok. Compared to living without pain - something that a lot of people think would be pretty sweet - living without fear would be just fine. Those poor kids born without the ability to feel pain don't last very long. And they get so, so mangled, too. Not knowing fear would be a walk in the park in comparison, I think.
#8 pluisjen Dec 20, 2010 14:17:24	Living without pain is almost hell... it's very difficult and often you die very young. Regarding the "no fear" though... everyone says that without fear you're still rational... but how can you be rational about new things without fear? I can imagine that you know you shouldn't jump off a 15 story building because that's rationally a bad idea... but what about fidgeting with some loose wires? Would you still have the instinct that says "those might be live. you might shock yourself, be careful" or would you just not care and go mess around? I think in any situation where people say to themselves "hmm, I should proceed carefully" are going to be much harder when you don't know fear... as you've a lot less reason to be careful. Granted I might be wrong, but I don't think it's as easy as it sounds.
#9 zombie_babies Dec 20, 2010 14:28:44	No fear != not understanding consequences, though.
#10 Ragnar_Lodbrok Dec 20, 2010 14:34:13	No one instinctively knows not to mess with live wires. We haven't had them as part of our environment anywhere near long enough for that .
#11 homicidal_squirrel Dec 20, 2010 15:27:00	Living without pain is almost hell... it's very difficult and often you die very young. Regarding the "no fear" though... everyone says that without fear you're still rational... but how can you be rational about new things without fear? I can imagine that you know you shouldn't jump off a 15 story building because that's rationally a bad idea... but what about fidgeting with some loose wires? Would you still have the instinct that says "those might be live. you might shock yourself, be careful" or would you just not care and go mess around? I think in any situation where people say to themselves "hmm, I should proceed carefully" are going to be much harder when you don't know fear... as you've a lot less reason to be careful. Granted I might be wrong, but I don't think it's as easy as it sounds. Also... The article mentions that this lady turned her back and walked away (calmly) from someone who had just threatened her with a knife, and when she was presented with several poisonous snakes and spiders, she wanted to pet them.
#12 EscherEnigma Dec 20, 2010 15:48:54	Also from the article... “What that suggests to us is that perhaps the amygdala is acting at a very instinctual, unconscious level,” says Feinstein. “Without this area, instead of just losing your interest in things, you do the very thing that’s opposite. She tends to approach the very things she should be avoiding.” So it's not just that she doesn't feel fear. It might not be possible in humans to be immune to fear without these other behavioral alterations, but that wasn't the question. Not to mention that it's very dangerous to generalize from a case study to... well, anything.
#13 pluisjen Dec 20, 2010 17:09:29	If I remember correctly there was also a test once with mice... they removed the fear center. These mice then were no longer afraid of cats and would infact go up to them and just eat next to them. The most interesting part wasn't really the mice.. it was the cats. They refused to eat the fearless mice. Ah well.
#14 adun_irving Dec 20, 2010 18:41:22	That, at least, makes sense. Fear does have a scent, or at least a pheromone associated with it, so that predators know what is prey. As can be seen in the wild, if you're fearless or angry enough, you can even cow a hungry bear into not attacking you. Unfortunately, animals that attack defensively will probably be even more likely to kill you...
#15 zombie_babies Dec 21, 2010 8:41:32	I'm pretty sure it's more related to sight than scent. Predators key on movement - to find what they're looking for and to know what to do when they find it. If the mouse simply walked up to the cat, sat there and ate calmly, it would not be behaving as a prey creature. It would not inspire the cat to action because there would be no chase. It's why you're not supposed to do things like run from bears, big cats, etc or even jump away from an aggressive venomous snake. The movement - rapid, evasive - keys them to attack. Standing your ground can help but it's no guarantee of safety. It is, though, a better bet than running away from something faster than you. You can get a cat to chase down the dot presented by a laser pointer - but only if you move it. The cat will run the thing down, swinging and biting at it in order to 'kill' it or, at the least, 'knock it down'. As far as I know, a laser pointer has no fear and, therefore, no smell of fear to give off. EDIT: Fear also keys the fight or flight thing. As such, I can't see it as a good indicator of behavior or suitability as a snack. The thing may run offering you a chance at chasing it down or it may stand and fight. Scared ****less, but fighting cuz that's what the adrenaline has it doin'. Yeah, I'm not really buyin' the 'scent of fear' thing. I believe it's far, far more sight related and the animal or whatever keys on body language, posture, etc rather than some smell.