OK, this is perhaps coming at it from a strange angle, but bear with me.
I was thinking about grief, and why it exists. In particular, the agonizing grief of losing a loved-one. It doesn't have an evolutionary benefit and in fact seems a detriment to survival, so why does it exist?
And where I went with that is that it may not have an evolutionary advantage, but it may be the unavoidable result of something that does have an advantage that outweighs the negative consequences. Like bright light creates shadows or the dangerous snapping of a high-tension bungee cord, the affection we feel for our loved ones has the inevitable 'snapback' of grief when they're gone.
So that leads me to back to this question: is this uptick in mass shootings (when EVERY OTHER indicator of violent crimes is generally falling!) the inevitable 'result' of a self-absorbed, atomized, overindulgent society? When everyone can have anything they want 24/7, whenever they want, when there are few (if any consequences) for counter-societal behaviors, how much of a stretch is it that some warped individuals decide to 'indulge' in mass violence? The US is unquestionably the leader in narcissistic, shallow, self-indulgence in the western world. What happens when a child gets everything they want, all the time? They turn into a horrible, horrible person, commonly called 'spoiled'. Why should we believe that's limited to children?
I'm not advocating anything here; I don't want to give up a self-indulgent way of life any more than anyone else. I admire the Stoics, but honestly don't believe I have the strength of character to be one. (Besides, what's the logical conclusion of that path? ISIS?)
What I wonder/fear is that the cultural path we're on has socio-/psychological implications consequences that haven't really been addressed seriously.
I'm not sure we ever can address them, as any substantive discussion veers off into politics, power, and protecting whatever indulgence happens to be "my own" priority.
I was thinking about grief, and why it exists. In particular, the agonizing grief of losing a loved-one. It doesn't have an evolutionary benefit and in fact seems a detriment to survival, so why does it exist?
And where I went with that is that it may not have an evolutionary advantage, but it may be the unavoidable result of something that does have an advantage that outweighs the negative consequences. Like bright light creates shadows or the dangerous snapping of a high-tension bungee cord, the affection we feel for our loved ones has the inevitable 'snapback' of grief when they're gone.
So that leads me to back to this question: is this uptick in mass shootings (when EVERY OTHER indicator of violent crimes is generally falling!) the inevitable 'result' of a self-absorbed, atomized, overindulgent society? When everyone can have anything they want 24/7, whenever they want, when there are few (if any consequences) for counter-societal behaviors, how much of a stretch is it that some warped individuals decide to 'indulge' in mass violence? The US is unquestionably the leader in narcissistic, shallow, self-indulgence in the western world. What happens when a child gets everything they want, all the time? They turn into a horrible, horrible person, commonly called 'spoiled'. Why should we believe that's limited to children?
I'm not advocating anything here; I don't want to give up a self-indulgent way of life any more than anyone else. I admire the Stoics, but honestly don't believe I have the strength of character to be one. (Besides, what's the logical conclusion of that path? ISIS?)
What I wonder/fear is that the cultural path we're on has socio-/psychological implications consequences that haven't really been addressed seriously.
I'm not sure we ever can address them, as any substantive discussion veers off into politics, power, and protecting whatever indulgence happens to be "my own" priority.
No comments:
Post a Comment