
The Brain Is Hardwired to Snap - DiabloD3
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/02/160207-brain-violence-rage-snap-science-booktalk/
======
norea-armozel
I remember when I was younger I would snap at the silliest moments, mostly
when I wasn't getting my way. This went on for about 16 years, so there was a
point I was very dangerous to be around if I lost it. What I find interesting
looking back is how now I don't really get all that mad and at worse I'll just
snarky or rude. I don't know what's changed over time (hormones maybe?) but I
do know that unless someone really pushed me I probably wouldn't go into a
ragefit.

~~~
jschwartzi
Part of the function of your frontal lobes is to moderate impulses, and they
actually continue growing and maturing for several years past age 18. It
sounds like you just had a little more growing up to do.

~~~
norea-armozel
This is somewhat true, but I actually use to be very verbally abusive until
three years ago. Then again I was dealing with not even having a therapist to
talk about my gender dysphoria (not being out sucks for me). So who knows wth
is going on with me.

------
mystic001
"We’re constantly dividing people into “us” vs. “them.” And once we put
someone in the “them” category, it can open up the floodgates for violence and
is the root of a lot of human misery and wars."

Some may call this naive, but this is the reason we need more unity in the
world. Less division. More us...less us and them. The media seems to do a
great job of pitting one side against the other. I think many of our attitudes
and perspectives are learned and perpetuated by the media.

~~~
ooo000ooo
> Some may call this naive, but this is the reason we need more unity in the
> world. Less division. More us...less us and them.

Then you have learned nothing. The tribalism in humans is hardwired. It's not
going away, whatever we may wish or do. The media doesn't create the
divisions, they just profit from them.

The key to peaceful coexistence is properly delineated regions and nations, so
that each thede can have their land without being afraid of being invaded and
replaced.

~~~
bonoboTP
But divison is not just about nations.

1) It's also political differences in the same nation. Tribes fragment to
smaller tribes, small tribes merge to large tribes etc.

2) There are divisions based on topics of interest, subcultures, etc. that
aren't location-based, but thanks to telecommunications, global.

~~~
ooo000ooo
> Tribes fragment to smaller tribes, small tribes merge to large tribes etc.

When boundaries can change slowly enough we don't even notice. That's organic
growth, that's ok.

> that aren't location-based, but thanks to telecommunications, global.

Thankfully I only have to close the browser tab to forget about someone Who is
Wrong On The Internet. But I can't do that in meatspace.

------
astazangasta
I'd just like to take this to task for how much supposition is floating
around. Early on we are introduced to the idea of snapping via an anecdote. We
are given a neuronal hook via something called a 'hypothalamic attack region',
which produces rage in rats.

Is this region responsible for the opening episode of rage? We have no idea;
it is pure speculation to assume it is. All of the subsequent examples (crime,
heroism) are imputed to this circuit similarly without evidence.

Then we are given a model (LIFEMORTS), which is extended to cover race
relations and much else. We are told our thinking is 'tribal'; we are expected
to believe this is science, because recall the existence of the hypothalamus
attack region! But there is no evidence chaining these three together
(neurons, the model, the behavior) - we have zero reason to accept the model
view of what happened in Baltimore. It is pure speculation.

------
cpdean
R Douglas Fields grossly misinterprets how much people are exposed to
influences their behavior. "Something like 90 percent of the people in prison
for violent crimes are men."

Something about all these people make them terrible humans, but it's not an
adrenaline response. He's belittling all the social problems in his book by
attributing them to neurological reflexes.

~~~
zzalpha
Not at all. He's saying that what likely landed many, though probably not all,
of them in jail ("snapping") has its basis in neurology, but flat out states
that that response is due to numerous outside triggers, including things like
stress, and that our responses to those triggers are something we can control
once we recognize they're pressing these deeply wired buttons.

That said, I do agree, the story as told here is still a bit black and white
for my taste. For me it was the heroism angle that threw me... E.g., maybe the
majority of decorated vets are men because, until recently, only men were
eligible for combat roles.

~~~
colomon
He talks about the Carnegie Award for Heroism, which is for civilians:
[http://www.carnegiehero.org/](http://www.carnegiehero.org/)

~~~
metasean
Interesting that the the "Deed of Trust" starts off,

> Gentlemen

The first paragraph goes on to talk about supporting _widows_ and children.
Thankfully the paragraph does end with, "Grants of sums of money may also be
made to heroes or heroines as the Commission thinks advisable-each case to be
judged on its merits."

But by the third paragraph, it's back to "A medal shall be given to the hero,
or widow, or next of kin ..."

I'm sure that language doesn't bias anyone on the Commission.

[1] [http://www.carnegiehero.org/deed-of-
trust/](http://www.carnegiehero.org/deed-of-trust/)

------
sjtrny
> We’ve all been there: Some jerk cuts you off on the highway. You lean on the
> horn, scream abuse. You want to get out the car and kick the @#$% out of the
> bozo’s SUV.

Nope

~~~
jmngomes
"The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that between 1990 and 1996 road
rage contributed to 218 deaths and 12,610 injuries. The study analyzed 10,037
police reports and newspaper stories about traffic accidents that led to
violence. What's more, AAA found that road rage incidents increased nearly 7
percent each year within that six-year period."

in
[http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun05/anger.aspx](http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun05/anger.aspx)

~~~
nothrabannosir
Not sure what you're trying to say, exactly. "There is proof that road rage
exists"? OP didn't say "Road rage doesn't exist", he said "It's not
universal". A universal quantifier ("all" or "none") can be disproven with a
counter-example (op to article), an existential quantifier ("some" or "not
all") can't (you, if I understand it correctly, to op).

He's just saying "speak for yourself."

Or did you mean something else?

------
fiatmoney
"Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory" is an excellent book on related
subjects.

------
golemotron
> When you look at the subject of aggression there is no more important factor
> than gender. Something like 90 percent of the people in prison for violent
> crimes are men. Men have different brains than women, which comes from our
> different roles during evolution, when the brain was formed. Men had a role
> of being aggressive, which makes no sense for a woman because a woman was
> not endowed with the physical strength of a man, who probably outweighs her.
> But although 90 percent of those in jail are men, 90 percent of people who
> have been awarded medals by the Carnegie Institute for heroism are also men.

What is wrong with this guy? Doesn't he know that gender is a social
construct?

~~~
vzip
It's kind of frightening that people are leaving university with a developed
hostility toward the notion of sexual dimorphism in humans.

~~~
golemotron
Steven Pinker's'The Blank Slate' explains it well. Western culture has a bias
toward nurture explanations rather than nature explanations because admitting
nature affects people's perceptions of their abilities and our sense of agency
as a culture. If all differences are culture we can fix them. That's why it
becomes political.

~~~
bonoboTP
This is especially so in US culture. The "eveyone's responsible for their own
fate" meme is still very strong there.

~~~
zo1
I disagree. The opposite is ridiculously pushed from what I can tell of the
online-manifestation of western culture. Rather, what I'd argue is the
elephant in the room, is that it doesn't matter which of the two is the right
answer. We should take responsibility for doing the right thing, regardless if
our nature or our surroundings made us a certain way.

Barring certain extreme cases, of course, such as mental illness and such.

~~~
bonoboTP
I wasn't talking about which one is right. It's just an interesting feature of
American culture. The positive side is that people are proud of their
successes, they are encouraged, every kid is told they can one day become
President etc (obviously exaggerated, but the Tall Poppy Syndrome is not
characteristic of the US).

The stereotypical US things, like no universal health care, no tuition-free
education, lax gun laws, mass incarceration, death penalty etc. are also a
manifestation of this attitude.

You must take care of yourself, you must protect yourself, if you make it then
great! If you become a criminal, you become subhuman and can be executed and
treated brutally by the police. If you become dirt poor, that's your fault,
you can become homeless, there's no welfare.

Now again, I'm exaggerating somewhat to emphasize what I mean. And yes I also
know the historical origins of this mentality, and as I said, there are also
positive consequences, like most major innovations and scientific discoveries
coming from the US, the huge dynamic market where anyone can start a new
company with manageable levels of bureaucracy (compared to most European
countries) etc.

