Live data from Hacker News

Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

nytimes.com

11–20 of 249 posts

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#11
post #8

I think of the murderers as having some kind of hardware bug. We have evolved special safeguard that prevents us form killing the people we live with and people we meet daily. It's crazy that we do live in proximity of other people and meet them if you think how dangerous single person can be when this safeguard fails. All the search for reasons why the person killed is little bit like creating fake narratives to kin…

Whilst it might be accurate to describe depression's root cause as a 'hardware bug' it is a much more common bug than you seem to assume.

It seems more appropriate to me to view it as a case of hardware specialized for one purpose systematically failing for another. The former is some evolutionary root, and the latter is modern society.

One of the most interesting parts of the linked article is the implication that people going postal are not so different from you and me. You seem to disregard it.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#12
post #6
post #2

I cringe every time I hear perpetrators of mass shootings described as "evil". Evil implies a presence of something bad. It's an easy label that allows people to hate the perpetrator. It's much more accurate to describe the perpetrators as cold, empty, detached. That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. There is no such thing as evil. I a…

> That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. This position is strange, you think the only position from which you can reason or bargain with another person is if they are emotionally attached? I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless. By this measure I sup…

Why do you believe emotion is useless? I cannot think of any aspects of our psychology that are useless (they evolved for a reason).

Negative emotions are fundamentally indicators of a cognitive dissonance and are absolutely invaluable in maintaining a healthy system of introspection. Your profile shows you're also a programmer so here's an analogy I use internally: negative emotions are part of a monitoring system built into our brains that inform us when an assumption in our set of operating beliefs (our personality source code) has been violated. (You get angry when your beliefs about 'fairness' are violated, you feel disappointment when your beliefs about e.g. 'relationships' are violated, etc.)

Positive emotions fulfil a similar role, in the opposite direction by reinforcing the value of the beliefs you've created, although negative emotions are more interesting because your response to the emotion can be extrospective ("I feel angry because that guy cut me off on the road and that violates my beliefs about fairness; I'm getting out my tire iron and teaching him the right way to do things") or they can be introspectively rational, controlled and empowering ("Should I revisit my beliefs about fairness to be more in tune with reality, where people make mistakes?"). People with dysfunctional belief systems and rigid attitudes towards their beliefs are prone to depression (i.e. their belief systems do not serve them well given reality, either through distortion or inadapation).

From an evolutionary perspective, I suspect extrospective analysis was more useful ("I'm angry because the other ape has stolen my lunch, and resources are scarce, so I'm going to punch him in the face"), which explains our default, instinctive "emotional" response to emotions, but as civilization develops and the rules change, introspective responses (which encourage co-operation) are more useful (but more fraught with dangers such as depression, which is a kind of reinforcement feedback loop of negative emotional states, beliefs and poor assumptions). Nevertheless, the high value of emotions remains present.

If anybody reading this finds this personal philosophy interesting, I highly recommend reading David Burns' "Feeling Good" for an exhaustive listing/discussion of emotional states and responses, and constructive ways of dealing with these experiences.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#13
post #6
post #2

I cringe every time I hear perpetrators of mass shootings described as "evil". Evil implies a presence of something bad. It's an easy label that allows people to hate the perpetrator. It's much more accurate to describe the perpetrators as cold, empty, detached. That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. There is no such thing as evil. I a…

> That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. This position is strange, you think the only position from which you can reason or bargain with another person is if they are emotionally attached? I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless. By this measure I sup…

That may not be possible. A good case can be made that emotions are vital to human cognition. E.g.:

http://www.amazon.com/Descartes-Error-Emotion-Reason-Human/d...

What you could instead be doing is not noticing your subtler emotions. Until I took up meditation, I thought I was very rational. But after years of paying attention to the flows of my thought, I've become aware just how much emotion is part of cognition.

That process has left me behaving more rationally, in that before I couldn't control things I wasn't aware of. Or things I refused to be aware of because I didn't like to think I was anything other than logical.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#14
post #6
post #2

I cringe every time I hear perpetrators of mass shootings described as "evil". Evil implies a presence of something bad. It's an easy label that allows people to hate the perpetrator. It's much more accurate to describe the perpetrators as cold, empty, detached. That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. There is no such thing as evil. I a…

> That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. This position is strange, you think the only position from which you can reason or bargain with another person is if they are emotionally attached? I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless. By this measure I sup…

> I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless.

Wow, your kids are going to have more issues than Playboy.

On a more serious note, you realize this means that you're purposely trying as hard you can to live a life free from happiness, empathy and contentment?

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#15
post #12
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. This position is strange, you think the only position from which you can reason or bargain with another person is if they are emotionally attached? I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless. By this measure I sup…

Why do you believe emotion is useless? I cannot think of any aspects of our psychology that are useless (they evolved for a reason). Negative emotions are fundamentally indicators of a cognitive dissonance and are absolutely invaluable in maintaining a healthy system of introspection. Your profile shows you're also a programmer so here's an analogy I use internally: negative emotions are part of a monitoring system b…

I believe emotion is useless because it is largely a distraction. By this I mean that if there are reasons other than emotional to take a course of action, the positive enforcement of emotion to push you in that direction is unnecessary. However, if there are no reasons other than emotional in order to undertake an action, that's a good indicator that the action is not a good path to take.

This doesn't mean that an action which we are compelled to undertake for emotional reasons is necessarily bad, merely that the emotional justification alone is not enough. Same with when we are compelled not to and negative emotions.

Emotion just serves to muddy the waters. I certainly agree with your position that it had an evolutionary advantage at one stage, however I think that has run its course. Frequently human society appears to be little more than an orgy of unthinking, emotionally charged activity. People think less and feel more, and they are guided by these emotions more than by their rational thoughts, to the extent that normal people even think at all.

I think that this is a bad thing. Look at our politics and advertisements, or more generally our levers of compulsion, what largely are the appeals in these arenas designed to target? Our emotions, because this is an extremely effective path for manipulation, the vast majority of humankind is enormously weak to this kind of thing. I believe there is value in making a conscious effort to reject this paradigm.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#16
post #13
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is frightening, because there is no hope of reasoning or bargaining with someone who is truly detached from emotion. This position is strange, you think the only position from which you can reason or bargain with another person is if they are emotionally attached? I purposely try as hard as I can to live a life completely free of emotional entanglement, I think emotion is largely useless. By this measure I sup…

That may not be possible. A good case can be made that emotions are vital to human cognition. E.g.: http://www.amazon.com/Descartes-Error-Emotion-Reason-Human/d... What you could instead be doing is not noticing your subtler emotions. Until I took up meditation, I thought I was very rational. But after years of paying attention to the flows of my thought, I've become aware just how much emotion is part of cognition.…

Thanks for sharing that, I'll put it on my to-read list, your description of your personal experience is certainly enough to make me think how it relates to my own.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#17
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot appeal rationally to that which has no utility function.

You think you can't have a utility function without emotional justification, I assume?

All justification/utility is ultimately either emotional, instinctual, or cultured.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#18
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe emotion is useless? I cannot think of any aspects of our psychology that are useless (they evolved for a reason). Negative emotions are fundamentally indicators of a cognitive dissonance and are absolutely invaluable in maintaining a healthy system of introspection. Your profile shows you're also a programmer so here's an analogy I use internally: negative emotions are part of a monitoring system b…

I believe emotion is useless because it is largely a distraction. By this I mean that if there are reasons other than emotional to take a course of action, the positive enforcement of emotion to push you in that direction is unnecessary. However, if there are no reasons other than emotional in order to undertake an action, that's a good indicator that the action is not a good path to take. This doesn't mean that an a…

You may be very different from the typical person, but most people do not exhaustively record their actions, observe consequences, compare with goals, reflect, plan new actions, etc. This is because we already have a good part of this built into our hardware, so to speak.

We build a set of beliefs and act them out. Emotions are the feedback mechanism we use to determine whether the beliefs are serving us well enough to reach our goals. Many people stop there, I agree.

Higher-level individuals capable of greater introspection are aware that their initial belief system, as a child, was largely programmed by parents, relatives, friends, etc. These people monitor their beliefs and adjust them appropriately (e.g. getting angry about somebody not acting the way I'd like them to is pointless, so I'm going to change my belief), or they adjust the world (e.g. scientists researching medicines, engineers building things or software etc.)

EDIT To do so without taking advantage of our emotional processing subsystems would be very exhausting and tiring. I think it's also impossible to escape this characteristic of your humanity; you can learn to suppress your emotions but then you run the risk of not dealing with the cognitive dissonance that caused them in the first place, and this is very dangerous because in effect you are suppressing reality and disconnecting yourself from the world (I'm guessing this is a similar process to how people like the Unabomber create their dangerous belief systems - by ignoring reality they don't like).

I think the problem is not emotions -- the problem is the lack of awareness people have for the role emotions play in our lives, and their options for responding to the emotions (emotions are not facts because beliefs are not facts, yet the vast majority of people act on the basis of their emotions being facts about reality).

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#19
post #8

I think of the murderers as having some kind of hardware bug. We have evolved special safeguard that prevents us form killing the people we live with and people we meet daily. It's crazy that we do live in proximity of other people and meet them if you think how dangerous single person can be when this safeguard fails. All the search for reasons why the person killed is little bit like creating fake narratives to kin…

Whilst it might be accurate to describe depression's root cause as a 'hardware bug' it is a much more common bug than you seem to assume. It seems more appropriate to me to view it as a case of hardware specialized for one purpose systematically failing for another. The former is some evolutionary root, and the latter is modern society. One of the most interesting parts of the linked article is the implication that p…

> You seem to disregard it.

In a way. I think that those people are not so different from you and me. With exception to the one thing. They have the antikill safeguard damaged. Looking for the cause of murder in the things you and me may have experienced as well and not go postal is in IMHO misguided. People should not look for what caused the murder but what caused the damage to the safeguard and think up ways to detect it and maybe even correct it in advance.

I don't think it's depression. Depression is whole other kind of hardware bug. And the antikill safeguard damage is also more common than you might expect. Many times a year there is a news about some guy killing his wife and children and often himself after that. It's so common that it's not even a big news. They call it extended suicide but I think in many cases that's not the right description.

Re: Don’t Jump to Conclusions About the Killer

#20
I've read about killings before, I lived through 9/11, but for some reason these killings struck me really hard. Even more than school shootings. Perhaps because I think of the cinema as sanctuary - a place of make believe where we go to escape (move over places of worship!) but mostly because I wanted to really know motivations - why did he do it? Especially when it turns out he's not a person who tortured animals as a kid etc etc. I want to know why a seemingly normal person can meticulously plan such a senseless act of destruction.
Post reply on HN