Slashdot Mirror
Revenge Really Does Taste Sweet
Wizzy Wig writes "The Toronto Star is reporting on scientific experiments showing a link between revenge and the 'pleasure center' of the human brain, thus putting a nature spin on something heretofore thought of as a nurture based, or learned, emotion."
Revenge is always one of those things that, besides are better ethics not too, always makes one feel good.
.
It's never a matter of being right or wrong, it's that feeling of justice I suppose, the feeling that we have, in our eyes, made things right in the world
Of course, it's also immensely selfish and one sided.
Cheers,
James Carr
I think a better solution is to find a safe outlet for these urges. Sports are a fairly common choice, but there is a wide range of activities that allow you to vent your frustrations without driving dangerously or beating spouses/offspring.
_____
Thank you.
The point is that revenge has a biological basis; it's not a learned behavior, as was previously thought. This has serious implications about human behavior and society.
WWD4D?
'[I]f we want to be civilized humans, we have to go against these basic, animalistic instincts.'
'Is anyone else here thinking "Prisoner's dilemma"?'
In the iterated prisoner's dilemma, the potential for revenge is an incentive to cooperate. In light of this, your assumption -- that revenge is inherently inimical to civilization -- does not obviously hold.
I think if you revenge for something, you actually want to show your victim that you can "also do that", and the victim is not superior to you, and can push you around.
so revenge is an act who increasess self-esteem which gives satisfaction (this is clear, I think).
therefore it's not an instinctive thing, rather a "point-of-view"-thing which comes out of rationality.
I myself think, I am superior if I stay with my ethics and do not hurt people in revenge. That doesen't mean I wouldn't hurt people at all, but not in revenge.
This gives me satisfaction, too.
South africa had seen a very bitter and long conflict not just between white and black but between whites and whites. Brown and black. Black and black. Zulus where used by the white goverment as a way to keep the ANC down. People from india where put in a middle position. Jews were on the outside white but just as prosecuted.
So why was there no revenge? Their sure was enough on all sides to be bitter about.
Because all sides realized that revenge was not an option. Even the neo-nazis realized that either there was peace or they were going to get slaughtered.
Peace was possible because no side wanted to risk war.
An example to the world that we can rise above ourselves. And sadly one that is almost impossible to duplicate. Usually at least one side thinks that he will win the war. The person cutting you off doesn't consider that he will die horribly in an accident or that you will gun him down. The rapist does not consider he will go to jail. The troll does not consider that someone will look him up and punch his face in.
South africa didn't take revenge because they were afraid of what revenge would do to them.
So I disagree with out. I think revenge is very usefull. Most usefull when both sides fear the potential of revenge.
The extreme side of the lack of fear of revenge are terrorist attacks. Al Quada could attack because they didn't fear anything america could do back. Or do you really think Osama Bin Laden gives a damn about the people on his side killed?
On the other hand america can act like a real prick because it does not live in fear that someday the world will get revenge. Look at vietnam. America slaughtered yet lives free from ever having to face the consequences.
Revenge is sweet but the fear of revenge keeps humans "civilized" where civilized translates as "from bashing each others head in".
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Forgiveness is no good. But neither is revenge. It's like this. The kid spinning the book was trying to bother you. His happiness relied upon your misery.
You put up with his actions for a few minutes. That is what we call tolerance. Something is bothering you, but you don't do anything about it, you tolerate it. This doesn't work because even though you don't put out a reaction two other things happen. You are still unhappy, and the other person still gains joy. Also you bottle up whatever you would have let out.
Forgiveness is when someone does something and you say, even though you bothered me, that's ok. Instead of doing nothing you respond to the annoyance with a positive. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't. Usually its an acknowledgement of your displeasure and the annoying guy still has fun. And now that you are marked as a source of fun, you will be a future target.
The real way to avoid tolerance, forgiveness and revenge is apathy. So, he's spinning his book. WHo cares? So he ruins your drawing, who cares? Let it happen and carry on. It's not enough to just carry on though, you have to legitimately not care. People can sense it if you are getting frustrated and then you've lost. I legitimately don't care what other people think about me or what other people do. It's fantastic. Because of this I say and do whatever I want and most consequences evaporate. This doesn't necessarily mean I do evil things. Whatever I want usually means trying to help people and do good. But I don't let the actions or opinions of others guide my decisions or actions.
If this guy did to me what he did to you he would have a very tough time. First when he couldn't get a reaction he would try harder. Now he's not having fun because he's putting in more effort and not getting a return out of it. Two things can happen. Either he will give up because its too much effort, or he will hit me first. If he gives up, I win. If he hits first, it's all over. I get up and send him to the hospital. I never hit first, ever. I'm almost pacifist in that way. But if I get hit, nukes come out. And demonstrating this behavior tends to make it so that people don't bother you so much anymore. Both because of fear and lack of fun.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
It's too bad that in many western societies Justice is almost equivalent to Revenge.
This may be a little offtopic...
Justice should never appeal to the "lower" human feeling, but rather be designed to prevent crime from happending in the first place. Revenge has no place in Justice as it does nothing to "undo" the crime after it happened.
Crimes are prevented by:
- Eliminating the reason (for example poverty and social inequalities).
- Education (for example learn to deal with jealousy, envy, and other desires and feelings in a non-violent way)
- Deterrance (if you commit a crime, face the consequences).
- Reparation (not preventing anything, but necessary to repair the damage caused - this is not revenge!)
This is a big difference, although in practise the differences are subtle; i.e. are you locking somebody up because of revenge or deterrance?When somebody is punished for a crime, there should be no pleasure and no feeling of revenge or even accomblishment! Rather there should be the urge to understand why the crime happened and the understanding that this is necessary to deter the next.