Slashdot Mirror


Dissecting the Neural Circuitry of Fear

al0ha writes "Fear begins in your brain, and it is there — specifically in an almond-shaped structure called the amygdala — that it is controlled, processed, and let out of the gate to kick off the rest of the fear response. In this week's issue of the journal Nature, a research team led by scientists at the California Institute of Technology has taken an important step toward understanding just how this kickoff occurs by beginning to dissect the neural circuitry of fear. In their paper (abstract), these scientists ... describe a microcircuit in the amygdala that controls, or 'gates,' the outflow of fear from that region of the brain. The microcircuit in question, [Professor David J. Anderson] explains, contains two subtypes of neurons that are antagonistic — have opposing functions — and that control the level of fear output from the amygdala by acting like a seesaw. 'Imagine that one end of a seesaw is weighted and normally sits on a garden hose, preventing water — in this analogy, the fear impulse — from flowing through it,' says Anderson. 'When a signal that triggers a fear response arrives, it presses down on the opposite end of the seesaw, lifting the first end off the hose and allowing fear, like water, to flow.' Once the flow of fear has begun, that impulse can be transmitted to other regions of the brain that control fearful behavior, such as freezing in place."

123 comments

  1. Now that you know how fear works by MRe_nl · · Score: 5, Funny

    Please put your hand in this little box...

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  2. Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if the repercussions of removing the amygdala completely would be catastrophic to the person. In a society where we don't necessarily have direct predators, would a fearless person be more bold and have less stress? I wouldn't mind a boost in either of those traits. :)

    --
    check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    1. Re:Remove it! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Look,

      They just want raw, killer soldiers - who won't come back with either PTSD or a human soul.

      This is the kind of research that begins looking lie rational inquiry into the determining mechanisms of everyday psychology, and ends in horrors.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      removing the amygdala completely

      It's not worth it, trust me.

      -River Tam

      PS: Also, I can kill you with my brain.

    3. Re:Remove it! by rastilin · · Score: 1

      That's a good point, they probably would be bolder and have less stress. I wonder if they might also end up dead faster from bad judgements; like attempting things they're unskilled at that have large negative outcomes (driving on an icy road, attacking a mugger without training or a weapon)? What I would love to see is a drug that lets you suppress a dose-Dependant chunk of your fear for a period of time. Would that still allow you to instinctively protect yourself while letting you take fairly consequence free risks?

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    4. Re:Remove it! by brainboyz · · Score: 1

      Fear reduction and removal would be completely different. Fear is part of the indicator that keeps you from repeating dumb mistakes. If you walk into the road w/o looking and almost get hit by a car, you'll probably be more cautious next time. W/o fear, you'd probably walk blindly into the road regardless of what happened last time unless you were actually thinking about it. Fear is that safety meter you want intact.

    5. Re:Remove it! by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fear is necessary to function in all levels of society - not just fear of death. I need to fear losing my job in order to keep me from yelling at my boss. I need to fear the slap of a women before I drop the worst pickup lines of the century. I need to fear the reprocussions of the law before I go rob a bank.

      A "Fearless" person would have no place in our world. Sometimes it is fear which drives us to do the right course of action.

    6. Re:Remove it! by elsurexiste · · Score: 1

      Indeed, they are catastrophic. I would gamble that you would become a robot devoid of emotion processing and recalling. The amygdala is much more than fear processing.

      --
      I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
    7. Re:Remove it! by artfulshrapnel · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing there would be a number of strange and unpleasant side effects. The fact that many people in industrialized nations are "fear seekers" (horror movies, roller coasters, extreme sports, videogames, etc.) suggests that there is an inherent desire/need in the human brain to feel fear on a regular basis. With a complete inability to feel fear, it's reasonable to assume a person would become dangerously unstable. Might manifest either as adrenaline junkie tendencies, or as some sort of dissociative disorder. Also, I have a feeling they would die very quickly due to something like: - Walking across a busy intersection trying to pull a "frogger" - Travelling alone at night through a dangerous neighborhood - Overdosing on some sort of medication or chemical - Insulting a bunch of veterans - Attempting some sort of assassination or political uprising - ... or any number of other things we all would totally do if we weren't afraid of the consequences.

    8. Re:Remove it! by dintech · · Score: 1

      It would be interesting to discover if soldiers do the right thing because they are good or because they are afraid of the consequences. Next stop insubordination and war crimes.

    9. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed, it has been shown that many serial killers have a lower or muted sense of fear (startle response, etc).

      Also, ask a bipolar person about the stupid shit they do in their mania state (which can override emotions like fear).

      I once took an SSRI antidepressant and it removed nearly all emotion from me, including fear. It was unpleasant and extraordinarily dangerous to say the least.

    10. Re:Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 1

      See, I wonder about this idea. I understand your point and it's true that I would feel fear at the idea of slapping someone I was mad at but I don't think that's the reason I restrain myself. There's plenty of rational reasons not to run into the middle of the street or slap your boss. This argument kind of reminds me of the religious argument that without a god giving laws there's no reason to be moral or lawful, when in my opinion there are many rational reasons for both. (I'm not trying to lump you in with religious folks or start a religion flameware here, though) Now, whether or not the rational reasons would truly not push me in the right direction I can't say, I've never had the benefit of the experience of having zero fear.

      --
      check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    11. Re:Remove it! by toxonix · · Score: 1

      You'd pretty much be a vegetable without them. There are no isolated components of the brain AFAIK. Removing or damaging anything will have multiple effects. If you damage the amygdala, you might lose the fear response. You'd also lose the ability to form long term memories. You'd lose any notion of protecting yourself from harm of any kind. You'd allow people to abuse you, and have no emotional response to the abuse or fear of it. It would be terrible, but you would have no clue.

    12. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could be quite a few other drawbacks as well. In some cases fearless soldiers could be useful, like say if you have a chinese sized population. However if casualties are problematic, then a bit of fear is still good. Not to mention the fear response also generates addrenaline, A soldier that can walk fearlessly through a barrage of mortors may be a good thing, but a soldier who fears but pushes through, is more likely to succesfully dodge while moving foward.

      Even if you do have unlimited soldiers and consider human life a negligable cost, brain surgery isn't usually cheap, nor is the equipment the average soldier is carrying.

    13. Re:Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 1

      That's a good point, they probably would be bolder and have less stress. I wonder if they might also end up dead faster from bad judgements; like attempting things they're unskilled at that have large negative outcomes (driving on an icy road, attacking a mugger without training or a weapon)? What I would love to see is a drug that lets you suppress a dose-Dependant chunk of your fear for a period of time. Would that still allow you to instinctively protect yourself while letting you take fairly consequence free risks?

      Exactly, that would be incredibly interesting to find out about. And being able to lessen fear response instead of removing it would mitigate risk for the individual.

      --
      check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    14. Re:Remove it! by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree with your point - even without fear you would still have your rational logic (supposedly, we don't know exactly what would happen when you remove this chunk of the brain).

      But assuming that you DO still have logical reasoning and you think "It's in my best interest to NOT rob a bank" - at what point do you then get a benefit by removing the gland? Essentially fear is designed to help your survival - it's not always right - like the deer in headlights freezing when something is heading your way, but that's essentially your body saying "Something you are doing something wrong, STOP" but usually by then its too late. Taking it away doesn't seem to have any real benefits - I don't see how it would reduce stress (if you are still tasked with making difficult decisions) since you don't always come across life-or-death situations everyday.

      Like someone else posted, there are horror movies, roller coasters, video games, etc, a whole bunch of things designed you give you the fear-reaction in a safe environment. By removing that ability you're essentially removing some of the things you can enjoy in life.

    15. Re:Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 1

      Hmm, being a vegetable would probably be pretty stress free but I don't think I've ever considered a carrot bold... well, unless it's used as an ingrediant in a spicy carrot cake.

      --
      check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    16. Re:Remove it! by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      You don't need to fear a consequence to not desire it, or more strongly, desire not having that consequence.

      I feel no fear standing on a curb next to a busy freeway, but I know that if I jump out into traffic, I will likely be killed or maimed. I do not want to be killed or maimed, therefore I don't jump out into traffic no matter how much I don't want to wait to cross the road. It's more than possible to make rational self-preservation decisions, it's done all the time.

      A child might need fear to stop from crossing the road or yelling at their boss, but an adult shouldn't. I think maybe you're thinking of a more abstract form of fear than what your brain squeezes out when you get that jolt or nauseous feeling in your stomach. If you feel actual fear at woman's slap, I feel sorry for you.

      I have, however, seen fear absolutely destroy people. Just yesterday, I watched someone argue the wrong point here at work because they feared looking dumb--there was no rationality about it, he was flat wrong, and when I talked to him later in a much less antagonistic way than the person he was originally arguing with, he saw it my way. Sometimes, people don't have someone to give them an "out" so they'll let that fear run them right into the ground even when they know they're wrong. I've seen fear of rejection turn people into bitter, lonely people, and fear of failure turn people into people who never try anything.

      Finally, being fearless doesn't mean being amoral. I don't not rape everything in sight because I fear the repercussions, I don't rape because it's a horrific thing to do to a person.

      Lacking fear would suck when it's time to run from a bear, or stay awake all night to guard against zombies, but honestly ask yourself when the last time that jab in the gut really helped you out in today's society?

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    17. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Did you mean "stop insubordination"? If yes, you should read about "Miligrams Experiment"

    18. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, think of how people behave every day with regards to logic and reason. Now imagine all they had was logic and reason with no conscience or emotion (think of emotion as the guide that tells stupid and weak-minded people what to do).

      It would be chaos my friend.

    19. Re:Remove it! by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      You'd lose your sex drive too which, as a Slashdotter, might also be helpful.

    20. Re:Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 1

      That's actually a really good point, I'm not a horror movie buff or anything but I do really enjoy some fear inducing activities. I went sky diving a couple years back and it was really incredible. Interestingly though, I don't remember feeling any fear or nervousness during the experience because of a combination of things. I think I knew rationally that there was minimal danger and I also happened to be going through a bad break-up and up until the moment I was falling It was pretty much the only thing on my mind. I wonder if I would still have enjoyed the experience without the ability to feel fear.

      --
      check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    21. Re:Remove it! by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      I need to fear the slap of a women before I drop the worst pickup lines of the century.

      I thought it was the desire to get laid that prevented that.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    22. Re:Remove it! by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      Lacking fear would suck when it's time to run from a bear, or stay awake all night to guard against zombies, but honestly ask yourself when the last time that jab in the gut really helped you out in today's society?

      Thats where your logic falls apart - the fear would not help you run from a bear or survive with Zombies anymore than it would keep you from running across the street - your logic of holding your rational decisions without fear would hold true in any scenario - in which case, you might think that living entirely without fear would be beneficial - all you seem to observe from fear is the irrational decisions that people make because of fear.

      Ask myself when the last time the jab of the gut helped me in today's society? Lets see.
      Last summer driving on the highway when I was really tired - I almost hit a deer. Fear quickly caused that gut reaction which caused me to swerve and miss colliding with the animal.

      A few months ago I was on top of a ladder and I felt it slide along the wall, which caused a quick fear that instantly pushed my focus towards how to get off without getting hurt, where I noticed a ledge a bit further down which I jumped to instead to lessen the distance I fell.

      I could go on - I know I could find more examples. From a strictly survival point of view - Fear works. If you don't include the fear of everyday reprisal - then removing the gland isn't going to remove any stress associated with it. I merely included it because I figure taking out that chunk of your brain is likely to cause more issues than just the survival-fear reaction. I'm not a doctor and definately not a neuroscientist so perhaps that was a bold assumption to make.

      All in all, its just not a good idea.

    23. Re:Remove it! by precariousgray · · Score: 1

      You might also just decide to go on a murderous rampage, being no longer fearful of life imprisonment or death. Does fear alone mitigate such behavior, or are there other factors involved?

      --
      not much, just being forced to manually insert line breaks into my comment
    24. Re:Remove it! by falldeaf · · Score: 1

      That's really hard to say... I feel like the rational reasons not to go on a murderous rampage are *more* of a reason than the fear of punishment. But is fear subconciously the true driver, regardlesss? Who knows?

      --
      check out the Mp3 Garbler I built!
    25. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if the repercussions of removing the amygdala completely would be catastrophic to the person. In a society where we don't necessarily have direct predators, would a fearless person be more bold and have less stress? I wouldn't mind a boost in either of those traits. :)

      Fearless person would be more dead, fear guids us and stops as from doing stupid shit too often,

    26. Re:Remove it! by immakiku · · Score: 1

      How about the opposite? What are the consequences of systematically introducing low doses of fear to our daily lives? We might all become sheep. This is the kind of thing harmony-seeking governments would want to have control over.

    27. Re:Remove it! by ThinkWeak · · Score: 1

      Does this also control you from harming yourself in normal settings? Here are a few examples:

      Getting into a shower and being tentative of the temperature. If you do not have any fear, would it even cross your mind to test the temperature or would you just step in and burn yourself?

      In a military setting, would you see a lot more accidental shootings by individuals who do not turn on the safety of their gun? You usually turn the safety on to not misfire the weapon and accidentally shoot someone (ie. afraid of killing someone or afraid of the consequences of shooting someone)

      Are these choices fear based? How do you differentiate between someone walking into a battlefield and not being afraid of combat versus someone burning or hurting themselves in normal daily life.

    28. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I meant "Next stop, insubordination and war crimes". I was wondering if fear and morality are connected or at least correlate to the same outcomes.

      Tangentially, I've always been fascinated by that experiment. I wonder if the outcome would be different if the testee had no fear. Both of their superior and of killing. I would assume that it would depend entirely on the morality of the test subject.

    29. Re:Remove it! by sorak · · Score: 1

      Look,

      They just want raw, killer soldiers - who won't come back with either PTSD or a human soul.

      This is the kind of research that begins looking lie rational inquiry into the determining mechanisms of everyday psychology, and ends in horrors.

      If it happens, blame the gunman, not the gun.

    30. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was prescribed Dilaudid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydromorphone) when I had an abscess of a wisdom tooth. It had just the opposite affect on me that it caused me to fear everything.

      I gave the prescription back to the oral surgeon and told him that I didn't even want it in my house, the fear was so bad.

      Nathan

    31. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The amygdala regulates more then just fear, it is crucial for memory creation and processing of all emotions. Plastic surgery for the brain has never worked out well. Just ask some drooling fool who has been lobotomized.

    32. Re:Remove it! by blair1q · · Score: 1

      No, you just need to be more rational about your boss and your personality.

      Fear is an irrational cause for your actions, whether they are beneficial or not. It will lead you to do the wrong thing as easily as the right thing. Rationality can not, as long as you have the necessary information and know right from wrong.

    33. Re:Remove it! by wierd_w · · Score: 2, Informative

      The amygdala has other neurological functions, including regulating/originating aggression. (there is LOTS of literature on that one.) It also plays a significant role in the retention of emotional memories, and emotional states.

      Removal of the amygdala would be very bad for humans. It would result in a kind of severe autism.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala

    34. Re:Remove it! by Philomage · · Score: 1

      If you'd watched Firefly, you'd be all over this, including the stripping the amygdala thing to eliminate fear and create monsters...

      Isn't it amazing how science fiction can be used to investigate the dilemas of human existence?

    35. Re:Remove it! by radtea · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean by "do the right thing"... but if you mean "obey orders" then I'm pretty sure you'll find that as fear is reduced so is obedience.

      But you have to think this through at all levels: if fear is sufficiently muted there would be no war and therefore no soldiers. Wars are a product of the way humans use violence to induce fear in others and reduce fear in themselves.

      It isn't clear what kind of society humans would be capable of sustaining without fear. We would be more mobile, more independent, less obedient to authority, more likely to be kind to each other, and more likely to get hurt in a variety of ways.

      If you reduce fear enough you would not wind up with human beings who are exactly like everyone else but fearless. You would wind up with a species that was not recognizably human.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    36. Re:Remove it! by hrimhari · · Score: 1

      Getting into a shower and being tentative of the temperature. If you do not have any fear, would it even cross your mind to test the temperature or would you just step in and burn yourself?

      I don't fear the pain or the temperature. I know I don't like the pain, so I'll be cautious.

      If, in the other hand, I wouldn't take a shower because I once got burned, even if I know that I can control the temperature, that would be pure fear.

      In a military setting, would you see a lot more accidental shootings by individuals who do not turn on the safety of their gun? You usually turn the safety on to not misfire the weapon and accidentally shoot someone (ie. afraid of killing someone or afraid of the consequences of shooting someone)

      Again, could be fear or a rational decision. "Being afraid of" is often just a figure of speech. The soldier is probably really afraid of being killed, but I'm not so sure he's really afraid of accidentally shooting someone else, except for the reaction of his peers.

      People are afraid of dying, yet many would rather not wear the seat belt in cars. Others would not get out of their houses.

      Are these choices fear based? How do you differentiate between someone walking into a battlefield and not being afraid of combat versus someone burning or hurting themselves in normal daily life.

      You cannot tell if the battlefield guy isn't afraid of combat or if he's just able to rationalize his fear.

      Here's my suggestion on how to identify each case:

      Fear: a feeling. It makes your heart beat accelerate, can startle, will push you away from the situation regardless of what you think, like people who squeeze the chair's armrest during an horror movie because they think that something startling is going to happen.
      Rationalization: thought process. Consciously analyzing that if A then B. You know it's just a movie.

      What's important isn't when is it fear and when is it rational, but can you rationalize even when you're afraid?

      --
      http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
    37. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fear conditions an avoidant response, so you avoid stupid and dangerous scenarios to avoid feeling fear in the first place. You can cognitively work out something would be harmful to yourself without feeling that fear actively, even if it's not the exact same stimulus (your brain can generalize), but at some point, the psychological conditioning had to have taken place.

    38. Re:Remove it! by witherby · · Score: 1

      I definitely agree. I'm not so sure that you'd be able to reason properly without fear, though. I can't remember the specifics, but I read a case a couple years ago about test subjects who through some kind of brain injury had lost the ability to feel emotion. They were not only emotionally numbed, but also logically and rationally impaired.

      Here's a site devoted to more-or-less the same thing.

      "'In Animals in Translation, Grandin and Johnson write: "We humans tend to think of emotions as dangerous forces that need to be strictly controlled by reason and logic. But that's not how the brain works. In the brain logic and reason are never separate from emotion. Even nonsense syllables have an emotional charge, either positive or negative. Nothing is neutral.'"

      Granted, this is based on the assumption that fear is a functionally similar psychological/physiochemical response to say, grief and joy, but I could definitely see how you might begin to argue that without the ability to feel fear, you'd lose some of that rational cognitive ability as well.

    39. Re:Remove it! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Sorak is a Vulcan name - but backwards it's Klingon...

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    40. Re:Remove it! by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the outcome would be different if the testee had no fear. Both of their superior and of killing. I would assume that it would depend entirely on the morality of the test subject.

      I would be very surprised if this amygdala circuitry dealt with social fears that may have factored in to the Milgram Experiment. By "social fears," I mean fears of being ostracized or punished for criminal behavior, disobedience, or failing to meet expectations. I feel those fears differently from how I feel physical fight-or-flight fears.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    41. Re:Remove it! by Stregano · · Score: 1

      Go ahead and remove yours. When the zombie apocalypse happens, you will be the guy without fear running into a crowd of zombies distracting them while I run away

      --
      The world is how you make it
    42. Re:Remove it! by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      cocaine, lsd, and plenty of other drugs suppress fear (and many of the other senses...)

    43. Re:Remove it! by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1
      The amygdala also plays a critical role in emotions. It is effectively an interrupt prioritizer for not just fear but other emotions. It may be responsible for a person being able to stop smelling the pretty flowers when a tiger looms, and other cases where one must choose which current goal to pursue. If you consider emotions as metrics of the current success or failure level of key types of goals, and the amygdala as the analytic device for those metrics, you can see how the brain chooses which goals under pursuit require the most attention.

      If the research came up with a way to dampen the fear input, it could have positive and negative consequences. Reducing fear might help people who get anxiety attacks. On the other hand, a 'Warrior' pill that removes fear might also make soldiers reckless and take too many risks. And as Batman's Scarecrow character has, development of a 'fear gas' that triggered the fear input would be interesting.

    44. Re:Remove it! by kent_eh · · Score: 1

      No, I think he meant:

      Next stop: Insubordination.

      As spoken by a bus driver or train conductor

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    45. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging by how stroke victims recover, the brain is amazingly resilient and adaptive.

    46. Re:Remove it! by sorak · · Score: 1

      But i got it from a Dark Sun novel.

    47. Re:Remove it! by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall that the amygdala mediates a LOT more than just fear. Damage to (both of) it apparently produces: ... overreaction to all objects, hypoemotionality, loss of fear, hypersexuality, and hyperorality, a condition in which inappropriate objects are placed in the mouth. ... an inability to recognize familiar objects, approaching animate and inanimate objects indiscriminately, ... loss of fear towards [possibly threatening organisms] ... reduction in maternal behaviors towards infants, often physically abusing or neglecting them. ... memory loss (amygdala apparently modulates whether memory is referenced), docility, ...

      See the Wikipedia articles on the amygdala and Klüver-Bucy syndrome.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    48. Re:Remove it! by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      I need to fear the slap of a women before I drop the worst pickup lines of the century.

      Actually, that's a fear I'd desperately love to do away with, for my part. :-)

    49. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      would not such a person become a direct predator after removal?

    50. Re:Remove it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, a person without an amygdala makes all sorts of bad decisions. Fear is not just large-scale, but also those small anxieties that help us make it to appointments on time, not say socially inappropriate things, not engage in behaviors or say things that anger others (or increase the anger of others) that endanger us - e.g., don't respond appropriately to angry boss or angry strangers on the street or in a bar, and possibly more prone to injury due to increased unsafe/risky behaviors (I'm not a skier, but suddenly it seems ok to try black diamond trails my first time out). In monkeys without an amygdala they break all sorts of social rules presumably due to not feeling anxiety (challenge alpha, don't back down from stronger or higher-ranking members) which leave them isolated (rejected), injured, and worse off overall.

      If you want better control over your amygdala, try meditation. Research by Paul Ekman, Ph.D. and Bob Levinson Ph.D. indicates, for example, that monks in a trance state are able to effectively control their physiological responses (brain, heart, blood pressure, galvanic skin response, etc.) to stimuli that evoke startle responses in others.

  3. Yoda says... by intellitech · · Score: 3, Funny

    Fear is the path to the dark side.

    --
    vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
    1. Re:Yoda says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wasn't Senator Amygdala the reason Anakin fell to the Dark Side?

    2. Re:Yoda says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure it was the cookies.

    3. Re:Yoda says... by CaptainDefragged · · Score: 1

      fear of her predicted death and not being able to prevent it.

      --
      Don't tailgate - the end is near!
  4. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Tickety-boo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm afraid I can't do that.

    --
    Reading made Don Quixote a gentleman. Believing what he read made him mad.
  5. Autism? by AltGrendel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if they'll try the same techniques to study Autism?

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

  6. Fox News. by Xoltri · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's funny, I thought fear response was controlled by Fox News.

    --
    -Xoltri
    1. Re:Fox News. by blair1q · · Score: 1

      He's just got the button. His viewers still have the ignitors in them.

  7. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
    I will face my fear.
    I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
    And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
    Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
    Only I will remain

  8. Another tool in the box of TSA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet this stuff is in part if not totally funded by the Homeland Security group of the US governmint. Just another tool in their belt of manipulation, go Team USA! Yah!

  9. worrying by mlong · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how this applies to worriers? Like the people afraid of every possible thing that could wrong. And what part of the brain controls more general fears like the fear of death?

    --
    //m
    1. Re:worrying by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Couldn't that be described as a "chemical inbalance" in the brain? As in, the the see-saw isn't pinching the hose enough to turn it off?

    2. Re:worrying by kent_eh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm more interested in what implications this has into dealing with paranoia (as in full-on psychiatric disorder, not the popular usage of the word) .
      I have seen what paranoid delusions can do to a person, and it ain't pretty.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    3. Re:worrying by butalearner · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm more interested in what implications this has into dealing with paranoia (as in full-on psychiatric disorder, not the popular usage of the word) . I have seen what paranoid delusions can do to a person, and it ain't pretty.

      That is an interesting question. I must be a bad person, but my first thought was the opposite of most commenters:

      Can we hook up electrodes and magnify fear, say, for the purposes of obtaining a confession? It's a slippery slope I admit, but I would guess that the amount of stimulation is important. Especially if you can inflict a major mental disorder on the suspect.

      If this is blatant Geneva Convention-breaking torture, I apologize for my ignorance; the UN definition is so vague you could consider imprisonment a type of torture. I figure it seems far more "humane" than waterboarding at least.

    4. Re:worrying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I would say that it is not that they are more afraid - but they are either slower to disregard those fears, or remain sensitive to them longer. To use your example of a fear of death - many warrior cultures like the samurai or the scottish highlanders make claims of accepting death - "I do not fear death" is a common sentiment from any such culture. But when you really look at how they discuss Death philosophically (i'm a philosophy major, trust me to make this a philosophic thing!) they are terrified of death, they discuss it constantly, and they discuss it in incredible detail. The difference is that they discuss Death to death (I know, bad), they become used to the constant fear of death and are accustomed to the inexxorability and permanence of the threat and the fear. When cultures claim they do not fear death, that I think they mean to say is - I have embraced the fear of death.

      A constant worrier is similar in that they obsess over the fear, but they never take the next step - and develop an outlook which embraces and accepts that fear as being omnipresent - and learns to operate despite, and often improved, by that constant fear.

    5. Re:worrying by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      Pretty much everything going on in the brain is a "chemical imbalance", in the end it's all chemistry. If it was perfectly balanced then it'd be static, nothing going on at all.

      The world however is FULL of retarded monkeys who think that the phrase "a chemical balance" conveys meaning when talking about processes within our neural structures.

      What the retarded monkeys are TRYING to say is more like "an unwanted chemical imbalance" or "an atypical chemical imbalance" (ie that the "typical" balances are what comes naturally in the "normal" functioning human brain).

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    6. Re:worrying by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

      If this is blatant Geneva Convention-breaking torture, I apologize for my ignorance; the UN definition is so vague you could consider imprisonment a type of torture. I figure it seems far more "humane" than waterboarding at least.

      Seriously folks, that's the worlds bigest copout.

      The point of the Geneva Convention was to draw a line in the sand. If there's ANY question that it might possibly be turture, then it is.

      The primary concept is this: if you were innocent, were detained for questioning, and THEY did THIS to YOU ... Would you be TOTALLY PISSED , or would you think they were being perfectly reasonable?

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    7. Re:worrying by butalearner · · Score: 1

      If this is blatant Geneva Convention-breaking torture, I apologize for my ignorance; the UN definition is so vague you could consider imprisonment a type of torture. I figure it seems far more "humane" than waterboarding at least.

      Seriously folks, that's the worlds bigest copout. The point of the Geneva Convention was to draw a line in the sand. If there's ANY question that it might possibly be turture, then it is. The primary concept is this: if you were innocent, were detained for questioning, and THEY did THIS to YOU ... Would you be TOTALLY PISSED , or would you think they were being perfectly reasonable?

      Sorry, I didn't see your reply until just now, so this will probably be buried (and I'll forget to check it too).

      I was thinking my idea was more inline with a lie detector test, perhaps augmenting it. An electrically-induced form of intimidation where the usual tactics (isolation, etc.) don't work.

      Frankly, your definition of torture is still unhelpful, because I would be pissed if I was detained for questioning in the first place. I would be extremely pissed being in jail waiting for a trial, losing wages and probably my job waiting for my innocence to be proven.

  10. they don't diferentiate it from stupidity so.. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1
    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  11. Make sure you study the real amygdala. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Most people assume the prominent almond shaped structure in the brain is the amygdala. But the real amygdala stays in the background, pretending to be an innocuous assistant or something and communicates with the prominently placed fake amygdala through complex undetectable chemical signals. This is done for security and the protection of real amygdala. Only on very rare occasions when the fake amygdala is assasinated the real one comes forward and one realizes how well they have been fooled by these security protocols. So let us first make sure the scientists studied the real one.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  12. Queen Amigdala by Fartypants · · Score: 1

    Queen Amigdala, regulator of the Phantom Menace... There, mnemonic device sorted.

  13. Fear is useful by PPH · · Score: 1

    It keeps us from doing dangerous things. Its the response that needs to be modified. In some cases, the 'freeze' response can be retrained to be something more appropriate, like taking cover, assuming a defensive posture or running.

    Fear is what keeps us from clicking that submit button before making a stupid .... [Oh crap!]

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  14. Seesaw WTF? by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

    That seesaw/garden hose analogy is really tortured. In fact, I think it could easily induce fear in the faint hearted.

    --
    http://www.acetonestudio.com
    1. Re:Seesaw WTF? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, where’s the car analogy?

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:Seesaw WTF? by mangu · · Score: 1

      It's like a garden hose stretched across the driveway. A car is parked with a wheel sitting on the hose preventing water from flowing. When a signal that triggers a fear response arrives, it releases the parking brake, letting the car roll down the driveway off the hose and allowing fear, like water, to flow. Once the flow of fear has begun, that impulse can be transmitted to other regions of the brain that control fearful behavior, such as freezing in place.

  15. one analogy too far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Imagine that one end of a seesaw is weighted and normally sits on a garden hose, preventing water"

    wouldn't another analogy be to say it's like a tap?

  16. Re:Now that you know how fear works by thijsh · · Score: 1

    Wasn't that how pain works? I believe it was the prospect of death by Gom Jabbar that instills the fear in the subject.

  17. Re:Now that you know how fear works by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fear is good. Fear is healthy. Fear keeps you alive. A person without fear would rapidly become dead, as there would be nothing preventing them from taking crazy risks. And if you say someone can make a rational appraisal of risks, I am telling that a person doing such a rational appraisal will wander into traffic in their fearlessness while they are doing their cognitive calculations.

    When people identify fear as a negative impulse, they are actually complaining about things that stupid people fear, which are usually artificial constructs, and are usually controlled by fearmongering demagogues spreading propaganda for political purposes. Yes, this is wrong, but fear is only a piece of that puzzle, and not even the lynchpin.

    Fear itself is not wrong, only what stupid people fear is wrong. I have fears in my life, and I'm glad I do. It keeps me alive, it even motivates me. It would be a shame to disregard such potent neural circuitry just because of some political hangups that have nothing to do with you.

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  18. Clint Eastwood by Kreplock · · Score: 1

    So how much would it cost to get them to re-direct my fear flow to the calm, deadly badass region of my brain?

    1. Re:Clint Eastwood by Viperpete · · Score: 1

      I find for this this quote from Lawrence of Arabia to be appropriate:

      Sherif Ali: Have you no fear, English?
      T.E. Lawrence: My fear is my concern.

      Once you decide that you will refuse to allow you opponent to know what you feel inside you're halfway there. Then, work on your thousand yard stare and fringe scanning. This allows you (from your opponents view) to look directly into their eyes, yet what you are really looking at is their shoulders and hips and yet you look completely impassive. I hear it is quite disconcerting.

      Disclaimer: You should learn how to fight before using these techniques.

      --
      loose: not fitting closely or tightly != lose: to suffer the deprivation of
  19. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fear vs. Knowledge confusion. As a spiritual teacher once said - you don't _need_ fear to not put your hand in fire - just the knowledge and consciousness to apply the knowledge is sufficient.

  20. Re:Now that you know how fear works by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

    But the pain was "illusionary", the test was about overcoming your fear and resisting the urge to remove your hand. Or that's how I remember it anyhow.

    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  21. Re: Fear Seekers by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    I'm not so sure.

    Lots of stuff in our minds are multiplexed, and there's a word I can't think of right now for "inefficient medicine" such as drinking an energy drink for the energy because it's nice rather than taking a boring pill.

    The Dopamine Cycle is all scrambled up in this, and it's not at all clear if we do those activities *to feel fear* or *get a dopamine burst*.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  22. Re:Systematic Low Dose Fear by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    "It's a Post 9-11 World. We'll never have a carefree time again."

    Personally, I find it exhausting.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  23. Re:Now that you know how fear works by thijsh · · Score: 1

    Pain and the illusion of pain are the same, pain is a strangely psychologically influenced phenomenon. What you mean is that it gave the impression that your hand was burning while it actually wasn't... but the pain was very real!

  24. Re:Now that you know how fear works by thijsh · · Score: 1

    Great quote, who is it attributed to?

  25. Lacking Pain by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    Lack of pain receptors is a big problem for people who suffer from the condition. You can lean on a red-hot iron and not know your flesh is scalding until you smell roast meat.

    This is somewhat analogous to lack of fear. You can find yourself in very dangerous situations and not care. This may have good consequences (overcoming adversity) and bad consequences (reckless behavior, getting yourself killed).

    --
    -kgj
  26. Oriental perspective on fight-or-flight, ego, etc by nido · · Score: 1

    In oriental medicine, the fight-flight-freeze response is governed by the "Triple Warmer" or "Triple Heater" meridian (pathway). Triple warmer's [TW] job is to keep a person alive, and whenever the fight-or-flight response gets activated, TW takes energy from all the body's other systems (except Heart), so that the body can fight better or run faster. TW directs the body to release a surge of adrenaline, concentrates blood at the reptilian brain around the brainstem (forebrain/higher thought processes aren't really needed in a fight), etc.

    Some people get stuck in a continuous fight-or-flight response. Nothing in the body works as well as it should if TW's always hijacking other systems' resources. If the TW pathway is calmed down, the individual is better able to come to terms with the fear that overwhelms them, chronic health problems improve, etc.

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  27. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great litany.

    "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love."

    1st John 4:18

    Fear is natural and comes naturally (i.e. without effort) to the natural man. In contrast, the man who entrusts his life to God has no cause, need or circumstance of fear, as though anything could snatch him from God's hand. I am not yet this man, but I believe it to be true. I believe it to be true because of reason. I would expect no less than the complete absence of fear in the presence of and submission to an almighty being.

  28. Highly recommend... by abolduc · · Score: 1

    "How We Decide" by Jonah Lehrer. Very digestible for sciency non-scientists.

  29. Re:Now that you know how fear works by swillden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fear itself is not wrong, only what stupid people fear is wrong. I have fears in my life, and I'm glad I do. It keeps me alive, it even motivates me.

    Absolutely. Fear guides our actions in many ways, and generally for the better. Applied properly, it can help us make quick decisions with sufficient accuracy in situations where there simply isn't time to apply rational analysis. The decisions aren't always as good as rational decisions would be, but they're generally not too far off, and often doing nothing is even worse than doing something that isn't quite right.

    For example, I teach concealed weapon permit courses, and one of the major challenges faced by any rational, law-abiding person who decides to carry a deadly weapon is to learn how to decide under what circumstances they should use it. In the course I cover the ins and outs of the law, but there's no way anyone can apply that knowledge in the split second available during a possibly-deadly encounter. It's too complex and too abstract.

    So in addition to the law, I teach people to train themselves to use their fear, to assume that if they draw and fire their gun they will go to prison for it, and so they should only use it in circumstances where they fear the consequences of not shooting even more than that. This "balance of opposing fears" is something that can be done on an emotional level -- with "the gut" --, and it can be done very quickly. Not to mention the fact that the standard of justification in the law is based on the presence of "reasonable fear", so if you're a reasonable person and you have a great fear, then you should be legally justified when the DA and/or jury gets around to weighing your actions against the minutiae of the law.

    Of course, some people are more afraid of prison than of dying, so it might not be a good standard for them.

    (Aside: This being slashdot, I know I'm going to get some responses saying that anyone who wants to carry a gun already has a broken "fear sense", but that's simply untrue. I have taught many, many people and the only ones I've met who decide to carry out of a sense of fear really DO have reason to fear -- mostly women with dangerous and unstable exes. Mostly, people who decide to carry do it more out of a sense of determination that they do not want to be a victim. Not that they think they're likely to be victims, but they see it as a reasonable precaution, much like having a fire extinguisher in their car and house.)

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  30. To fear is Human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  31. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Raenex · · Score: 1

    How ironic then that the God of the Bible often rules through fear.

  32. Re:Oriental perspective on fight-or-flight, ego, e by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Good guess, some of it. But there's not much science and a good deal of mysticism in it, so it will be wrong more often than Western medicine, which isn't based on guessing as a rule.

  33. sorry by gibbson · · Score: 1

    I thought Fear leads to hate, and hate leads to anger, and anger leads to Suffering. or maybe they're right.

  34. Re:Now that you know how fear works by seven+of+five · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As someone who's struggled for decades with irrational and useless phobias, I really wish my fear had an off-switch. I would've gotten a lot more enjoyment out of life, and saved a lot in therapy bills and medications. It's an adaptation that kept our ancestors alive, but now it's mostly baggage.

  35. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe Eckhart Tolle said something very similar in response to a question in his book Power of Now.

  36. Re:Now that you know how fear works by radtea · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Fear is good. Fear is healthy. Fear keeps you alive.

    Which fear is that?

    Your post, and the others here praising fear, are excellent examples of innumeracy: you treat the world as it existed in real binary categorical terms "fearful" and "fearless".

    The real world is a bit more floating point than that.

    I suffer from a deficit of physical fear, yet I am still manifestly alive.

    I routinely judge things based on rational probabilities. I once walked out into a fairly busy highway to remove some debris that had forced me to swerve. I could see from basic kinematics I had plenty of time to get out there, get the thing (a large piece of somebody's bumper, as it turned out) and get back without significant risk. So I did so. The person I was with was beside herself with fear on my behalf.

    Incidents like this eventually convinced me that I was physiologically defficient in this regard, and made me more aware of the importance of rational risk-estimation in my life. But I am now nearing my second half-century, and still not dead.

    The interesting question to me is: would most people be better off with LESS fear in their lives, or MORE?

    Today, I'd argue strongly for less, across the board, so that fear was just one of many mild emotional impulses that people could take into account when choosing actions, rather than an apparently unanswerable motivation to do all manner of stupid things.

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  37. I'd be skeered too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a seesaw...or any kind of saw was going to come crashing down on my hose.

    Thank you. Thank you very much.

  38. Re:Now that you know how fear works by hrimhari · · Score: 1

    When people identify fear as a negative impulse, they are actually complaining about things that stupid people fear, which are usually artificial constructs, and are usually controlled by fearmongering demagogues spreading propaganda for political purposes.

    I knew those spiders were up to no good!!!

    --
    http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
  39. The Phantom Menace by TVDinner · · Score: 1

    Amygdala..Amidala? Crap, now I know why I was so scared of Lucas ruining the franchise and the fragile memories of my youth!

  40. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you have a specific example in mind?

  41. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least I'm quite confident there's no cat in this box. Unless ... oh, wait!

  42. Re:Now that you know how fear works by MRe_nl · · Score: 1
    --
    "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
  43. Re:Now that you know how fear works by bar-agent · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Fear is good. Fear is healthy. Fear keeps you alive. ... Fear itself is not wrong, only what stupid people fear is wrong. I have fears in my life, and I'm glad I do.

    Yes. The litany the GP posted, below, is not about denying fear, but rather about keeping control when the fear instinct would get you killed. Paul Atreides was being tested. He had to keep his hand in the box even though it felt like his hand was being burned/shredded/destroyed; if he removed his hand, he'd get stuck with the poisoned needle and die. He knew (or could figure out) that his hand was not actually being destroyed. The litany was to clear away the unnecessary fear of losing his hand, so that he could concentrate on dealing with the pain and keeping his hand in place.

    I must not fear.
    Fear is the mind-killer.
    Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.

    --
    i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  44. Analogies by bar-agent · · Score: 1

    Imagine that one end of a seesaw is weighted and normally sits on a garden hose, preventing water -- in this analogy, the fear impulse -- from flowing through it. When a signal that triggers a fear response arrives, it presses down on the opposite end of the seesaw, lifting the first end off the hose and allowing fear, like water, to flow.

    I like this analogy. It is a great analogy!

    But do you know what would be better? If it were about cars.

    --
    i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
  45. This is an easy study slashdotters can help with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just put a slashdotter in front of a female homosapian and watch their fear and sweat response go into high gear as they babble of tech terms the female doesn't understand.

  46. Re:Now that you know how fear works by eggstasy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can probably get by without fear in a nanny state ruled by the fearful masses, where everything has to be made perfectly safe, but try doing that in the jungles of your ancestors, where danger awaited around every corner...

  47. Fear that affected the democrats? by malakai · · Score: 1

    Fear is good. Fear is healthy. Fear keeps you alive.

    Which fear is that?

    This one?

    "Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country's scared.”
    -President Barack Obama

    If fear is the reason the house has switched from democratic to republican control, I for one welcome our new fear based society.....

  48. fear is the mind killer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is the small death that brings total oblivion

  49. Dr Who obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cybermen will remove fear

  50. Re:Now that you know how fear works by CarlosM7 · · Score: 1

    Oh, but somebody will die if I do that.

  51. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    A person without fear would rapidly become dead, as there would be nothing preventing them from taking crazy risks.

    Actually, a person with extremely attenuated fear tends to become psychopathic.

    Apparently an occasional dose of fear/love/hate/excitement is rewarding. (Perhaps not having occasional scary/angry/loving/excited events indicates you're not taking enough risks with your life and as a result are probably missing opportunities.) Thus scary movies and TV shows, risky sports like racing, skydiving, mountain climbing, etc.

    One observation about psychopaths is that they do not get excited without extreme stimulus, leading to the speculation that they are experiencing a phenomenon akin to sensory deprivation and part of their behavior (risk taking, harming others, seeking extraordinary rewards with no regard to side-effects, etc.) is an attempt to produce a strong enough stimulus to actually feel some activation of this path.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  52. Re:Oriental perspective on fight-or-flight, ego, e by nido · · Score: 1

    Good practitioners are able to get feedback from the body they're working on.

    My high school friend's insurance company has spent well over $100,000 trying to figure out what's wrong with his kid, and they still don't have a diagnosis... All they have are guesses about what what went wrong 2 years ago - they presume it's a denovo genetic mutation, last I heard.

    Furthermore, the new approach is "complementary care", where you take the best of all approaches and combine them. Oriental medicine is much more preventative than allopathic care.

    Thanks for commenting.

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  53. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever. You can't calculate a probability of failure for everything, and if you want to call fear uncertainty, fine.

    You're not as smart as you think, and I'm sure the few friends you have would agree. As much as you wish you were a calculator, you're still human, and probably afraid of being wrong.

  54. Re:Now that you know how fear works by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    When people identify fear as a negative impulse, they are actually complaining about things that stupid people fear

    I think it's extremely unfair to describe people who have irrational fears as 'stupid people'. You're thinking of certain irrational fears; racism, xenophobia, etc. I have severe social anxiety disorder and don't consider myself 'stupid'; not as a whole, anyway. You don't have to be insulting.

  55. Re:Now that you know how fear works by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 1

    What's in the box?

    --
    Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  56. Re:Oriental perspective on fight-or-flight, ego, e by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Good practitioners are able to get feedback from the body they're working on.

    When they can do X-rays by ESP, that'll be something interesting.

    As for allopathic, that term is a buzzword showing the speaker rejects science in favor of obvious fraud.