Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With various sensational tragedies popping up recently (Boston, and the mass killings in Conneticut and Texas), I am puzzled by how our society gets very worked up over these events, expresses a great deal of compassion and empathy for the victims and make these evens the topic of discussion for years. However There is no discussion, compassion, sympathy for less sensational tragic events that happen every single day, month or year.
For example, the Connecticut slaying of children was horrific and deserves our attention and compassion, however in the same month, dozens, possibly hundreds, of young children were killed in instances of abuse, neglect, torture, rape, etc. Yet that is not the subject of compassion, discussion outreach. In fact, it seems that people generally do not care about those children. It seems that we care more when all f the events are located in one place than if the same number or more children perish at the same time, but in scattered events. The same is true of the Boston bomber attacks. We feel great compassion for those who were injured or who lost love ones, yet we do not discuss, express concern for, or otherwise exhibit caring about the larger number of people who lost limbs, life or other severe injury that same day as a result of traffic accidents, crime, or other causes.
So for a hypothetical example, while Connecticut and Boston get, deserve and need our attention and sympathy, the children killed in arson fires in Detroit, Cleveland, Los Angeles and Miami during the same time frame do not even make the national news and their families do not get any compassion or even a thought nationally.
I do not think it is just because the media frenzy over the sensatioanlized events. People still know these other events are happening every day, week or month, they just to not give them attention.
I am certainly not saying we should not feel and express compassion for the people injured or killed in the recent various sensationalized tragedies, but I am wondering why do people care so much about those events but seemingly do not care at all about larger numbers of persons suffering the same losses during the same time period?
I also think a part of it is the fact that Boston was a terror attack.
I also think a part of it is how sensational an event is.
I think that it's a rallying point/nationalism, etc...
---
But more Philosophically/Psychologically:
Children, people do die everyday, and in some part I think our brains purposely lack empathy for wider more general instances of death. Why? Because we wouldn't be able to function in our daily lives.
Death is a natural part of life, and an everyday occurrence. What sense, what purpose does it serve to purposely bombard myself with a myriad of stories to feel compassion for someone miles away who got stung by a bee, or gets into a car accident?
When the act is brought to my attention, then I feel empathy or compassion and even then at a various degrees relative to the severity of the tragedy.
So in the end, it's kind of quantum/Schrodinger's Cat in nature. Yes, people are dying, but they are also not dying at the same time. I am alive and for the most part well, so I focus on that. My concern for "the other" in this case (as in all cases) is a sort of empathetic altruism as the guilt of not helping the other shouldn't outweigh my regard for myself. In an evolutionary sense if I cared for the other too much, that limits my level of survival.
;taken at it's extreme end, if we were all heroes/cared to the point of action, ironically there wouldn't be anyone left to save.
TL;DR, In short, our level of care is akin to altruism vs. our self-interest.
I also think a part of it is the fact that Boston was a terror attack.
I also think a part of it is how sensational an event is.
I think that it's a rallying point/nationalism, etc...
---
But more Philosophically/Psychologically:
Children, people do die everyday, and in some part I think our brains purposely lack empathy for wider more general instances of death. Why? Because we wouldn't be able to function in our daily lives.
Death is a natural part of life, and an everyday occurrence. What sense, what purpose does it serve to purposely bombard myself with a myriad of stories to feel compassion for someone miles away who got stung by a bee, or gets into a car accident?
When the act is brought to my attention, then I feel empathy or compassion and even then at a various degrees relative to the severity of the tragedy.
So in the end, it's kind of quantum/Schrodinger's Cat in nature. Yes, people are dying, but they are also not dying at the same time. I am alive and for the most part well, so I focus on that. My concern for "the other" in this case (as in all cases) is a sort of empathetic altruism as the guilt of not helping the other shouldn't outweigh my regard for myself. In an evolutionary sense if I cared for the other too much, that limits my level of survival.
;taken at it's extreme end, if we were all heroes/cared to the point of action, ironically there wouldn't be anyone left to save.
TL;DR, In short, our level of care is akin to altruism vs. our self-interest.
Off Topic:
HEY--"TL;DR," what does that mean??? I saw it for the first time on the Reddit site and now you're using it here. It seems to signify a summary of sorts.
With various sensational tragedies popping up recently (Boston, and the mass killings in Conneticut and Texas), I am puzzled by how our society gets very worked up over these events, expresses a great deal of compassion and empathy for the victims and make these evens the topic of discussion for years. However There is no discussion, compassion, sympathy for less sensational tragic events that happen every single day, month or year.
For example, the Connecticut slaying of children was horrific and deserves our attention and compassion, however in the same month, dozens, possibly hundreds, of young children were killed in instances of abuse, neglect, torture, rape, etc. Yet that is not the subject of compassion, discussion outreach. In fact, it seems that people generally do not care about those children. It seems that we care more when all f the events are located in one place than if the same number or more children perish at the same time, but in scattered events. The same is true of the Boston bomber attacks. We feel great compassion for those who were injured or who lost love ones, yet we do not discuss, express concern for, or otherwise exhibit caring about the larger number of people who lost limbs, life or other severe injury that same day as a result of traffic accidents, crime, or other causes.
So for a hypothetical example, while Connecticut and Boston get, deserve and need our attention and sympathy, the children killed in arson fires in Detroit, Cleveland, Los Angeles and Miami during the same time frame do not even make the national news and their families do not get any compassion or even a thought nationally.
I do not think it is just because the media frenzy over the sensatioanlized events. People still know these other events are happening every day, week or month, they just to not give them attention.
I am certainly not saying we should not feel and express compassion for the people injured or killed in the recent various sensationalized tragedies, but I am wondering why do people care so much about those events but seemingly do not care at all about larger numbers of persons suffering the same losses during the same time period?
I think it has to do with the media, too. Not far from where I live, a four-year-old picked up a gun left in the open by his parents and went outside and shot his 6-year-old friend in the head, killing him. It raised an outcry in this part of NJ, and these people's kid was just as dead as the Newtown kids or the boy killed in the bombing, but it was just not a national event.
We don't all know about these events, though. I had not heard of any of these children killed in arson fires that you mention, for example.
And sometimes it's the lack of media coverage. Think about the BP oil spill. There was so much coverage about the effects of the millions of gallons of oil pouring into the Gulf and how it was affecting the industry of states on that coast and of course the environment. Did anyone remember that 11 people died? They hardly covered them.
Also, sometimes the size of one thing blots out everything else. Every year we hold a memorial in February for the six people who died at the WTC in the first bombing. Most people don't even remember that there WAS a bombing, let alone that people were killed.
You are certainly right about the media sensationalizing news stories to the point of making a huge deal out of mundane events. If I were to break down the state of journalism I would say that 75% of today's journalism isn't really journalism at all or is outright irresponsible if it even is. The other 25% is socially responsible.
Part of the fault lies with common citizens because many of us stopped watching the news and stopped paying attention to what is going on in the world. Instead too many Americans started watching things like reality T.V. and became more obsessed with celebrities than what is going on in the world. As a result newspapers and news journals lose subscriptions and news outlets on T.V. and radio lose viewers and listeners meaning decreased Ad revenues. In order to get those viewers and listeners back they have to sensationalize stories in order to draw in the average person who wouldn't watch or listen to the news otherwise. But then that has the side effect of turning off the people who actually want to hear and watch real news creating a vicious cycle.
But...
Those three events you mentioned in the OP, those stories were given the proper attention because they really were that tragic. Of course people; including children, die everyday and quite frankly the loss of any one life is a tragic event unless you're a murderer or rapist. So harhar has a point that we would probably go bat s**t insane thinking about the fact that everyday a child's life has been ended.
Now if the death of one person in one place at one moment is tragic, imagine the deaths of 30 school children in one place at one time. Or the deaths of 25 people going to see a movie just get wiped out all at once. The thing is death doesn't just effect the person that dies, it effects their friends and families but also it deeply effects the survivors of these tragedies a.k.a people who have had the horror of seeing them die gruesomely.
I would love to speak more on this but now I have to get ready for work. This is a good thread though OP.
Why do we only get worked up over sensational tragedy?
The more important question is Why do you think anyone is getting worked up about it?
What most people don't realize is the media fools you twice. First it makes you think that the event is news worthy, then it fools you into thinking "everyone" else thinks it is news worthy.
In elections this is particularly important. The media doesn't have to convince you that a certain candidate is worthy of a vote, all they have to do is convince you that other people think the candidate is worthy of a vote. Then they can rig the election without anyone thinking twice about it.
The more important question is Why do you think anyone is getting worked up about it?
What most people don't realize is the media fools you twice. First it makes you think that the event is news worthy, then it fools you into thinking "everyone" else thinks it is news worthy.
You're right ,and sometimes I think I rant about this too often. The media is the enemy. It works to perpetuate more ignorance than the wisdom it has the potential to impart.
The media is a tool of Big Brother. Our society has evolved almost completely into an oligarchy, which uses its media monopoly to solidify its power.
In terms of the thread title, I've learned to wean myself from that kneejerk reaction. I get more worked up every time I hear a siren. Invariably, a siren means that something has just happened to somebody somewhere that has suddenly changed their life adversely in a way they will never completely recover from, and their life will never again be the same. It's happening to a complete stranger, but a person just like me, who is feeling the depths of despair, whether they are being rushed to the ER, or their house is on fire, or they are about to be dragged by the police into a one-sided system of rigged justice.
For random tragedies, people think "there was surely a REASON for this - someone was surely at fault". And here they stop.
For mass tragedies, people know the details of the attack. When they believe there was HELPLESNESS, they feel compassion.
A "reason" could be: a parent made a mistake, someone overlooked something, someone provoked somebody, something malfunctioned, etc.
When people see helplessness, they feel humane. That's the reason why some stop on the street to help an animal that's been hurt and then talk about it for days...
With various sensational tragedies popping up recently (Boston, and the mass killings in Conneticut and Texas), I am puzzled by how our society gets very worked up over these events, expresses a great deal of compassion and empathy for the victims and make these evens the topic of discussion for years. However There is no discussion, compassion, sympathy for less sensational tragic events that happen every single day, month or year.
For example, the Connecticut slaying of children was horrific and deserves our attention and compassion, however in the same month, dozens, possibly hundreds, of young children were killed in instances of abuse, neglect, torture, rape, etc. Yet that is not the subject of compassion, discussion outreach. In fact, it seems that people generally do not care about those children. It seems that we care more when all f the events are located in one place than if the same number or more children perish at the same time, but in scattered events. The same is true of the Boston bomber attacks. We feel great compassion for those who were injured or who lost love ones, yet we do not discuss, express concern for, or otherwise exhibit caring about the larger number of people who lost limbs, life or other severe injury that same day as a result of traffic accidents, crime, or other causes.
So for a hypothetical example, while Connecticut and Boston get, deserve and need our attention and sympathy, the children killed in arson fires in Detroit, Cleveland, Los Angeles and Miami during the same time frame do not even make the national news and their families do not get any compassion or even a thought nationally.
I do not think it is just because the media frenzy over the sensatioanlized events. People still know these other events are happening every day, week or month, they just to not give them attention.
I am certainly not saying we should not feel and express compassion for the people injured or killed in the recent various sensationalized tragedies, but I am wondering why do people care so much about those events but seemingly do not care at all about larger numbers of persons suffering the same losses during the same time period?
People get more "worked up" when it feels like a tragedy that could have happened to them. When a random child gets shot as collateral damage in a drive-by, or a rich person's son OD's or commits suicide, it's not as upsetting on a deep level because we feel so far removed from that child's situation - we feel don't have to worry about that happening to our own child.
This is human and normal. It does not IMO mean we don't care about other children, it's just not as relatable to our own lives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
