How desensitized are you to casualties around the globe?

Dissociation is a coping mechanism.

Nowadays you can't go anywhere, watch anything or read anything without constantly bumping into news about atrocities, wars, other disasters, horrible crimes etc.

Many people choose to ignore them as best as they can - particularly if they are more prone to getting depressed from them and feel that they themselves can do nothing to change things.

So yeah, most people are pretty desensitized when they need to be. On the extreme levels - for example a doctor who digs up mass murder victims in order to identify them almost HAS to be desentisized to remain functional.

For me, it depends. Some days I try avoid anything negative, some days I feel ashamed of not caring more, mostly it's inbetween and not something that you do consciously.

 

Criticism is easier than solutions. Contempt and fury, eh? Just because you observed people enjoying their lives does not mean you have a right to judge them because they aren't stewing with a refugee like you were and visiting charity sites. You don't know them. I'm not saying I don't understand the apathy you are referring to, I'm merely saying keep things in perspective.

Bad things happen in the world. Many live their lives trying to right the wrongs. If this is an issue dear to you, perhaps pointing fingers is less productive than finding out why more isn't being done about "x" and finding a way to overcome that.

 

I feel you that we are entirely too desensitized and apathetic to the real troubles of the world. However, anger itself doesn't do a thing. I realize that anger can lead to action, but I'm sorry -- some of the stuff people try to do is just pathetic and serves only to give themselves a feeling that they are doing something. One of those things is the whole 'awareness' thing. Now I don't want to belittle its importance; it's the first step for any action to come about. But often, that's where it stops and I feel really nothing came from it. One example is Darfur: when I was in college, we had a whole bunch of 'activists' strutting around campus with their 'Save Darfur' shirts, trying to speak passionately and intelligently about it, when really they knew squat about what was really going on. But I'm sure they felt good about themselves. I'm also quite sure none of them will actually step foot in Sudan. I could go on and on... how about that whole Joseph Koni ordeal?

But on the other hand, when all we know is security and wealth, how can we truly empathize? Or if caring for our own well-being and that of our family's is burden enough, can you really blame us? If the world is ever to be 'saved', it's going to be a collective effort and I'm sorry, I just don't see that happening anytime soon. I know there are pockets of great things happening from non-profits and NGOs, etc etc. But as whole, mankind is simply too unequal. The disparity of the hands people are dealt bugs me every single day.

 

99.999% of people on this earth are just trying to make it through life. Doesn't matter if it's here, France, or the Sudan. On the one hand, we here in America have it better than a lot of other places. Doesn't mean we need to take on the problems around the world.

There's so many problems within one person's life, much less a person's community, much less city, much less state, much less country, etc..... Where would it end?

 

People have been dealing with cruelty and death since the beginning of time. Just read the old testament. Read about WW2, the killing fields, the communist resolution, and Rwanda. We haven't been desensitized. If anything we are more sensitive to it.

 

I don't care. At all. In fact, I really don't care at all about people outside the Western world and Japan with the natural exception about how what they do affects us.

 

I would love to hear how you justify this kind of behavior.

 

Not really sure, because I'm not totally certain what you even mean by that.

 

When asked whether or not you care about other people, you said the following:

"I don't care. At all."

and then proceeded to say you only cared about two specific parts of the world, clearly the two specific parts of the world that actively involve you.

I mean, are you really going to pretend that this attitude does not require some kind of justification? Or are you intentionally playing dumb as a tactic of deflection?

 

You're the one who seems to think that my attitude requires some kind of justification, not me. Therefore, why don't you explain why? Or are you going to suggest something absolutely ridiculous like the idea that an American life and an European life and a Viet life are equal?

 

How angry are you about the tragedies that happen in your city everyday?
The ones that are so common . . . we don't even report them anymore

Rocket River

 

Hm, this is an interesting direction that you are taking this conversation in, Koji. I see you yourself have brought up the idea of "equal value", whereas I was simply wondering why you seem to suffer from such a dearth of compassion that you could actually bring yourself to say that you don't care about other people "at all".

It seems to me that, by your aversion to humanistic egalitarianism, that you divide the value of people's lives by their location/respective culture, as evidenced by your initial post in this thread. Furthermore, by pointing out that it's me who is interested in a justification rather than you, it is pretty clear that you in fact do NOT feel as though your attitude needs justifying! (Further evidenced by your, now, second attempt at deflecting the original request.)

Hmm, well all the pieces are there. Perhaps the other humans on this board can now take turns determining your value.

 

I think it is tragic, but nothing can really be done about it; and I'm not even sure anything SHOULD be done about it. Can you imagine what would happen if everyone everywhere had the same life expectancy and standard of living as the "1st world" countries? This planet would be used up faster then you can say "climate change".

If you want to be truly, brutally, darwinian about it; it's about survival and advancement of the human race. The vast majority of the world's countries are contributing nothing to technological, biological, or other advances. They're just trying to survive. Which is their right. The rest of the world has no obligation to help beyond what is in our best interests as it is a diversion of resources.

TL;DR version: I guess I am pretty desensitized. I'll opine that a person has to be, or else they'll wallow in futile empathy and sadness.

 

I'll suggest that. I have a personal connection to American lives, so my level of care, action, and interest may be greater, but that doesn't mean it's better or the lives of people in other nations aren't equal.

You can adjust your attitude or not, that's up to you. I just think it's odd to act like the idea of lives being equal is ridiculous.

 

Typical "poison the well" tactic. That aside, I bet a majority of people would find the views he has expressed in this thread to be the ridiculous ones.

 

Well, he did answer the question honestly. Props for that.