Question:
Is it human nature to find the self-destruction of others entertaining?
anonymous
2009-05-12 08:52:04 UTC
Why are people so perverse like this? What other creature stops what they are doing to watch another creature destroy itself, and be entertained by this?
25 answers:
cantor60
2009-05-12 09:50:48 UTC
Lots of creatures watch on as members of their group tear each other apart without intervening .....whether is is entertaining or not depends on your definition of entertainment...does a sense of awe, fascination, being frightened, etc etc count as entertainment? Who know whether other creatures even have the capacity for emotion?



There has been some social research ( I think in the 70s) done in this area where a group of university students was divided into pretend prisoners and pretend jailers ...they had to stop the study because the cruelty ( including entertainment out of watching the mental torture) got out of control...very much like the event that happened in the abul grail (can't spell) prison.
Doctor Why
2009-05-12 10:50:35 UTC
Let's tease out exactly what you're observing for a moment.



I won't dispute that there are some instances of comedy that are fundamentally built upon the suffering of the actors. This is most of the work of Charlie Chaplain, after all, the definition of black comedy, slapstick, and the like. I am fond of a Mel Brooks aphorism: "Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you walk into an open sewer and die." Which sounds horrible, true.



And while these are all common forms of comedy, past a point it ceases to be such for pretty much anyone. I don't recall much of anyone laughing at hurricane Katrina survivors, at the Holocaust, or at any of a variety of forms of genuine suffering. Even drug users or bankrupted corrupt millionaires... we may feel a certain pleasure at seeing their comeuppance - shadenfreude as the Germans would call it - but it's not generally comedy. So it can't really be unilaterally true that people are amused by the destruction of others.



Some of it is funny and some of it is not. So how do we tell the difference between the two? Part of the equation, I think is the absurd. The unreal. Much of what happened to Chaplain or any slapstick performer was obviously farce. When the Three Stooges poked each other in the eyes, none of them were genuinely hurt or suffering at all, even if they played at being so very briefly. But even the brevity of the act is a kind of giveaway... a way of saying, "This is just pretend."



I would take another example from a recent hullabaloo with Wanda Sykes, who made a joke that some considered to be in rather poor taste, wishing that Limbaugh's kidneys would fail. Here we can see highlighted the psychological boundary between comedy and tragedy: for many people, kidney failure is just too real too be funny. There's nothing absurd or strange about it at all.



Now this does lead to some actual suffering that still ends up being funny just because it is so beyond the par. Take your average Darwin Award winner. People who are doing things that most of us would consider so foolish that it's hard to imagine anyone really doing them. And BECAUSE we can't imagine that, that makes the real suffering of the victims and their families equally unreal. And therefore laughable.



As far as other creatures go, I would say humans are actually one of the MOST sympathetics and LEAST cruel ones on the planet. Most animals don't give a second thought about the pain and suffering they may be causing to others. A hungry pack of lions will torment, chase, and bleed a baby elephant for hours until it is worn down enough to be killed. And your average housecat will PLAY with mice, catching them and letting them go only to catch them again. Such a game generally only has one outcome for the mouse once the cat becomes bored.



Only humans worry about killing their food humanely and without suffering. Only humans go well out of their way to secure the well-being of many plants and animals that would happily destroy them if given a chance. Think about that next time you see a crocodile in the zoo (or the Everglades which is largely set aside for them instead of developed). Don't sell humans short.
Wesley B
2009-05-12 10:31:55 UTC
Yes. Very much so.



It is as much a human survival technique as feeding, copulating, or language. Seeing others fail provide us with warnings on what not to do, how not to behave, who not to anger, etc. The failure of another is a lesson to be learned - and thus must be watched. So we are wired to watch it by attributing to it an entertaining quality.



The key here is "self-destruction."

We don't feel so sorry for people we feel "brought it on themselves," because, well, they did it to themselves. Their destruction is the end of their own choices.

We *do* feel sorry for victims of tornadoes and hurricanes and earthquakes because it is not viewed as their fault...unless the area is prone to such things.

I guarantee the outpouring of support if New Orleans floods a second time will be much less because people will say "they knew it could happen, why did they go back there?" At that point, we attribute self-destructive tendencies to the individuals. Caring wanes and "perverse" observation begins.



The whole of human literature is based on the premise. In fact, the classical definition of "tragedy" is the fall from grace of a noble or powerful figure while the classical definition of "comedy" is the fall of the common man.

Go back to the ancient Greeks and look at Oedipus Rex, the Iliad, the Odyssey, and other classic tales and you will see that even then the self-destructive tendencies of the individual was being exploited for entertainment and lesson telling purposes. Characters that entertain have fatal flaws in their own persons. Hamlet in Elizabethan England, Dante's Inferno, the Everyman plays and most other religious morality tales, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, the Italian commedia del'arte plays, Oliver Stone's Wall Street, Japan's The Crane Wife...all are about others bringing on their own fates. All are classics of entertainment.



People "excuse" such behavior when reading because those characters are "not real," but all the author is doing is exploiting our natural tendencies to witness such spectacles. they use fake people, fake settings, fake plots, but all of that only works because of the reader's very real desire to see another fail.



This attitude is not a result of our modern society.

It is universal, it is ancient, it is human nature. It is in every culture, every time, and every great piece of lasting art.

And what's more, it serves a purpose in human growth, development, and advancement. It is not perverse; it is actually beneficial.
anonymous
2016-10-04 08:44:47 UTC
this could be a great question. If guy behaves clearly, there could be non-supply up progression with accumulation of expertise and adventure - human beings bestowed with greater means strategies can try this extra desirable than different beings. the situation is that human beings at the instant are not behaving clearly - we are continuously attempting to bypass against the character for short term effective properties. it particularly is the clarification why we are shifting in the direction of self-destruction. instead of adapting ourselves to the changing organic ecosystem, we are arrogantly tinkering with the character to make the ecosystem suitable for us as we are. some successes have made us much extra assuming - the end result's that we've become stagnant interior the experience that we don't prefer to alter ourselves to adapt to the changing needs of nature. particular sign of shifting in the direction of self-destruction.
Matrix
2009-05-12 09:13:51 UTC
Ironically we find just as much entertainment and joy from watching other people overcome personal obstacles and soar to heights of achievement.



1.Joy in knowing a person survived cancer

2.Admiration for those who find financial and personal success.

3.Relief when a person is spared from physical harm or danger.



I really like this question because people can be equally capable of perversion and enlightenment, sometimes depending on the mood of that person at the time. Speaking for myself.
Robocook23
2009-05-12 09:09:46 UTC
In my opinion... right now...

Comedy in general has a butt of the joke, which degrades someone else whilst making the onlookers appreciate that degradation. Although it can be done Not out of malice, but out of an appreciation for the human condition of multiple imperfections. People just lose themselves sometimes in comedy and essentially make life one big joke. This is a very cynical approach to life, and due to the idolization of comedy as virtuous in and of itself, people become more apt to think that progressively worse degradations of people is amusing. It is a lack of empathy or sympathy for others and a general dismissal of other people as valueless (at least people they don't know). This is a very dangerous and, ironically, self-destructive outlook on life.



So in short, yes it is within human nature to find the self-destruction or simply the destruction of others amusing.
anonymous
2009-05-12 09:41:39 UTC
I find murder entertaining, but I don't want to see it first hand. Human nature is completely void of behavior. Behavior is 100% learned. Behavior and learned might as well be synonyms.



I grew up not being able to watch or hear "bad" things. Naturally I grew very curious about these movies and words I'm not supposed to know about. I don't know about today, but at one point saying bad words and watching gory movies was a middle finger to authority.



Sometimes those murders make the other elements of the story more provocative, and while you might not like the death, it did make the rest of the story powerful. We like what we don't like sometimes.
P'quaint!
2009-05-12 09:17:51 UTC
NO! I don't really believe that! It could be 'entertaining' for a few but not all.



I can understand a show of strength, like in a wrestling match, can be entertaining...but ancient Roman Gladiator fights or even modern boxing, is beyond me!



But then, I'm only a woman :)
.
2009-05-12 09:05:01 UTC
it is human nature to be better, to evolve , to improve. The efficiency and brillaince with which one does this is important so to see that you are still standing while others are flailing and failing even dying reinforces you own perception of your own quality at a subconcious level.



a spiritual or compassionate understanding should though allow you to see the whole picture and while you cannot change you subconcious value of reaffirimng your quality you can control the outward signs of it which are unsocial and demeaning and jsut stop doing things like slowing down while passing a fatal road accident
anonymous
2009-05-12 10:48:50 UTC
Are we talking racked in the balls or falling off a roof, a la America's Funniest Home Videos? Or are we talking genocide levels of self-destruction?



If it's the first, I fully indulge.



If it's the second, very few twisted minds would take any pleasure in that!
anonymous
2009-05-12 09:28:24 UTC
It is not human nature, rather, a psychological effect of our society. In a society where this was looked down upon, people wouldn't be desensitized to it and would help others more.
anonymous
2009-05-12 11:06:08 UTC
I don't usually but must admit that watching feminism implode due to the hubris and hate of its own leaders is a little entertaining.
Big Bill
2009-05-12 09:42:46 UTC
People do laugh at slap stick comedy and at the klutz in the movies who fails again and again however, they may be silently rooting for him or her to succeed as they see themselves in that role...as they hope that nobody else notices...



namaste.
mindmedic
2009-05-12 08:56:09 UTC
If it is so, then I am not human. It is simply the influx of a cruel, impassive, unfeeling culture into the minds of the people that causes this. To destroy oneself is worst than to die- it is to live without dreams, without hope. It is to be alive without life.
anonymous
2009-05-12 11:53:15 UTC
I don't get it either. But sadly, if that weren't the case, people wouldn't watch those idiot train-wreck reality shows.
Raja
2009-05-12 13:01:34 UTC
It's not human nature but homeless and jobless evil spirits' nature.
Lux Et Veritas
2009-05-12 09:01:13 UTC
Human being evil thing,

gadget of the gods,

why thou like pain and strife?

isn't that bad odds?



Human being drugs and wine,

is that what you like?

self destructive now you're being,

please don't act like swine.
bloodshotcyclops
2009-05-12 08:55:38 UTC
Yes, and the germans actually have their own word for it.
Liz
2009-05-12 08:55:46 UTC
It's demonic. Not from this world. Not from God. Sign of the times.
Lady A
2009-05-12 08:56:03 UTC
It's in my nature, and I'm human.
Juliet Died Alone
2009-05-12 09:17:12 UTC
Some people THRIVE on it.
anonymous
2009-05-12 08:56:19 UTC
IT IS THE EVIL PART OF HUMAN NATURE IN WHICHJESUS ADDRESSED!! REMEMBER HE SAID: IT IS NOT WHATOES INTO THE MOUTH THAT DEFILES A MAN, BUT THAT WHICH COMEOUT OF THE HEART, WHICH IS CAPABLE OF ALL KINDS OF EVIL
_
2009-05-12 09:55:19 UTC
dont worry about it. they have low IQ. that's just how it is. they have nothing better to do.
Bill W
2009-05-12 10:05:08 UTC
If we're going German with it.... I would say..... Zeitgeist
anonymous
2009-05-12 08:55:04 UTC
Give an example, and please don't say Reality TV...


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...