Warum aus evolutionärer Sicht sollte es lähmende Angst immer noch geben?

das effiziente setzt sich durch =Evolution,bist lähmende Angst A effizient für das Opfertier und B warum verschwindet das Phänomen nicht aus der Natur und C wäre es für den Überlebensinstinkt nicht sinnvoller fliehen oder kämpfen zu können???

(2 votes)
Loading...

Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
5 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stefan997
2 years ago

Paralyzing fear usually occurs not in simple dangers but in excessive dangers.

If you encounter an excessive predator, you have the choice:

  • Fight: The predator is stronger (overpowered) => death
  • Fly: You trigger the animal’s hunting reflex => Probably death
  • Persistent: The best way. Can be good that you ignored, especially if the predator is not really hungry. Or: If your friend panicks next to you and triggers the hunting instinct of the predator. Friend is “selected”. You don’t

Or:

You will find yourself in a dizzying height before a abyss.

  • Fighting/ fleeing/son as hectic: Not as good
  • First of all: Better. Finally, if possible, detach as far from the solidification in order to get back carefully. Or stay solidified and wait for help

This is involuntary, so if you want to make your first bunge jump.

Even a self-killer solidifies when he meets the abyss. And here too, it is good of nature not to make this easy for the self-mother. And give him a second chance.

So there are 3 sensible actions: fighting, fleeing or just staring. If the brain fights as suicide and fleeing as impossible it will be possible to choose 3. And this is often good.

chrisbyrd
2 years ago

That would be totally counterproductive…

An example of many!

I find the following video of Dr. Markus Blietz on “Evolution or Degeneration”:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF1wx-v6UME

jojojo5433
2 years ago

because the theory of evolution is a complete Schmarrn…

chrisbyrd
2 years ago
Reply to  jojojo5433

This is definitely the top answer here… 🙂