...that underlies the motivation of probably 1 in 3 of the main characters in the MHA universe, a majority of whom are kids. (Also, WTF does nobody in their universe or ours seem to notice the glaringly obvious self harm issues some of those people have?)
>> (And even today, the behavior might be framed asa mental health issue, rather than a violence issue, though both can be true at the same time.) << >>I'd say both.<<
I'll suggest that they correlate, which would, among other things, explain why revolutions tend to happen when people have miserable lives. Interestingly this would also provide scientific evidence for the fact that leaders should keep their subjects reasonably happy...alas, people don't seem to listen to scientists anymore than they used to listen to prophets.
Its hard to distinguish them, though. Generally, there's a correlation with free choice, and possibly also with attempts to choose a safer option or survive (this one runs into relativity of cultural ethics..)
Just off the top of my head, musing : Are seppuku and martyrdom universally bad, or are they good-bad as defined by specific cultures? If we train soldiers to die on command, is that a form of abuse because it trains people to hurt themselves? Why do so many authority figures consider it okay to hurt others but get grouchy when their underlings hurt themselves?
>>That's part of what makes it such a strong symbiosis. It's challenging to bridge that gap, but the two groups really have a complementary set of strengths and weaknesses. They buffer each other toward a more stable medium.<<
Re: Hmm ...
...that underlies the motivation of probably 1 in 3 of the main characters in the MHA universe, a majority of whom are kids. (Also, WTF does nobody in their universe or ours seem to notice the glaringly obvious self harm issues some of those people have?)
>> (And even today, the behavior might be framed asa mental health issue, rather than a violence issue, though both can be true at the same time.) <<
>>I'd say both.<<
I'll suggest that they correlate, which would, among other things, explain why revolutions tend to happen when people have miserable lives. Interestingly this would also provide scientific evidence for the fact that leaders should keep their subjects reasonably happy...alas, people don't seem to listen to scientists anymore than they used to listen to prophets.
Its hard to distinguish them, though. Generally, there's a correlation with free choice, and possibly also with attempts to choose a safer option or survive (this one runs into relativity of cultural ethics..)
Just off the top of my head, musing : Are seppuku and martyrdom universally bad, or are they good-bad as defined by specific cultures? If we train soldiers to die on command, is that a form of abuse because it trains people to hurt themselves? Why do so many authority figures consider it okay to hurt others but get grouchy when their underlings hurt themselves?
>>That's part of what makes it such a strong symbiosis. It's challenging to bridge that gap, but the two groups really have a complementary set of strengths and weaknesses. They buffer each other toward a more stable medium.<<
Yup.