Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by SafariDevelop 4167 days ago
Thank you. I find it interesting that you describe her to be "uniformly happy" yet your former lab mate, Justin Feinstein (along with Adolphs, Damasio, Tranel), uses "adverse consequences of living life without the amygdala" to describe her.

And when he (they) concluded the paper by writing "[SM's] behavior, time and time again, leads her back to the very situations she should be avoiding, highlighting the indispensable role that the amygdala plays in promoting survival by compelling the organism away from danger." were they thinking of the experimental situations (snakes, haunt houses) in mind or real world situations? I ask because for someone living in a "poverty-stricken area replete with crime, drugs, and danger" at the age of 44 being held at knifepoint/ gunpoint 4 times seems par for the course.

Even so, what evidence is there that SM went back to the very situations she should be avoiding in real life (i.e., not experimental situations of poking snakes and monsters). For example, did she go back to the situation that put herself at knifepoint (the incident which she handled fearlessly by saying "go ahead and cut me")?

I can't help but think that the authors are bringing their own bias (that fear-response is essential in modern times) when concluding as that. I'm not a neuroscientist, but I'm very interested in the topic of fear.