Log in

View Full Version : Rudeness Is a Neurotoxin



The Vegan Marxist
7th January 2011, 04:57
Rudeness Is a Neurotoxin
by Dr. Douglas Fields
January 5, 2011

Americans are rude. I say this not to preach, which is neither my right nor my intention, but as a scientist, a developmental neuroscientist. My concern about American rudeness relates to my scientific research and knowledge about the development of the human brain. My conclusion comes from a recent trip to Japan, and from a reminder of times past, the death of actress Barbara Billingsley, who died Oct. 16, 2010.

Billingsley portrayed June Cleaver, the sympathetic and iconic, nurturing mother on the popular 1950s sitcom "Leave It to Beaver." Remember her signature line? "Ward, I'm worried about the Beaver." She confided her concern earnestly to her husband whenever their young son seemed the slightest bit distressed. The latest scientific research backs up with detailed molecular and cellular mechanisms what June Cleaver (and we) always knew intuitively, that through adolescence, the human brain is molded by the social environment in which a child is reared. A disrespectful, stressful social environment is a neurotoxin for the brain and psyche, and the scars are permanent.

One can debate how accurately television entertainment reflects reality, but there is no doubt that it represents the ideals of the time. Commercial art and entertainment always reflect and reinforce a society's values, as the public buy it (literally) because they value it. There is no doubt that American society has changed dramatically with respect to manners and social discourse in a generation. The "Leave It to Beaver" model of American polite society in the 1950s and early 1960s is gone. Those black-and-white sitcoms have been supplanted today by garish reality television programs that showcase domestic and social interactions driven by narcissism, factionalism, competition and selfishness.

The contrast between the brash, comparatively disrespectful behavior of Americans today and the courtesy, formal manners, civil discourse, polite behavior and respect for others regardless of social status that is evident in Japanese society is striking. The contrast hits an American like a splash of cold water upon disembarking the airplane in Japan, because it clashes so starkly with our behavior. For an American, Japanese manners and courtesy must be experienced.

American children today are raised in an environment that is far more hostile than the environment that nurtured today's adults. Children today are exposed to behaviors, profane language, hostilities and stress from which we adults, raised a generation ago, were carefully shielded. When I was a boy, there were no metal detectors at the entrance to my school. The idea was inconceivable, and there was indeed no need for them. Not so today. I wonder: how does this different environment affect brain development?

First it is helpful to consider, from a biological perspective, what "rudeness" is, so that we can consider what is lost when formal polite behaviors are cast away. People (and animals) living together in large numbers must develop strict formalized behaviors governing interactions between all individuals in the group, or there will be strife and chaos. In the natural world, as in the civilized world, it is stressful for individuals (people or animals) to interact with strangers, and also with other members of a working group and family members. As the size of the group increases, so do the number of interactions between individuals, thus raising the level of stress if not controlled by formal, stereotyped behavior, which in human society is called "manners." The formal "Yes, Sir, Yes, Ma'am," is not a showy embellishment in the military; strict respect and formal polite discourse are the hub of the wheel in any effective and cohesive social structure. True, many chafe under a system of behavior that is overly rigid, as do many young Japanese, but my point is that these polite and formalized behaviors reduce stress in a stressful situation that arises from being an individual in a complex society. Stress is a neurotoxin, especially during development of a child's brain.

Studies have shown that children exposed to serious psychological trauma during childhood are at risk of suffering increased psychiatric disorders, including depression, anger, hostility, drug abuse, suicidal ideation, loneliness and even psychosis as adults. Using modern brain imaging, the physical damage to these children's brain development can be seen as clearly as a bone fracture on an X-ray. Early-childhood sexual abuse, physical abuse and witnessing domestic violence undermine the normal wiring of brain circuits, especially those circuits connecting the left and right sides of the brain through a massive bundle of connections called the corpus callosum. Impairment in integrating information between right and left hemispheres is associated with increased risk of craving, drug abuse and dependence, and a weakened ability to make moral judgments. (See my post "Of Two Minds on Morality (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-douglas-fields/of-two-minds-on-morality_b_738916.html)" for new research on the corpus callosum and the ability to make moral judgments.)

A series of studies by a group of psychiatrists and brain imaging scientists lead by Martin Teicher, of Harvard Medical School, shows that even hostile words in the form of verbal abuse can cause these brain changes and enduring psychiatric risks for young adults. In a study published in 2006, the researchers showed that parental verbal abuse was more strongly associated with these detrimental effects on brain development than was parental physical abuse (http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/163/6/993?). In a new study published in the July issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry, they report that exposure to verbal abuse from peers is associated with elevated psychiatric symptoms and corpus callosum abnormalities (http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/45/13/25.2.full). The main causes are stress hormones, changes in inhibitory neurotransmitters, and environmental experience affecting the formation of myelin electrical insulation on nerve fibers. The most sensitive period for verbal abuse from peers in impairing brain development was exposure during the middle school years. Why? Because this is the period of life when these connections are developing in the human brain, and wiring of the human brain is greatly influenced by environmental experience.

Unlike the brains of most animals, which are cast at birth, the human brain develops largely after we are born. The brain of a human infant is so feeble that human babies are helpless. Human infants cannot walk, visual perception is rudimentary, and cognitive abilities, likes and dislikes, talents and skills, and the ability to communicate by speech or through reading and writing do not develop fully until the completion of adolescence. Our brains are the product of the environment in which we are nurtured through the first two decades of life. Whether you are Mormon or Muslim or speak Spanish or French depends primarily on where you were born and raised. Our experience during childhood and adolescence determines the wiring of our brain so powerfully that even processing of sensory information is determined by our childhood environment. Whether or not we can hear eight notes in a musical scale or 12, or whether we find symmetry in art beautiful or boring, or whether we can hear the difference in sound of the English letter "R" vs. "L", depends entirely upon whether our brains wired up during childhood in Western culture or Asian culture. The neural circuitry underlying those sensory perceptions is directed by what we experienced in early life, and these circuits cannot be rewired easily in the adult brain.

One can view the effects of environment on brain development with fatalism or with optimism. It is, however, the reason for human success on this planet. The fact that our brains develop after we are born rather than in the womb allows humans to adapt to changing environments. Biologically speaking, this increases the likelihood of success in reproducing in the environment we find ourselves rather than in the cave-man past coded through natural selection in our genes.

There were many other sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s that portrayed politeness and manners as paramount in social and family interactions: "Ozzie and Harriet," "Father Knows Best," "The Donna Reed Show." These are largely forgotten, but "Leave it to Beaver" thrived. It did so not as a commercial success for the ABC television network during its run from 1957 to 1963, but because of its enormous popularity in syndication, where it ran for decades in the late afternoon, watched with devotion by an audience of school children.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-douglas-fields/rudeness-is-a-neurotoxin_b_765908.html

Summerspeaker
11th January 2011, 02:50
Any good point the author may have had got lost in the reverence for order and hierarchy.

The Vegan Marxist
11th January 2011, 05:28
Any good point the author may have had got lost in the reverence for order and hierarchy.

Yeah, because the Professor seriously wants to dominate your puny brain! :rolleyes:

Summerspeaker
11th January 2011, 17:22
The formal "Yes, Sir, Yes, Ma'am," is not a showy embellishment in the military; strict respect and formal polite discourse are the hub of the wheel in any effective and cohesive social structure. True, many chafe under a system of behavior that is overly rigid, as do many young Japanese, but my point is that these polite and formalized behaviors reduce stress in a stressful situation that arises from being an individual in a complex society.

I'd say the dude does want exactly that. Replacing rudeness with rigid formality is like replacing porn culture with prudish sexual repression. We can do much better than toggling between bad options.

Princess Luna
11th January 2011, 19:50
the 1950's a time when not calling your boss "sir" was very uncivilized , but beating your wife and kids to a bloody pulp , joining the KKK , and throwing people in prison for their political views were all good :rolleyes:

Quail
12th January 2011, 19:12
I'm not sure what to think of the article. On the one hand, it makes sense that the environment a child grows up in affects how they are as a person, but on the other hand, I find the author kind of preachy. He seems to be saying that people who grew up with the values of his generation will be less rude - seems a bit like a "damn kids these days" rant to me.

The Vegan Marxist
13th January 2011, 02:36
I'm not sure what to think of the article. On the one hand, it makes sense that the environment a child grows up in affects how they are as a person, but on the other hand, I find the author kind of preachy. He seems to be saying that people who grew up with the values of his generation will be less rude - seems a bit like a "damn kids these days" rant to me.

Are you saying that kids then were just as obnoxious and spoiled as those today? I think our society, and the environment today that kids revolve around on a daily basis, have clearly effected our generation of kids of being a bunch of spoiled obnoxious jerks.

Princess Luna
13th January 2011, 03:27
Are you saying that kids then were just as obnoxious and spoiled as those today? I think our society, and the environment today that kids revolve around on a daily basis, have clearly effected our generation of kids of being a bunch of spoiled obnoxious jerks.
If kids in 60 years ago were more well behaved (the idea of which i consider to be more nostaliga then fact) you must ask , at what cost? fathers back then were allowed to use extreme punishment methods against their children

The Vegan Marxist
13th January 2011, 08:08
If kids in 60 years ago were more well behaved (the idea of which i consider to be more nostaliga then fact) you must ask , at what cost? fathers back then were allowed to use extreme punishment methods against their children

Well, fact of the matter is that parents were a lot more strict, for better or worse. And children were a bit more well behaved then than they are now. Though, I'd admit that tactics then weren't justifiable, nor are the tactics now. Harshness then scared their kids. Apathy now doesn't help the kids either. Parenting is still a behavior needing to be revolutionized and understood. And when I mean understood, I mean through both biological and social understanding. If you're going to argue that little kids called other little kids *****es, sluts, and act all "cool" because they think they are, say, 5 decades ago, then I'd love for anyone to prove such. Fact of the matter is that kids today are a hell of a lot more disrespectful than kids were in the past. This is a social problem, at most. Though, biological symptoms could play in as well.

ZeroNowhere
13th January 2011, 08:40
The author is a worthless piece of shit and should go to Hell with the rest of their bollocks.

The Vegan Marxist
13th January 2011, 09:08
The author is a worthless piece of shit and should go to Hell with the rest of their bollocks.

Great scientific observation comrade.

Quail
13th January 2011, 14:09
Are you saying that kids then were just as obnoxious and spoiled as those today? I think our society, and the environment today that kids revolve around on a daily basis, have clearly effected our generation of kids of being a bunch of spoiled obnoxious jerks.
I don't think that the environment children grow up in today is particularly good for them, but the author of that article seems to be promoting quite a backwards, conservative set of values. I don't think that scaring children into being polite is particularly healthy either.


Well, fact of the matter is that parents were a lot more strict, for better or worse. And children were a bit more well behaved then than they are now. Though, I'd admit that tactics then weren't justifiable, nor are the tactics now. Harshness then scared their kids. Apathy now doesn't help the kids either. Parenting is still a behavior needing to be revolutionized and understood. And when I mean understood, I mean through both biological and social understanding. If you're going to argue that little kids called other little kids *****es, sluts, and act all "cool" because they think they are, say, 5 decades ago, then I'd love for anyone to prove such. Fact of the matter is that kids today are a hell of a lot more disrespectful than kids were in the past. This is a social problem, at most. Though, biological symptoms could play in as well.
Parenting is definitely an issue that communists should be concerned about. I think that leading by example and showing your children that being respectful, tolerant and a helpful member of the community is the way to go. The values the author is pushing are unnecessarily authoritarian.

Lord Testicles
13th January 2011, 14:26
Fact of the matter is that kids today are a hell of a lot more disrespectful than kids were in the past.

It's not a fact just because you said so.

Blackscare
13th January 2011, 14:53
Children today are exposed to behaviors, profane language, hostilities and stress from which we adults, raised a generation ago, were carefully shielded.

Bolded part lost me, are we really supposed to believe that kids didn't curse a generation or two ago? Kids have, and always have had, foul mouths. If not in front of parents, then when they are alone with friends. Excuse the expression, but I call bullshit.

I think as people get older they lose confidence in the capacities of younger people. Obviously, we live in a vastly different age than even a generation before, with kids being able to access things on the internet that many adults have never seen or experienced. We focus so much on a few anti-social kids and fail to ever take note of the fact that there are vastly more kids who seem to be coping quite well.


What I get from this is that we really need to re-examine what it is that kids are capable of grasping without becoming serial killers. Our generation may have come out more jaded than those past, but I don't know if we won't turn out to be more well-adjusted in the long run.

Nothing Human Is Alien
13th January 2011, 15:00
This all assumes that children should be respectful of authority figures to begin with. Needless to say, I disagree.

Bring on the rebels.

Princess Luna
13th January 2011, 15:09
Well, fact of the matter is that parents were a lot more strict, for better or worse. And children were a bit more well behaved then than they are now. Though, I'd admit that tactics then weren't justifiable, nor are the tactics now. Harshness then scared their kids. Apathy now doesn't help the kids either. Parenting is still a behavior needing to be revolutionized and understood. And when I mean understood, I mean through both biological and social understanding. If you're going to argue that little kids called other little kids *****es, sluts, and act all "cool" because they think they are, say, 5 decades ago, then I'd love for anyone to prove such. Fact of the matter is that kids today are a hell of a lot more disrespectful than kids were in the past. This is a social problem, at most. Though, biological symptoms could play in as well.
The big thing among kids 50 years ago seems to be "When i grow , i'm going to join the army and kill a bunch of commies!" so yes children today are better off by calling themselves "*****es" and "sluts" because they are not as willing to get their brains blown out for bullshit causes (well not nearly as many as in the 50's anyway) also i suggest you read the book Catcher in the rye i think it provides a much better example of how teens thought 55 years ago then leave it to beaver does.

Summerspeaker
13th January 2011, 16:56
Parenting is definitely an issue that communists should be concerned about. I think that leading by example and showing your children that being respectful, tolerant and a helpful member of the community is the way to go. The values the author is pushing are unnecessarily authoritarian.

I like Shulamith Firestone's approach. Abolish the traditional family and liberate children.

Jazzratt
14th January 2011, 16:11
Great scientific observation comrade. If you insist I'll attack the science but the guy is still a chaffinch's chuff and can fuck off.

The writer seems happy to cite a handful of individual studies, but none of those links evinced any kind of sustained research into the subject. There was no meta analysis of several studies on similar subjects that would illustrate a lot more strongly the position this guy's arguing for. That's ignoring the fact that what he's citing talk about "verbal abuse" which is not actually the same thing as simply being impolite, certainly nothing in the studies themselves (from my cursory reading) indicate that impoliteness and verbal abuse are at all the same. I certainly don't think he has illustrated that "strict respect and formal polite discourse are the hub of the wheel in any effective and cohesive social structure" or that we should live like people in a '50s sitcom idyll. "Rudeness is a neurotoxin" is just plain nonsense.

That's of course giving him far more respect than he deserves in the first place; it is, as others have pointed out, saliently just nostalgia for a society and set of behaviours that never existed. The transparency of it is amazing, he's comparing attitudes shown on sitcoms (which are unrealistic and romanticised versions of life and attitudes at the time) to real behaviours. Not only that but it's obvious people back in the day had to be at least around as "rude" (however one wants to quantify that) if one of the causes of the current so called problem is that adults are ruder around children; unless of course there was some event in the modern day which caused everyone to spontaneously drop their past values when they reached adulthood (an acknowledged rarity)!

So yeah the author is a worthless piece of shit and should go to Hell with the rest of their bollocks.