Fight Or Flight @ MindSay 
idk....sumthn stupid
just got in a retarted fight w/ sum1 that i've known since 5th but o-well shes bein a bitch like always but idc..n e way i just got back yesterday from my aunts..it was rly boring && embarisin too i mean she got up & danced in the room to this rly gay music..but i made $20 so why do i kare. that's it ttyl ppl <3 ya later...
Fight or Flight and the State of Nature
I wrote this for my philosophy and literature class. We had to write something about the novel Life of Pi so I did. She told us we could structure it however we wanted, so I felt 17 paragraphs would be just enough. It turned out to be just over 7 pages double spaced, so it's not too much. The introduction is also very long so it's not as long as it seems. Also, she didn't say anything about incorporating philosophy really, I just did on my own accord.
“Don’t…move.”
Adam starts breathing heavily at the voice of the large man who has just come up behind him while he waits in line at the bank. “Yes, sir,” Adam whimpered helplessly. Even while his external actions showed signs of a weak, timid man, internally hormones were shooting off, racing through his blood stream, and adding to his perceptiveness. His pupils dilate. His awareness intensifies. His sight sharpens. His impulses quicken. His perception of pain diminishes.
“Turn around slowly…and hand me your wallet…slowly,” the large man quietly demanded.
“Yes, sir,” Adam responded in a meek voice. Adam slowly turned around to face the muscular man, who was at least twice his size. His face had a slight grin of pure evil on it. This grin disturbed Adam. He had no respect for those that resorted to a life of crime to make ends vegetables. Adam completed his half revolution, and was now face-to-neck with the man. He started to reach into his back pocket to get his wallet. His moves were very slow and deliberate.
Then suddenly, Adam kicks the large man in the groin, and punches him in the face. The man falls to the floor. Adam stomps on his face as he runs out of the bank, and around the corner, and continues to run for another three blocks. All the while, he scans the streets, the sidewalks, and the people in the stores, looking out for danger. Fear has become the lens through which he views the world.
One may think Adam has some special super powers. A person would not find a scrawny little man knock a huge block of muscles to the ground every day. The feat does indeed seem superhero-esque, yet this ability rests inside all of us. When the body perceives a threat, a bodily reaction is triggered, called the "fight or flight" response. Originally discovered by the great Harvard physiologist Walter Cannon, this response is hard-wired into our brains and represents a genetic wisdom designed to protect us from bodily harm.
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy defines “fight or flight” as “The set of processes that occur in the body when it is confronted with some form of physical or mental stress. For example, if a person is faced with danger (as from a vicious animal about to attack), the nervous system signals for adrenaline and other hormones to be released into the blood. These hormones prepare the body either to confront the attacking animal or to flee to safety (thus, “fight or flight”). Changes in the body include increased heart rate, dilated pupils of the eye (to improve vision), and increased supply of blood to the muscles (to prepare the body for action).” (Hirsch et al)
At times when our actual physical survival is threatened, there is no greater response to have on one’s side. The surge of adrenaline and other stress hormones pumped through one’s body during the “fight or flight” response is the force responsible for mothers lifting cars off their trapped children and for firefighters heroically running into blazing houses to save endangered victims. The surge of adrenaline imbues us with heroism and courage at times when we are called upon to protect and defend the lives and values we cherish.
In the novel Life of Pi by Yann Martel, the main character, Pi, is placed in a situation in which the “fight or flight” response takes over. He becomes stranded out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean without much hope. Pi focuses on survival, and reverts to primitive survival skills. He also constantly observes his surroundings, preparing for eminent attacks from other animals on his lifeboat. He views his surroundings through a veil, of which danger is the only thing permeable. Yann Martel uses symbolism to show that the primal instincts of man may take over when his life is in danger, and while these instincts may go against normal societal values, they are justifiable.
Throughout the story of Pi’s survival, Martel portrays all the characters as non-human animals. Martel even reveals at the end of the novel that Pi himself is portrayed as both a human and a tiger. When Mr. Okamoto and Mr. Chiba of the Maritime Department of the Japanese Ministry of Transport come to question Pi about the sinking of the cargo ship, the Tsimtsum, Pi reveals a second tale involving no non-human animals. Pi tells the story of how he was the only survivor of the four humans on the lifeboat: the sailor, the chef, his mother, and him. However, in Pi’s previous story, there were five characters: the zebra, the hyena, the orangutan (Orange Juice), the tiger (Richard Parker), and him. After hearing the two stories, Okamoto and Chiba conclude, “the Taiwanese sailor is the zebra, [Pi’s] mother is the orang-utan, the cook is…the hyena – which means [Pi’s] the tiger!” (Martel 311) Thus, a non-human animal in the first story accounts for every character in the second story. By portraying the characters as non-human animals, Martel makes the gruesome violence of Pi’s second story much more comprehensible. It is hard to believe humans would act in such a disgusting manner as when “[the cook] moved over [Pi’s mother]. The knife appeared. He raised it in the air. It came down…He raised his head and looked at [Pi]. He hurled something [Pi’s] way… [Pi] held [his] mother’s head in his hands.” (Martel 309-310) The chef’s behavior was very animalistic and was caused by a build up of stress. The “fight or flight” response took over, and the overwhelming accumulation of strain led to the chef’s murder of Mrs. Patel. This murder is masked in Pi’s original telling in which the hyena attacks the orangutan (Orange Juice) when he “jumped on the bench and caught Orange Juice at the wrist before she could strike…The hyena let go of her wrist and expertly got to her throat.” (Martel 131) The chef (the hyena) still kills Pi’s mother (the orangutan). However, by using non-human animals to describe this violence, Martel shows how humans become more animalistic in times of stress, and when life is in danger.
Martel also describes Pi’s animalistic behaviors that he resorts to for survival as the “fight or flight” response seizes control under his conditions. In instances of extreme hunger, the “fight or flight” response will take over, as starvation is perceived as a threat. Thus, the perception of pain is diminished (including bad tastes), and the only focus is to find food in order to survive. Pi, once a vegetarian, turns into a murderer of sorts as he begins to catch fish. He even warns the reader that “[one] may be astonished that in such a short period of time [he] could go from weeping over the muffled killing of a flying fish to gleefully bludgeoning to death a dorado.” (Martel 185) However, eating is a necessity for survival, and therefore should not astonish anyone. A person might do anything to survive. Killing another animal for food is very animalistic. Pi even resorts to feeding on the fluid found in the veins of sea turtles. He discovers that in the veins of the sea turtles “coursed a sweet lassi that had to be drunk as soon as it spurted from their necks.” (Martel 212) Pi takes to eating every part he can of an animal, just as a more simplistic non-human animal might. More evidence of the “fight or flight” response is found when Pi believes Richard Parker (the tiger) has attacked him. Pi felt a hit across his face, and believed that Richard Parker had leapt across the boat and struck him. “[He] was to have his face clawed off – this was the gruesome way [he] was to die. The pain was so severe [Pi] felt nothing.” (Martel 180) Once again, the “fight or flight” response diminishes the perception of pain. When Pi felt his life was about to end, he did not feel the pain because of this effect. In Martel’s description of Pi’s actions on the lifeboat, it is evident that the “fight or flight” response often takes over his actions, and makes him more animalistic.
These animalistic actions taken by the characters of Pi’s story are in great conflict with normal societal values. The question is, however, do societal values apply in this situation? Robert Nozick (1938 – 2001) explained that a society, or state, forms because of groupings called Protective Associations. Protective Associations result when a group of people decides to voluntarily join and protect each other. In the story, there are no such efforts to join and protect one another until Pi and Richard Parker are the only two left on the boat. Even when Pi felt he should do something to save the zebra from the hyena he felt no “pity to spare for long for the zebra. [Because] when [one’s] own life is threatened, [one’s] sense of empathy is blunted by a terrible, selfish, hunger for survival.” (Martel 120) Pi was only looking out for himself and was reluctant to protect anyone else. Thus, it can be said that before it was just Richard Parker and Pi, the characters were in a State of Nature. Therefore, societal values do not apply.
Many philosophers have different ideas on how man acts in the state of nature. Jean-Jacques Rousseau thought human beings are compassionate in the state of nature. Locke described man in the state of nature as being born good, equal, and independent. He claimed that “the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.” (Locke 117) In other words, he believed man used reason and tolerance to protect his natural rights. However, before both Rousseau and Locke, Hobbes came up with the concept of the State of Nature. Wikipedia.org describes Hobbes’ belief of the State of Nature…
When only Richard Parker and Pi are left on the lifeboat, Pi attempts to establish a Protective Association with the tiger. Pi decides to help Richard Parker by feeding him, and Richard Parker will help Pi by not eating him. Furthermore, remember that Richard Parker and Pi are one in the same. It is his animalistic side (Richard Parker) that keeps Pi fishing, and surviving. Thus, Pi and Richard Parker have the beginnings of a society according to Nozick. Are Pi’s actions then justifiable, since he is no longer in a State of Nature? Yes. While Pi’s animalistic actions would not be accepted in society as we view it around us, those actions would be acceptable in the society on the lifeboat. Killing and consuming every edible part of fish and other sea creatures is commonplace, and fully accepted as means of protection (from starvation).
The use of symbolism in Life of Pi intensifies the idea that humans are indeed very animalistic when their life is threatened; however, these actions can be justified by a philosophical analysis of the conditions of a person’s environment. When a person is in danger, the “fight or flight” response takes over making a person more animalistic. Their main goal is survival, which may lead to the killing of other animals. In the case of Pi, these actions were justified for two reasons during two different parts of the story. First, in the State of Nature, man is brutish (according to Hobbes). Second, in the established society between Pi and Richard Parker, such actions are, in fact, accepted as normal behavior. Man will always be animalistic. It is innate inside them for them to act instinctively at times, especially when their life is threatened. However, in our established society, to always act instinctively may go against established Protective Associations. In other cases, it is extremely beneficial to our survival.
Bibliography
Hirsch, E.D. Jr., Joseph F. Kett, and James Trefil, ed. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy. 3rd ed. : Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.
Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. London: Everyman, 1999.
Martel, Yann. Life of Pi. Orlando: Harcourt, 2001.
"State of nature." State of nature. 26 Apr 2005. Wikipedia. 15 May. 2005 .
“Don’t…move.”
Adam starts breathing heavily at the voice of the large man who has just come up behind him while he waits in line at the bank. “Yes, sir,” Adam whimpered helplessly. Even while his external actions showed signs of a weak, timid man, internally hormones were shooting off, racing through his blood stream, and adding to his perceptiveness. His pupils dilate. His awareness intensifies. His sight sharpens. His impulses quicken. His perception of pain diminishes.
“Turn around slowly…and hand me your wallet…slowly,” the large man quietly demanded.
“Yes, sir,” Adam responded in a meek voice. Adam slowly turned around to face the muscular man, who was at least twice his size. His face had a slight grin of pure evil on it. This grin disturbed Adam. He had no respect for those that resorted to a life of crime to make ends vegetables. Adam completed his half revolution, and was now face-to-neck with the man. He started to reach into his back pocket to get his wallet. His moves were very slow and deliberate.
Then suddenly, Adam kicks the large man in the groin, and punches him in the face. The man falls to the floor. Adam stomps on his face as he runs out of the bank, and around the corner, and continues to run for another three blocks. All the while, he scans the streets, the sidewalks, and the people in the stores, looking out for danger. Fear has become the lens through which he views the world.
One may think Adam has some special super powers. A person would not find a scrawny little man knock a huge block of muscles to the ground every day. The feat does indeed seem superhero-esque, yet this ability rests inside all of us. When the body perceives a threat, a bodily reaction is triggered, called the "fight or flight" response. Originally discovered by the great Harvard physiologist Walter Cannon, this response is hard-wired into our brains and represents a genetic wisdom designed to protect us from bodily harm.
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy defines “fight or flight” as “The set of processes that occur in the body when it is confronted with some form of physical or mental stress. For example, if a person is faced with danger (as from a vicious animal about to attack), the nervous system signals for adrenaline and other hormones to be released into the blood. These hormones prepare the body either to confront the attacking animal or to flee to safety (thus, “fight or flight”). Changes in the body include increased heart rate, dilated pupils of the eye (to improve vision), and increased supply of blood to the muscles (to prepare the body for action).” (Hirsch et al)
At times when our actual physical survival is threatened, there is no greater response to have on one’s side. The surge of adrenaline and other stress hormones pumped through one’s body during the “fight or flight” response is the force responsible for mothers lifting cars off their trapped children and for firefighters heroically running into blazing houses to save endangered victims. The surge of adrenaline imbues us with heroism and courage at times when we are called upon to protect and defend the lives and values we cherish.
In the novel Life of Pi by Yann Martel, the main character, Pi, is placed in a situation in which the “fight or flight” response takes over. He becomes stranded out in the middle of the Pacific Ocean without much hope. Pi focuses on survival, and reverts to primitive survival skills. He also constantly observes his surroundings, preparing for eminent attacks from other animals on his lifeboat. He views his surroundings through a veil, of which danger is the only thing permeable. Yann Martel uses symbolism to show that the primal instincts of man may take over when his life is in danger, and while these instincts may go against normal societal values, they are justifiable.
Throughout the story of Pi’s survival, Martel portrays all the characters as non-human animals. Martel even reveals at the end of the novel that Pi himself is portrayed as both a human and a tiger. When Mr. Okamoto and Mr. Chiba of the Maritime Department of the Japanese Ministry of Transport come to question Pi about the sinking of the cargo ship, the Tsimtsum, Pi reveals a second tale involving no non-human animals. Pi tells the story of how he was the only survivor of the four humans on the lifeboat: the sailor, the chef, his mother, and him. However, in Pi’s previous story, there were five characters: the zebra, the hyena, the orangutan (Orange Juice), the tiger (Richard Parker), and him. After hearing the two stories, Okamoto and Chiba conclude, “the Taiwanese sailor is the zebra, [Pi’s] mother is the orang-utan, the cook is…the hyena – which means [Pi’s] the tiger!” (Martel 311) Thus, a non-human animal in the first story accounts for every character in the second story. By portraying the characters as non-human animals, Martel makes the gruesome violence of Pi’s second story much more comprehensible. It is hard to believe humans would act in such a disgusting manner as when “[the cook] moved over [Pi’s mother]. The knife appeared. He raised it in the air. It came down…He raised his head and looked at [Pi]. He hurled something [Pi’s] way… [Pi] held [his] mother’s head in his hands.” (Martel 309-310) The chef’s behavior was very animalistic and was caused by a build up of stress. The “fight or flight” response took over, and the overwhelming accumulation of strain led to the chef’s murder of Mrs. Patel. This murder is masked in Pi’s original telling in which the hyena attacks the orangutan (Orange Juice) when he “jumped on the bench and caught Orange Juice at the wrist before she could strike…The hyena let go of her wrist and expertly got to her throat.” (Martel 131) The chef (the hyena) still kills Pi’s mother (the orangutan). However, by using non-human animals to describe this violence, Martel shows how humans become more animalistic in times of stress, and when life is in danger.
Martel also describes Pi’s animalistic behaviors that he resorts to for survival as the “fight or flight” response seizes control under his conditions. In instances of extreme hunger, the “fight or flight” response will take over, as starvation is perceived as a threat. Thus, the perception of pain is diminished (including bad tastes), and the only focus is to find food in order to survive. Pi, once a vegetarian, turns into a murderer of sorts as he begins to catch fish. He even warns the reader that “[one] may be astonished that in such a short period of time [he] could go from weeping over the muffled killing of a flying fish to gleefully bludgeoning to death a dorado.” (Martel 185) However, eating is a necessity for survival, and therefore should not astonish anyone. A person might do anything to survive. Killing another animal for food is very animalistic. Pi even resorts to feeding on the fluid found in the veins of sea turtles. He discovers that in the veins of the sea turtles “coursed a sweet lassi that had to be drunk as soon as it spurted from their necks.” (Martel 212) Pi takes to eating every part he can of an animal, just as a more simplistic non-human animal might. More evidence of the “fight or flight” response is found when Pi believes Richard Parker (the tiger) has attacked him. Pi felt a hit across his face, and believed that Richard Parker had leapt across the boat and struck him. “[He] was to have his face clawed off – this was the gruesome way [he] was to die. The pain was so severe [Pi] felt nothing.” (Martel 180) Once again, the “fight or flight” response diminishes the perception of pain. When Pi felt his life was about to end, he did not feel the pain because of this effect. In Martel’s description of Pi’s actions on the lifeboat, it is evident that the “fight or flight” response often takes over his actions, and makes him more animalistic.
These animalistic actions taken by the characters of Pi’s story are in great conflict with normal societal values. The question is, however, do societal values apply in this situation? Robert Nozick (1938 – 2001) explained that a society, or state, forms because of groupings called Protective Associations. Protective Associations result when a group of people decides to voluntarily join and protect each other. In the story, there are no such efforts to join and protect one another until Pi and Richard Parker are the only two left on the boat. Even when Pi felt he should do something to save the zebra from the hyena he felt no “pity to spare for long for the zebra. [Because] when [one’s] own life is threatened, [one’s] sense of empathy is blunted by a terrible, selfish, hunger for survival.” (Martel 120) Pi was only looking out for himself and was reluctant to protect anyone else. Thus, it can be said that before it was just Richard Parker and Pi, the characters were in a State of Nature. Therefore, societal values do not apply.
Many philosophers have different ideas on how man acts in the state of nature. Jean-Jacques Rousseau thought human beings are compassionate in the state of nature. Locke described man in the state of nature as being born good, equal, and independent. He claimed that “the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.” (Locke 117) In other words, he believed man used reason and tolerance to protect his natural rights. However, before both Rousseau and Locke, Hobbes came up with the concept of the State of Nature. Wikipedia.org describes Hobbes’ belief of the State of Nature…
“Hobbes believed that human beings in the state of nature would behave ‘badly’ towards one another (‘badly’ in the sense of the morality that we would commonly apply: but Hobbes argued that people had every right to defend themselves by whatever means, in the absence of order).
Famously, he believed that such a state would lead to a "war of every man against every man" and make life ‘totally lame.’” (State of nature)
It appears as though the type of behavior displayed by all the characters is what Hobbes would have expected from such a situation - that they would establish an every man for himself mindset, and compete against one another for survival. This is in direct contrast to Rousseau and Locke, who believed man is good in the State of Nature, and that they would act based on rationale.Famously, he believed that such a state would lead to a "war of every man against every man" and make life ‘totally lame.’” (State of nature)
When only Richard Parker and Pi are left on the lifeboat, Pi attempts to establish a Protective Association with the tiger. Pi decides to help Richard Parker by feeding him, and Richard Parker will help Pi by not eating him. Furthermore, remember that Richard Parker and Pi are one in the same. It is his animalistic side (Richard Parker) that keeps Pi fishing, and surviving. Thus, Pi and Richard Parker have the beginnings of a society according to Nozick. Are Pi’s actions then justifiable, since he is no longer in a State of Nature? Yes. While Pi’s animalistic actions would not be accepted in society as we view it around us, those actions would be acceptable in the society on the lifeboat. Killing and consuming every edible part of fish and other sea creatures is commonplace, and fully accepted as means of protection (from starvation).
The use of symbolism in Life of Pi intensifies the idea that humans are indeed very animalistic when their life is threatened; however, these actions can be justified by a philosophical analysis of the conditions of a person’s environment. When a person is in danger, the “fight or flight” response takes over making a person more animalistic. Their main goal is survival, which may lead to the killing of other animals. In the case of Pi, these actions were justified for two reasons during two different parts of the story. First, in the State of Nature, man is brutish (according to Hobbes). Second, in the established society between Pi and Richard Parker, such actions are, in fact, accepted as normal behavior. Man will always be animalistic. It is innate inside them for them to act instinctively at times, especially when their life is threatened. However, in our established society, to always act instinctively may go against established Protective Associations. In other cases, it is extremely beneficial to our survival.
Bibliography
Hirsch, E.D. Jr., Joseph F. Kett, and James Trefil, ed. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy. 3rd ed. : Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002.
Locke, John. Two Treatises of Government. London: Everyman, 1999.
Martel, Yann. Life of Pi. Orlando: Harcourt, 2001.
"State of nature." State of nature. 26 Apr 2005. Wikipedia. 15 May. 2005 .
Quick Links
Latest Comment
Re: Goodbye to you all - haha I just dumped out the remaining bong water and passed it along to my brother!!!...
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy