My first major work of fearology was this book The World's Fearlessness Teachings (2010), published by University Press of America/Rowman & Littlefield.
This opus volume contains 21 years of research on the topic of fear and fearlessness, across time, across cultures, and explores the topic across the many theories that exist out there in human thought on fear management.
I think Yahweh's comment on the last blog is relevant and worthy to comment on. Yahweh's comment is about their own doubt that there is such a phenomenon as the "gift of fear" (which is the phrase and theory of international security expert Gavin De Becker). Note: I cover De Becker's theory in my 2010 book and critique it respectfully as well, as I critique many theories of fear management/education therein.
I have analyzed De Becker and many other contemporary writers and teachers who want to make "fear" positive. Often they are doing this because they feel "fear" has for too long in history received a bad rap, a negative connotation, and that that hasn't helped us see the positive side to fear. I call this all a movement to re-furbish and rehabilitate fear in order to make it important again in its own right. I think that is generally a good movement and response and will benefit humanity. However, like all movements they can be biased and one-sided and excessive to become their own ideologies. That's part of my critique of these "fear-positivists" as I call them collectively. De Becker is part of that camp of thinking and teaching about fear. It is partial. And Yahweh is even questioning it as potentially mis-guided or at least it is something that ought to be scrutinized. I'm glad Yahweh wrote the comment of questioning on the De Becker initiative in the last blog post.
I show my book here because I attempt to sort through, albeit long-winded and scholarly in approach, that there are indeed troubles with the "fear-positivists" and that has important outcomes. Without going into all that detail, I recommend my book. However, I will say, it is good for us on the Fearlessness Movement Ning to think about these things carefully and examine our own experiences with fear and fearlessness. Let us not be controlled by what others think too much. That itself, is part of the path of fearlessness and it is part of what fearology attempts to do by raising these issues on the topic of fear into the light of critical analysis and experimentation and philosophical debate. Finally, I argue that the real gift (theoretically) is not "fear" but "fearlessness." I trace out carefully in my book why that is a useful proposition and theory and has not been embraced in the Western world of thought to date. There are also lots of problems with the use of the term "fearlessness" and "fearless" which I write and teach about. But besides all that, I have a way of writing and thinking that is dialectical and may help us get around some of the problems of the debates about "gift of fear" vs. "gift of fearlessness." My solution...
(?) or my intrigue for a better way to study this all, is to look at a conception that is written as fear(less)(ness). By breaking this down and showing these relationships, there is more likely to be a 'corrective' awareness in what we are talking and writing and teaching about with this topic of fear and fearlessness. Anyways, just my suggestion, for now... maybe you folks have a better suggestion...
-----------
Note: I appreciate John Coleman, Apocatastasis Institute for re-posting this blog today. See Learn about Apocatastasis' Fearology Center here: https://apocatastasisinstitute.wordpress.com/fearology-center/
Comments