the human response is exactly the right response
2020-05-18
If humans didn’t insist on being quite so messily human, pandemic response would be much simpler.
– from https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/humans-are-complicated-do-we-need-behavioral-science-to-get-through-this/
I would posit that the human response is exactly the right response.
A threat is perceived. Systems go into seeming chaos to deal with the threat. Eventually, the threat is ameliorated and homeostasis is once again established.
A stimulus is perceived. A response is mounted. The organism adapts.
Different parts of the organism perceive the stimulus differently. Some are highly sensitive to it, as that is their job. Others may carry on blissfully ignorant. And still others may not notice the stimulus so much as other parts' (or the effects of other parts') reactions to it.
These differing perceptions lead to differing responses - both to the perceived stimulus and the resultant stimuli produced by the act of responding. And these responses occur at varying levels of intensity proportionate to the level of threat perceived.
Depending upon the operating state and environment of the organism at the time of threat perception - and varying throughout the response - adaptations occur. No matter the substance of the response, the intended outcome is the same, "Stability now!" And, eventually, that stability - homeostasis - is attained; one way or another. The organism may or may not go on. But, if it does, it always comes away changed. Always.
There is no single correct response. No one part of the organism has it right. It cannot.
The organism is too vast. That one part does not have complete knowledge of the others.
Implementing any single response will have both beneficial and harmful effects on the overall organism.
The organism relies on the collective intelligence of its constituents. Each responding in the way that best makes sense for them to do.
I suspect that the less variance there is between the nature of those individual responses, the less changed the organism emerges from perceived insult.
That is, when there is greater coherence, the return to homeostasis is quicker and results in less "damage." (You might say, the better the health of the organism, the quicker it recovers.)
But, imposing "coherence" by force of will does not result in the desired "quick return without damage." Any resultant homeostasis is fragile as the individual parts coerced into coherence just weren't truly in a position to act and withstand the impact of acting in the prescribed way (that is, they aren't in a position to be homeostatic in the same way others might be - there is a friction underlying that new homeostasis).
So, any single response is not the correct response.
The only productive response is the ranging collection of responses within the organism.
But, no worries!
Each constituent will ultimately have its voice heard - its impact felt by the collective organism. So, in the case of a "fragile homeostasis," that bit of false peace will soon collapse and the threat-response-homeostasis cycle will begin again.
That is, the human response is exactly the right response.
The organism is smart.
The brain only thinks it is.