Only in the last decade it was identified and classified as a different reaction than fear and disgust. It is theorized that we have it to protect us against skin parasites (pathogens, insects) - and hence the skin shivers. See "Skin-transmitted pathogens and the heebie jeebies: evidence for a subclass of disgust stimuli that evoke a qualitatively unique emotional response" https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.120... for a nice overview.
> One study found that the mere visual perception of diseased-looking people stimulated white blood cells to respond more aggressively to infection (as indicated by the production of the proinflammatory cytokine Interleukin 6 in response to a bacterial stimulus).
I wonder if this is also why many people perhaps showed nocebo effects (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocebo) at the onset of the covid19 crisis & the many disturbing images (especially from Italy) being shown in the media.
I wonder if this explains why people forced to work in open plan offfices become less sociable? It’s well documented how illnesses travel in open plans.
I found the xenophobia thing quite interesting : "In addition, the behavioral immune system appears to contribute to xenophobia and ethnocentrism. One implication is that these prejudices tend to be exaggerated under conditions in which people feel especially vulnerable to the potential transmission of infectious diseases."
I wonder if we'll see a rise in xenophobia, and consequent long-term shifts in government policy, due to COVID-19?
Globalized society isn't a given; it isn't like the world doesn't work with nations maintaining domestic manufacturing capability.
In fact, the biggest push to economically globalize was actually a strategic move to spread influence in the Cold War era, and a means to the end of international peacekeeping through economic interdependence.
This pandemic in particular has highlighted some of the fundamental flaws in that model, however. Namely that if you don't have maximum commitment by all members (to help, and to not hinder), it leads to decisions being made that are worse for everyone globally.
For instance; Chinna may have completely shut down, and allowed western help if they did not feel it would unduly threaten their national security; and that they could with full faith trust that other nations would not exploit the period of temporary weakness while the virus was in the process of being contained.
That did not happen, nor will it likely ever. The fact is, globalization is only touted it seems by idealists, and capital wielders looking to stretch the buck that much further. In terms of local sociocultural security; it tends to be a non-starter.
It's a pity really. I can understand and see both sides of the issue's sentiments. I'll be damned if I can figure out any way to reconcile their contentions though.
It's a slightly odd article, in that it mentions things like avoidannce of the obese, the elderly and xenophobia, but it doesn't really talk about the obvious things like the disgust reflex - avoiding shit, mouldy food etc.
People in elevators are not more silent. The reason they're quiet is because they're strangers, not because they're standing too close. In a more open space, like a grocery store, strangers still aren't chatting.
Or maybe you're asking why elevators feel more awkward. It feels awkward because the physical relationship does not match the emotional one. Also, the stranger has an up-close view of you: any flaw in your appearance or words is received by someone who you don't trust, don't understand. You can only guess what they'll think. They'll likely be polite and say nothing critical, but the thought that they might secretly think something critical is enough to hold back most people. The concern for what strangers think is another interesting subject in psychology.
You can observe a bunch of people and say, "they are not talking to each other because they are strangers". But if you observed a randomly selected group over a decade, you would see that some of them talk to strangers now and then, and those are the ones that have a tremendous advantage in creating new relationships, whereas the ones that never talk to strangers might even be handicapped/pathological.
Like, there's a huge difference between someone who, on average, consistently starts a conversation with 1 of 1000 people they meet vs. someone who does that with nobody. But observing people for a minute or two at a time, you wouldn't see the difference.
Only in the last decade it was identified and classified as a different reaction than fear and disgust. It is theorized that we have it to protect us against skin parasites (pathogens, insects) - and hence the skin shivers. See "Skin-transmitted pathogens and the heebie jeebies: evidence for a subclass of disgust stimuli that evoke a qualitatively unique emotional response" https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.120... for a nice overview.