Philosophy Now Forum

They say it's always best to remain calm in a crisis but most rules seem to have an exception. Are there any circumstances under which the best strategy would be to panic?

Sometimes it it is wise indeed. I am told that you gotta know when to walk away and when to ...

FlashDangerpants wrote:Sometimes it it is wise indeed. I am told that you gotta know when to walk away and when to ...

Yes but, normally, when you have to make a speedy retreat, isn't it better if it's controlled and focused, rather than haphazard and blind?

Harbal wrote:They say it's always best to remain calm in a crisis but most rules seem to have an exception. Are there any circumstances under which the best strategy would be to panic?

Let's say you are in a platoon and the Sergeant is looking to pick out some "volunteers" for a mission which requires calm and cold precision, but is probably going to mean certain death.

Harbal wrote:They say it's always best to remain calm in a crisis but most rules seem to have an exception. Are there any circumstances under which the best strategy would be to panic?

I don't think it's ever BEST to panic. Although, it can be hard to avoid sometimes.

Screaming and flailing in panic uses up valuable energy, and blocks awareness, that could be better utilized in other ways. And dealing with insane people and situations goes more smoothly if you are able to pretend it's normal (for the time being)... which comes in handy nearly every day.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Let's say you are in a platoon and the Sergeant is looking to pick out some "volunteers" for a mission which requires calm and cold precision, but is probably going to mean certain death.

And?

Harbal wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Let's say you are in a platoon and the Sergeant is looking to pick out some "volunteers" for a mission which requires calm and cold precision, but is probably going to mean certain death.

And?

Well duh. You PANIC so you do not get selected obviously.

Lacewing wrote: I don't think it's ever BEST to panic.

In 99 out of a 100 situations that is probably true but there must be at least one conceivable set of circumstances where panicking would save the day.

Harbal wrote:

FlashDangerpants wrote:Sometimes it it is wise indeed. I am told that you gotta know when to walk away and when to ...

Yes but, normally, when you have to make a speedy retreat, isn't it better if it's controlled and focused, rather than haphazard and blind?

Soiling oneself while idly sitting around is extremely easy, I could just cross my eyes and release right now. But to soil yourself consciously and deliberately while running is near impossible, while to do so while in a state of pure panic is almost guaranteed!

Thus panic provides the elegant benefits of voiding heavy bowels while already on the move - shedding vital pounds if one has had a heavy dinner recently. That may come in handy when fleeing a tiger.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Well duh.

That bluntness of yours is such an endearing quality, Hobbes.

You PANIC so you do not get selected obviously.

Oh, right. Actually, after I'd thought about it, I thought you meant that if it was certain death, you would have nothing to lose by panicking.

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thus panic provides the elegant benefits of voiding heavy bowels while already on the move - shedding vital pounds if one has had a heavy dinner recently. That may come in handy when fleeing a tiger.

I appreciate the thought you've put into it but it's not really the direction I want to go in.

Harbal wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Well duh.

That bluntness of yours is such an endearing quality, Hobbes.

You PANIC so you do not get selected obviously.

Oh, right. Actually, after I'd thought about it, I thought you meant that if it was certain death, you would have nothing to lose by panicking.

Obviously my post was a direct response to yours - I know that is so rare on this Forum that anyone might actually directly and pointedly respond with exactitude and precision to a post- so I forgive you.

FlashDangerpants wrote: Thus panic provides the elegant benefits of voiding heavy bowels while already on the move - shedding vital pounds if one has had a heavy dinner recently. That may come in handy when fleeing a tiger.

I can see your thinking, but would suggest that having 3lbs of shit on the inside of your underpants might not be the best inducement to sprinting away from a speeding tiger.

Harbal wrote: I appreciate the thought you've put into it but it's not really the direction I want to go in.

Boo. Ok then. Panic is a breakdown of the decision making process in which we either choose without a valid rationale or fail to choose at all. If it is a condition of the right choice that there must be a valid rationale and that this must be correct in some fashion then panic is never the right option.

But if the choice is evaluated according to outcome rather than rationale, then there have almost certainly been many occasions where it has worked out very well for the panicky person. Bad generals have probably won battles by panicking. Admittedly, good generals have won vastly more of them by letting the other guy panic instead.

This is the kind of in-depth discussion that makes this site stand out from all the rest.