I am very excited about two continuing news stories: the hunt for the missing Malaysian commercial jet and the trial of Oscar Pistorius. Why? These two stories are loaded with suspense. Will the jet be found? What will turn out to be the cause of the disaster? Will Oscar testify at his trial? I’d love to be the one who cross-examines him. What a high-stakes battle that would be! What will be the verdict?
These are life-and-death dramas with lots of information pointing this way or that. We can made predictions and see whether we are right. Why do we care? Probably because we evolved to (1) want to learn the causes of death (so we can prevent our own), (2) want to decrease uncertainty, because uncertainty can be hazardous, and (3) want to make our world understandable and predictable, because that minimizes our anxiety. Also, we may feel more satisfied with our own ordinary lives in light of a disaster that befalls others. Finally, we may like joining the excitement of the chase for the truth in dramatic events — as long as the events are not too close to home.
Hence, many people follow these two news stories. Many individuals also read mystery stories, either fictional ones (“The Woman in White” is a favorite of mine) or a real-life one (I liked “Fatal Vision” about an Army captain who killed his family and then blamed hippie intruders for the killings).
Are you following either news story? What attracts you to mysteries? Do you prefer real mysteries of fictional?
John Malouff, PhD, JD, Assoc Prof of Psychology
I prefer real mysteries. The French call mysteries, ball(s) of gum, like something to chew on,’Something du gomme’.
The Oscar Pistorius case interested me too. Doesn’t everyone missing a leg feel very much closer to acting like a helpless, powerless child, and in a prolonged period of discord, aren’t they more likely to employ degenerate morality ? Especially if they feel attacked by someone who is physically whole and whom they thought was committed to them, but instead they feel betrayal and disrespect, and perhaps wonder if the other -ever- was committed? I thought it was intentional. Women are stupid if they think that they can link up with a man who’s significantly disenfranchised like this, and then treat him as carelessly as they might any fully integrated man/uninjured man. It’s more of a risk when someone is already pulling out all the stops to cope, and then you threaten and insult.