Watch Out, Filmmakers! The End of the World is Scary!

You are right that we use fear to teach children, but does it really work? I mean, you mispelled at least three words in your response, pretty simple words at that. Were english teachers who used fear that effective? Not really.

Just because we use fear as a motivator does not make it good. As a society, we do plenty of bad things and label them as "effective".

But what needs to be looked at in Wall-E's case is that we should not guard children from fear. Its a natural part of life, and to make them think the world is gumdrops and kittens is just wrong. Of course we shouldn't horrify them (that's why we've got a rating system), but honestly? Is Wall-E going to give a kid nightmares, or make him/her realize how mankind is ruining the environment?

Well, in my specific case, my teachers should consider it a success. I doubt most of my peers could even write a good sentence in there native tongue, let alone in English. I guess my fear of spending another year in a public school paid well.

The fact is, there is no way to gauge if this things really set in in any major way. I mean, I grew up in an age of ham-fisted Aesops about the ozone layer and drugs, and somehow, I don't see any mayor effect today that I can say, "hey, all that campaigning and millions of dollars had an effect". Drugs and environmental problems are still as relevant as I remember them or more so. The only thing that seems to work to get change is lobbying.

Well, your point about the ozone seems a little odd given that all that campaigning and public awareness led to a resurgence in the layer of ozone that was deteriorating due to CFC emissions. But as for fear being a tool, yes it can work to curb behavior, in the same way that punching a child can get him to eat his vegetables. Just because its effective doesn't mean its the best way to do things. Nearly every psychological study on children has shown that punishment has negative long term consequences and reward has positive outcomes. Fear can certainly be classified as a punishment. Having said that, I don't think these movies inspire fear as a teaching tool. I think they do so in order to illicit an emotional response to engender a tie to the film itself, and then when the movies over the memories formed may be used as teaching tools if necessary. The garbage in Wall-E looks great, and when the movie is over parents can talk to their kids about recycling and consumption. However, I hope that Wall-E spurred parents to become more educated about things like landfills and recycling before they talked to their kids about it, because most adults have horribly misguided ideas about those issues.

Well, Kevin, the specific Ozone layer may have been curbed, but all the other problems just got worse. It's as if you managed to drive down alcoholism but cocaine addiction and heroine addiction spiked up. And really, when the negative consequences of global warming send us to an Ice Age, the fact that "at least the ozone is ok" will be a small consolation indeed..

Fear is not the most effective method, but it is the easiest. Our whole society is bound by fear of repercussion. And that's fine with me, because lack of repercussion fears is what makes the Bernie Maddofs, the abusive cops, and the corrupt politicians of the world. Also see: Internet Piracy.

Again, don't know how the ozone layer got brought up, but your argument still seems odd. Are you saying that all the campaigning to improve the ozone layer is what caused the other environmental problems? Since thats clearly not the case, then yes, all that campaigning and millions of dollars spent actually did do a helluva lot of good. The ozone has repaired itself due to human efforts to curb its destruction. As for your alcoholism analogy, again, its only relevant if causal. If you got rid of alcoholism by handing out cocaine, then yeah, thats a pretty stupid method. But we didn't replace CFC's with carbon emissions. Finally, fear is easiest, but as I pointed out, its clearly been shown to be ineffective at curbing the actual behaviors it is meant to be attacking. Fear of reprecussion is not the reason why most people don't commit atrocious acts (and its lack certainly wasn't what drove Madhoff, etc.). You're telling me that if you knew that you wouldn't get punished for something you would rob your neighbor of all his possessions, rape woman, murder those you dislike, etc.? Of course not. So, again, what exactly is your point?

All I'm saying is, whatever the effect of the Ozone layer was gonna be, it is eclipsed by a bigger, longer lasting problem, which we have been nagged on about for years as well. Global warming is caused by the same things we know since before the 70's is bad. The Ozone layer fixed itself by having common people use less aerosol, apparently. But global warming would require more than "awareness" to be solved. Although if we threaten people with more "Day After Tomorrow" scenarios they will force HUGE transnational companies to comply with new energy methods. That requires fear, again.

But they companies, they can keep alternative energy fuels down. They can do that because they have nothing to fear from governments or the public at large. Nothing to lose, nothing to fear, millions to win.

"You're telling me that if you knew that you wouldn't get punished for something you would rob your neighbor of all his possessions, rape woman, murder those you dislike, etc.? Of course not. So, again, what exactly is your point?"

I'm not saying I would do those things if I knew I could get away with them. But people who think they can get away with them often do them, don't they? You try having something simple like a rewarding system. You give a person a reward for their work. We have that. People work, and they get money to exchange for goods and services. But before you know it, someone finds a way to cheat on the system. Others, seeing their peer thrive, decide soon to cheat as well. Soon the whole system based on rewarding good actions is threatened.How are you gonna deal with something like that without a punishment system. And a punishment system is based on ( I bet you know where this is going) fear of repercussions.

How many times have you heard the phrase, " I can't believe he thought he could get away with it"? How many times have you though it? Because this phrase kind of reveals the thinking. "I, John Doe, am to afraid of the consequences of said act first, the reactions of others second, and the ethics of it third. Take the bully, that miracle of sociopathy. Who does the bully pick on and why? That's right, those less likely to properly defend themselves against his bullying. So if you think instead of threatening them with punishment, you should educate them on how to give up their social power over others, well, I wish you good luck.

But in fact, people often do think they can get away with it and do. People are always testing their boundaries. "How far can I go?" And when they feel they can't move on without consequences they aren't willing to accept, they back down.

Have you ever seen a riot? A single person who tried to riot himself would probably be easily subdued. But in a group, people feel safety from possible repercussions and they do things they normally don't do. My point , I guess, is that most people are civil because they are afraid. They are afraid of losing what they have. And that that is not a bad thing.
It is in our nature, as social beings. If it's good enough for a pack of lions, it's good enough for us human beasts.

Ugh. Now I feel like Batman Begins. Rant over.

There are kiddiefied Bibles, and bible stories. They exist. Its kind of like choosing to show your kid Disney's Little Mermaid as opposed to the downer ending original book.