Question
What Fear Can Teach Us
Karen Thompson Walker
2013
So the question is, why did these men dread cannibals so much more than the extreme likelihood of starvation? Why were they swayed by one story so much more than the other? Looked at from this angle, theirs becomes a story about reading. The novelist Vladimir Nabokov said that the best reader has a combination of two very different temperaments, the artistic and the scientific. A good reader has an artist’s passion, a willingness to get caught up in the story, but just as importantly, the readers also needs the coolness of judgment of a scientist, which acts to temper and complicate the reader’s intuitive reactions to the story. As we’ve seen, the men of the Essex had no trouble with the artistic part. They dreamed up a variety of horrifying scenarios. The problem was that they listened to the wrong story. Of all the narratives their fears wrote, they responded only to the most lurid, the most vivid, the one that was easiest for their imaginations to picture: cannibals. But perhaps if they’d been able to read their fears more like a scientist, with more coolness of judgment, they would have listened instead to the less violent but the more likely tale, the story of starvation, and headed for Tahiti, just as Melville’s sad commentary suggests.
And maybe if we all tried to read our fears, we too would be less often swayed by the most salacious among them. Maybe then we’d spend less time worrying about serial killers and plane crashes, and more time concerned with the subtler and slower disasters we face: the silent buildup of plaque in our arteries, the gradual changes in our climate. Just as the most nuanced stories in literature are often the richest, so too might our subtlest fears be the truest. Read in the right way, our fears are an amazing gift of the imagination, a kind of everyday clairvoyance, a way of glimpsing what might be the future when there’s still time to influence how that future will play out. Properly read, our fears can offer us something as precious as our favorite works of literature: a little wisdom, a bit of insight and a version of that most elusive thing — the truth. Thank you. (Applause)
How does Walker think we should approach fear?
We should only pay attention to our relevant and reasonable fears.
While fear is a natural response, we should not allow it to impact our decisions.
We should pay equal attention to all of our fears because they are all equally likely to happen.
Facing our fears will allow us to overcome our problems and worry less.
Karen Thompson Walker
2013
So the question is, why did these men dread cannibals so much more than the extreme likelihood of starvation? Why were they swayed by one story so much more than the other? Looked at from this angle, theirs becomes a story about reading. The novelist Vladimir Nabokov said that the best reader has a combination of two very different temperaments, the artistic and the scientific. A good reader has an artist’s passion, a willingness to get caught up in the story, but just as importantly, the readers also needs the coolness of judgment of a scientist, which acts to temper and complicate the reader’s intuitive reactions to the story. As we’ve seen, the men of the Essex had no trouble with the artistic part. They dreamed up a variety of horrifying scenarios. The problem was that they listened to the wrong story. Of all the narratives their fears wrote, they responded only to the most lurid, the most vivid, the one that was easiest for their imaginations to picture: cannibals. But perhaps if they’d been able to read their fears more like a scientist, with more coolness of judgment, they would have listened instead to the less violent but the more likely tale, the story of starvation, and headed for Tahiti, just as Melville’s sad commentary suggests.
And maybe if we all tried to read our fears, we too would be less often swayed by the most salacious among them. Maybe then we’d spend less time worrying about serial killers and plane crashes, and more time concerned with the subtler and slower disasters we face: the silent buildup of plaque in our arteries, the gradual changes in our climate. Just as the most nuanced stories in literature are often the richest, so too might our subtlest fears be the truest. Read in the right way, our fears are an amazing gift of the imagination, a kind of everyday clairvoyance, a way of glimpsing what might be the future when there’s still time to influence how that future will play out. Properly read, our fears can offer us something as precious as our favorite works of literature: a little wisdom, a bit of insight and a version of that most elusive thing — the truth. Thank you. (Applause)
How does Walker think we should approach fear?
We should only pay attention to our relevant and reasonable fears.
While fear is a natural response, we should not allow it to impact our decisions.
We should pay equal attention to all of our fears because they are all equally likely to happen.
Facing our fears will allow us to overcome our problems and worry less.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
Karen Thompson Walker suggests that we should approach fear with a critical perspective, akin to how a scientist evaluates information. Rather than being swayed by the most vivid or lurid fears, which often distort our judgments (like fearing cannibals over the more likely threat of starvation), we should focus on the subtler, more realistic fears that might truly impact our lives. This means we should prioritize and evaluate our fears based on likelihood and relevance, paying attention to those that offer genuine insight into potential future outcomes. In essence, Walker advocates for a balanced approach that combines emotional engagement with rational assessment, allowing us to gain wisdom and insight from our fears rather than letting them lead us astray. Thus, the best answer to how Walker thinks we should approach fear is:
**We should only pay attention to our relevant and reasonable fears.**
**We should only pay attention to our relevant and reasonable fears.**