Fear is more disturbing than terror - Fight me

[rel=alternate]

Fear is insanely corrosive. It does need to materialize physically for you to experience it on a continuous basis. And yet, it hurts just as much, if not more. Fear is irrational. Fighting it is fighting yourself, and that's exceptionally hard.

Terror hits you differently. It's an imminent threat. There is no wait it out and watch something else option. It's in your face and you can't escape it if you do nothing. Whatever you choose to do when facing terror is a conscious choice. Even when it's choosing for cooperation or surrender.

There is some redemption arc to the feeling of terror. Fear is only destructive, you don't learn or grow from it.

 

[Dagoth AMOGUS]

I’ve always thought of terror as the combination of horror and action movie genres blended together. Like resident evil for example. You have a fighting chance against every monster, it just takes effort and a clear head.

 

[HyperboreanRightsActivist]

Fear is only destructive, you don't learn or grow from it.

You grow from it by learning how to fight it, learning how to work with it, and learning how to not let it govern your life. Fear and action are on a spectrum; that's why fear and acceptance are both part of the five stages of grief.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Isn't that the definition? Terror is a temporary state, while fear can be constant.

 

[We Are The Witches]

I mean, depends on the definition, since terror can just mean "extreme fear" (and that's it, no follow up by specifying further).

But if you want to frame it in your suggested way, terror would be generated promptly, and you'd supposedly get out of that situation fast, whether one way or another.
While on the other hand, fear can be, as you say, constant, so it effectively translates in mild emotional/psychological torture that lasts over time.

So under those premises, of course fear would seem more undesired to most people.

---

However only if you frame it like that, so I don't think I entirely agree with you, or that the distinction is relevant/important enough to mention, since it can revolve around semantics and also specific cases. Under yours, yes, it's clear what's worse, but that's obvious by that point.

I also don't agree in some things you say. Fear can push someone to better themselves or even overcome it, and also terror can make people (in a lot of cases) do irrational things, very irrational, to the point where it's not conscious and the person may act based on instinct, or automatically, like a machine. As opposed to that, you could say that when facing fear is when you're acting with a heavier degree of consciousness, because amongst other things, it's not sudden, you can choose to confront it or not, or to flee.

So in that case, I think your statement could work in the opposite way, terror can be more irrational than fear (or generate irrational thoughts/behaviour with more likelihood).

 

[Otterly]

Yes. Like the difference between short term stress and long term chronic stress. The former is alright as long as there’s recovery and the other will kill you.

 

[rel=alternate]

It took me some time to get back to this post. Which was heavily inspired from real life events. Anyway.

But if you want to frame it in your suggested way, terror would be generated promptly, and you'd supposedly get out of that situation fast, whether one way or another.
While on the other hand, fear can be, as you say, constant, so it effectively translates in mild emotional/psychological torture that lasts over time.

I guess I was somewhat trying to make a difference between what most people perceive as being fearful versus what actual fight or flight feels like.

I do agree that my own view is very subjective. I feel relief from tangible fear, no matter how severe. Because it gives me options.

However only if you frame it like that, so I don't think I entirely agree with you, or that the distinction is relevant/important enough to mention, since it can revolve around semantics and also specific cases. Under yours, yes, it's clear what's worse, but that's obvious by that point.

I also don't agree in some things you say. Fear can push someone to better themselves or even overcome it, and also terror can make people (in a lot of cases) do irrational things, very irrational, to the point where it's not conscious and the person may act based on instinct, or automatically, like a machine. As opposed to that, you could say that when facing fear is when you're acting with a heavier degree of consciousness, because amongst other things, it's not sudden, you can choose to confront it or not, or to flee.

So in that case, I think your statement could work in the opposite way, terror can be more irrational than fear (or generate irrational thoughts/behaviour with more likelihood).

In light of what I said before, you're probably right in absolute. I think this mostly holds true from my perspective.

I appreciate your perspective and you taking the time to answer something valuable.

 

[Guntwranglerpole]

Rate me dumb but I think fear paralyzes you, terror makes you run. If not, then the other way around.

 

[Alex Hogendorp]

Living in fear has seriously stunted my progress that I would've been able to focus on things much better. The world is filled with fear porn and it doesn't help that there is always a chance the worst possible outcome, a fate that's far worse than death could even happen to me. Ex. Tokaimura Nuclear Power Accident and what Hisashi Ouchi had to suffer from, human experiments from Unit 731, locked in syndrome that could happen to anyone without warning, war injuries similar to that of Johnny Got His Gun, Getting Alzheimer's, they're absolute nightmare fuel. It's always hell on earth.