Good grief, what a diatribe!

Responding to observations made in the field of neuroscience with an angry diatribe about doomsday religious cults and tidbits of the history of Western culture is not helpful.

ET's example using Huntington's disease may not, by itself, prove the tendency for the frontal cortex to interpret things in a positive light, but accusing him/her of taking an elitist view is nonsensical. There are compelling reasons for carriers of the Huntington's gene to get tested. In my mind, the most compelling is the fact that Huntington's is autosomal dominant and thus carriers who opt to have children have a 50% chance of passing along the gene for a horrific disease. Indeed, most patients who opt out of testing say they just don't want to know because they will lose their sense of optimism for the future.

While I would agree that extreme doomerism, and defeatism (basically a futilitarian approach) is irresponsible, I also think that flying off the handle in response to those who have examined the role of the central nervous system's architecture in shaping our world views is really the height of irony - an emotive response by one who has allowed his amygdala to get the best of him.

Yes, the human brain is also hard-wired to be ever vigilant to possible threats. The reaction to the perceived threat is the old flight or flight reaction (a.k.a. acute stress response). The stress of this reaction on the body is tremendous, it eventually returns to homeostasis but continuous triggering of this reaction is detrimental to the organism given that repeated exposure to the cascades following epinephrine and norepinephrine release reek havoc with the vascular, digestive, and immune systems. This is precisely why we are predisposed to avoiding intense contemplation of potentially alarming situations. It is not until these situations are perceived as critical (very near crisis) that we become motivated to react decisively.