Safety
Feeling secure is fundamentally opposed to feeling endangered. Without the presence of potential dangers, our sense of security would be meaningless. Protective instincts have evolved to a point where the responsibility for being alert to possible threats can be entrusted to certain individuals whose primary role is to watch for dangers. This allows the rest of the group to relax into a sense of safety. A prime example of this behavior is seen in prairie dogs, where a sentinel stands guard for predators on top of the burrow, allowing its fellows to forage in peace nearby1. This strategy among mammals has led to a system where the extended care and nurturing of offspring can take place within a safe zone, vigilantly safeguarded by designated protectors.
Cues
This protective bubble allowed mammals to develop intricate social interactions, opening up new avenues for evolution that for our species has culminated in our prolonged 25-year development cycle. A critical component for the success of this system is the capability to differentiate between signs of safety and danger. The sensitivity with which we detect these cues, or the point at which they provoke a protective reaction, directly impacts our sense of security and our level of social participation.
The safest place is at the center of the herd2. Essential to the ability is a continuing perception of the relationship of self relative to the group. For herd mammals, the closer one is to the edge of the herd, the less safe one feels. This is actively expressed in our species as social anxiety and the drive to get as close as possible to the center of one’s group/tribe/social unit – the “cool kids”. As conscious members of our group or tribe, we continually consciously regulate these and other emotional drivers of group cohesiveness.
Emotion
The cognitive mechanism correlating with the emergence of protective safety is emotion. Emotion enables individual members of the group to interact non-consciously or semi-consciously as a socially cohesive unit. Love, Bonding, Grief, Shame, Guilt, Jealousy, and Resentment are some examples of these emotional drivers. Feeling safe is an emotion. Emotionally driven cognition is a defining attribute of Mammals.
Collaborative defense tactics, such as diverting a predator’s attention while another member launches a surprise attack, provided a significant survival benefit. This advantage, particularly after the last mass extinction event, propelled mammals to become the dominant life forms. Such strategies have evolved into our complex ability to conduct warfare, which, paradoxically, has made us less safe in our pursuit of security. However, this sense of danger is often perceived abstractly, especially within the United States.
Low-Frequency Sounds
In nature, low-frequency sounds usually indicate the possibility of threat. The pounding of a predator’s paws or rocks sliding down a hill are low-frequency sound. At a deep instinctual level, we are geared to react protectively to sudden low-frequency sound. The machines in our built environment emit sudden bursts of low-frequency sound. Dishwashers, Buses, HVAC, construction, etc. all unexpectedly emit bursts of low-frequency sound. It is therefore not surprising to find that many people in urban environments are chronically triggered into a protective reactive state which becomes normalized due to incessant triggering. The Polyvagal Theory of Dr. Stephen Porges has comprehensively illuminated this protective reaction, and how it influences our thought patterns and our bodies once triggered.
This writer believes that a little-discussed benefit of transitioning from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles in urban settings is the decreased decibel level of low-frequency sound, which should result in lower overall stress levels and an enhanced experience of safety living in these settings.
- The work of Dr. Steven Porges has elucidated this concept in his “Polyvagal Theory“. ↩︎
- This concept is elegantly discussed in Temple Grandin’s book: “Animals in Translation“. ↩︎