Why did Black Arm take this attitude towards him?

According to his current observation, "showing off" is the most logical explanation.

And it is "showing off to someone you hate".

Gain superiority and achieve attack effect by showing what you have and what the other party doesn’t have?

Why?

He was not sure about the cause of the initial "conflict".

Before he started talking about Black Arm's experience during his lifetime, Black Arm had already had a relatively obvious repulsion to him.

And in the subsequent dialogue, this rejection gradually deepened.

The reason for deepening may be the life experience he "made up" by, "future people" or "people with magical experiences".

This situation is very common. In his lifetime, in school, some people would have been repulsive and even conflicted with people with better grades than themselves.

Yao Yan's memory shows that he had similar manifestations during his lifetime.

In society, similar situations will occur in the workplace.

To put it bluntly, there are two ways to develop this psychology. One is that it is based on genes and will have an additional competitive spirit and vigilance against outstanding and powerful individuals.

In the society during his lifetime, the concepts of "strong" and "excellent" were generally deviated towards "smart" and "learning ability".

Human cognition can be shaped, some are easy to change, some are difficult to change, and some can be strengthened by later cognitive reinforcement.

This kind of vigilance and competitive spirit, aggressiveness towards "excellence", and different people also have changes in strength and weakness.

However, in other cognitive judgments, these impulses may be suppressed after other cognitive hedging, disappear silently or form opposing judgments.

It may also be further strengthened, and even a reason for "I am right" is found for this.

Then, maybe using "this is inevitable" to comfort yourself, not doing it but not leaving behind any negative comments of self-deprecating, just pass it like this.

Perhaps this is a new support point, and to establish other "arguments" as another point of view for the correctness of this point of view, and gradually establish mutually connected arguments.

Most of these were experienced by Yao Yan personally during his lifetime.

Yao Yan didn't have any, and there was no reason to resolve the other party's rejection of him.

The easier way to succeed is to follow the other party’s point of view, admit your mistakes and act in an “obedient” attitude.

Just like some animals expose their belly or lower their heads and expose their weaknesses, expressing obedience.

This kind of emotion that is constantly increasing and expanding after being intensified is close to the mechanism of the generation and development of the counterfire effect. He may not be aware of his own mistakes, but in his knowledge logic system, he can find a "loophole" that "is wrong". The self-protection mechanism generates motivation, driving people to fill this loophole.

Whether it is self-deception, forgetting, or collapse, or the "error" that is "breaking through" by this vulnerability, as long as the problem is solved, the self-protection mechanism will stop outputting power.

As for why the other party rejected him at the beginning?

He is indeed not clear about this problem, and there are many possibilities.

For example, his behavior pattern or other characteristics overlap with the characters he hates to a certain extent.

Although people know that this person is not the same person as the person they hate, the physiological judgment mechanism and information classification mechanism will classify things that have certain similar or even similar characteristics into the same category.

When making associative judgments, some non-common features will be unconsciously interleaved.

This is a rough explanation of the physiological logic of the "halo effect".

Another flaw caused by the "simplification" mechanism.

Of course, it may also be based on "sense of security" and on self-protection.

Because he, the "corpse poet", is already in the skull-breaking team, and the new corpse poet may reduce his status.

Even the judgment that "there are more crew members and their status will decline" is not because "there is a new corpse poet", but because "there is a new member".

As for which one it is, Yao Yan does not have enough information to make a judgment, and it is possible that these conjectures are overturned now.

However, the problem arises again.

Why does Yaoyan's thinking logic move towards the direction of "analyzing the causes"?

Driven by curiosity?

Self-protection?

If you carefully analyze this behavior, you can find from similar memories that when Yao Yan analyzes the causes of other people's behavior, his original curiosity and even resentment and hatred will be eliminated.

In this analytical behavior, Yao Yan seemed to have gained some pleasure and superiority during his lifetime.

From the perspective of physiological logic, the original source of "finding the cause" may be that organisms are eliminated during survival and elimination, and individuals who "have the behavior of removing damage" will be more likely to survive.

Then, this kind of screening and elimination gradually formed an immune mechanism.

On a more macro level, individuals who can self-clear damage have experienced the elimination of survival competition.

Similarly, individuals with the awareness to take the initiative to perform this behavior are easier to survive.

This type of concept is a relatively basic concept in evolutionary psychology.

Unfortunately, the research level of this theory is only a general discussion, and the scope of application is not certain, and it is difficult to judge whether it is right or not, but it makes logical sense.

By analyzing why enemies perform such behavior, humans have a psychological effect that is close to "cleaning up injured areas" and can suppress the motivation of emotional impulses such as hostility, attack, and counterattack.

When he made the judgment that "black arm is hostile to himself", he himself did not realize the thinking inertia, which made him think in this direction.

However, substantial revenge has also eliminated part of the motivation.

Turned into a "spiritual victory".

According to the "logic of normal people" and "basic concepts of gains and losses", and "revenge concepts", if attacked, at least equivalent revenge should be returned.

According to different people's understanding of "equivalence", this revenge may be a verbal counterattack, or through hands-on violent attacks, or other ways to damage the other party's interests.

for example......

When he walked to the side of the boat, he did not realize that the undead had approached the bone ship and would be attacked soon. He should choose to ignore or even laugh at him to wait for the other party to be killed, at least to make the other party "suffer".

As for what Yao Yan plans to do?

Yes, I didn't plan to do anything.

He did not become hostile to the other party, did not hate the other party, and did not intend to let the other party die.

But he really didn't plan to do anything.

So, at this time.

Should we discuss our mind or our deeds?

Did he do something wrong or did he not do it?

However, this question is meaningless.

Wrong and right are meaningless to Yaoyan now.

ps: Many people often don’t realize the “why” when discussing right or wrong.

What concepts do you judge right or wrong based on?

And is this concept itself "correct"?

As for freedom of thought, etc....

Boundaries exist because of society, and there is no bottom line. There are probably many "cool characters" like Yao Yan who ignores human nature.

Oh, to be precise, there are many characters who make themselves look "unfeelingless".

Anti-human elements under the banner of internationalism can now see what else can't be used as a disguise.

Oh, evolutionary psychology is a good thing, but it also has a scope of application. Human subjective initiative, emotions and cognition that can be shaped cannot be ignored.

Of course, this sentence is an explanation that if you don’t understand evolutionary psychology, some book friends may have unnecessary misunderstandings due to the meaning of the text.

If you have time, you can read books and papers related to evolutionary psychology, which is quite fun.

Some of these views are interrelated with the philosophical concepts of some schools.

If it is important, I have to say that the relevant concepts involved in this book are relatively superficial, and different understandings are caused by issues of expression ability and understanding direction. Please put credible literature in related disciplines on the priority sequence.

As an author, I have been exposed to too much extensive and diverse knowledge when I consult various materials, but at best I am just a clown showing off my knowledge.

Classification of "popular science authors" is not qualified, so popular science must be rigorous... No, popular science must be even more rigorous.

Moreover, many of the views I cover in this book are not from the same genre.
Chapter completed!