Skip to main content

The Science of Revenge - James Kimmel ***

In his introduction, James Kimmel tells an attention-grabbing story that surely could only have originated in America. After years of bullying, when he was 17 the local kids thought it would be funny to come over in their pickup one night and shoot his dog. A couple of weeks later, they blew up his mailbox. In Kimmel's words 'I grabbed a loaded revolver from my father's nightstand, jumped in my mother's car and tore off [after them] into the night.' He corners the evil kids, grabs the gun and is about to get out of the car to kill them when the realisation of what he's about to do and its implications hit him.

He might have suppressed his immediate urge for revenge, but he claims it then grew in a general driving force of his life, the reason he became a lawyer. 'Within a decade, my revenge addiction had nearly destroyed me and my family.' It wasn't just his work but 'I threatened retribution against just about anyone for the slightest offense - including my wife and kids.' This is genuinely shocking stuff. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the bulk of the book manages to carry on the impact.

Kimmel first takes us through the science of revenge. When American medical doctors write books they have a habit of putting MD after their name, thinking this makes them a scientific source - I was a bit thrown that Kimmel has JD instead, never having seen the abbreviation, but assuming it was some obscure medical qualification as he is a lecturer in psychiatry, but actually it means he's a doctor of law. The science is vaguely interesting in the 'this chemical affects this bit of your brain' and psychology experiments sense, but much of the research seems firmly in the replication crisis era and very little seems to be the result of large scale, quality trials - I would least expect the limitations of the research to be emphasised.

There are plenty of powerful stories to back all this up - so much of it seems to be based on on American culture, I did wonder if it's not so much the science of revenge as the science of the problems with US culture that should be examined more. (There are examples from elsewhere, but these tend to be less everyday occurrences and more evil regimes.) However, we go on finally to how to kick the revenge habit, leading to Kimmel's invention, the 'nonjustice system for revenge addiction', which is about realising the harm you are doing to yourself by seeking revenge rather than offering forgiveness and mentally putting those you would otherwise seek revenge on though an imaginary trial.

Interestingly, before letting us begin putting this into practice we are told to consult our doctor to confirm it is safe and appropriate for us, and asked to note Kimmel's limited licence disclaimer. That's encouraging. Kimmel does give some academic justification for the system, but it still feels that he is attacking the symptoms, rather than a cause that makes gun control impossible and shootings commonplace.

Overall, an odd book as a mix between social science overview, legal viewpoint and self-help. It wasn't for me, but it should have a genuine appeal for those whose lives are damaged by this culture.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...