A commonly Accepted Image of Disaster Panic in Japan

by | Feb 2, 2025 | disaster management

 

Article: towards a complex Model of Disaster Behavior

Understanding disaster myths versus disaster realities is important to responders and policymakers. Understanding these trends also serves as foundational knowledge for the course.
Differentiating between disaster myths and realities is key to your understanding of the material for this course. This paper is your opportunity to differentiate between myths and realities, using research as the basis of your understanding.
In your paper,
Discuss two disaster myths found in your readings.
oThe myths must differ from those you addressed in your main post in the discussion forum.
oThe myths must be from your readings, so you will have at least two references for this paper section.
•Differentiate between your identified myths and the realities identified by the research. Research articles must also support the disaster realities you identify as references.
•Explain why it is important for responders and policymakers to understand disaster myths and realities. Can you find examples of disaster responses being less effective because preparedness efforts or responder actions were myth-based?
The Disaster Myths and Realities Paper

Sample solution

Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell. 

In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.


This question has been answered

God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.

Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.

To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.

 

References

Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.

Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.

Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.

Disasters, whether natural or human-caused, present complex challenges that demand effective preparedness and response. However, popular misconceptions, often termed “disaster myths,” can hinder these efforts and lead to suboptimal outcomes. Differentiating between these myths and the realities they obscure is crucial for responders and policymakers to ensure effective interventions. This paper will discuss two such disaster myths, contrasting them with research-supported realities, and explore the importance of understanding these distinctions.

Disasters, whether natural or human-caused, present complex challenges that demand effective preparedness and response. However, popular misconceptions, often termed “disaster myths,” can hinder these efforts and lead to suboptimal outcomes. Differentiating between these myths and the realities they obscure is crucial for responders and policymakers to ensure effective interventions. This paper will discuss two such disaster myths, contrasting them with research-supported realities, and explore the importance of understanding these distinctions.

Disaster Myth 1: Widespread Panic and Chaos

One pervasive myth is the belief that disasters inevitably lead to widespread panic and chaotic behavior. Popular media often portrays disaster scenes as filled with frantic individuals, looting, and general lawlessness. This image fuels the fear that disaster victims will act irrationally, hindering rescue and relief efforts.

Disaster Reality 1: Predominantly Prosocial Behavior

Research consistently demonstrates that, contrary to popular belief, panic and widespread chaos are rare occurrences in disaster situations. Instead, the dominant response is often prosocial behavior, characterized by altruism, cooperation, and community self-organization (Drabek, 2007). Individuals are more likely to help one another, share resources, and work together to overcome the challenges posed by the disaster. Studies of various disasters, from earthquakes to floods, have repeatedly shown that people exhibit remarkable resilience and a strong desire to assist their fellow community members (Waugh & Tierney, 2007).

Disaster Myth 2: Convergence Behavior by “Sightseers”

Another common myth is the idea of massive convergence behavior by curious onlookers or “sightseers” who flock to disaster areas, impeding emergency operations and overwhelming resources. This myth portrays these individuals as nuisances who are more interested in witnessing the devastation than offering assistance.

Disaster Reality 2: Convergence of Helpers

While some individuals may be drawn to disaster sites out of curiosity, research indicates that the vast majority of those who converge are well-intentioned and genuinely want to help (Quarantelli, 1997). These spontaneous volunteers bring valuable resources, skills, and labor to the affected area, often filling critical gaps in professional response efforts. The challenge lies not in preventing convergence, but in effectively managing and coordinating these spontaneous volunteers to maximize their contributions (Auf der Heide, 1989).

Importance for Responders and Policymakers:

Understanding the difference between disaster myths and realities is essential for several reasons:

  • Effective Planning: Myth-based assumptions can lead to flawed preparedness plans. For instance, if planners believe that widespread panic is inevitable, they might focus on security measures and crowd control rather than fostering community resilience and self-sufficiency.
  • Appropriate Response: Responders who expect chaos and lawlessness may adopt an overly aggressive or controlling approach, potentially alienating disaster survivors and hindering cooperation. Conversely, recognizing the prevalence of prosocial behavior can facilitate collaborative response efforts.
  • Resource Allocation: Misconceptions about convergence behavior can lead to misallocation of resources. Instead of trying to keep volunteers away, resources should be directed towards organizing and utilizing their assistance effectively.
  • Public Communication: Accurate communication is crucial during disasters. Perpetuating disaster myths through official channels can increase anxiety and undermine trust in authorities. Promoting realistic expectations about disaster behavior can foster a sense of community and encourage preparedness.

Examples of Ineffective Responses Due to Myth-Based Assumptions:

History is replete with examples of disaster responses hampered by adherence to disaster myths. For example, during Hurricane Katrina, initial responses were often delayed and disorganized, partly due to assumptions about widespread looting and violence. This led to a focus on security over immediate rescue and relief efforts, exacerbating the suffering of stranded victims. Similarly, the belief in widespread panic can lead to unnecessarily restrictive measures that prevent disaster survivors from helping themselves and their neighbors.

Conclusion:

Disaster myths can be highly detrimental, shaping ineffective policies and hindering appropriate responses. By grounding preparedness and response efforts in research-based realities, responders and policymakers can improve disaster outcomes, build community resilience, and minimize human suffering. Moving beyond these myths is not just an academic exercise; it is a moral imperative for creating a more just and disaster-resilient society.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer