There was also a discussion somewhere where they switched off the OSS subtitling software they were using onto a commercial product that doesn't implement many of the features (mostly typesetting features) of the previous software.
I get it and it does make sense. Humans always consider the unfamiliar dangerous by default, but I believe it's deeper and simpler than the arguments you present.
This is not a strictly human trait. Anthropologists are pretty sure we received this trait from our primate ancestors. It evolved out of family groups/tribalism.
Also, a large part of our brains are safety mechanisms. Many features are directed at keeping us alive which is why so many of our what if scenarios are about the worst happening.
In very tribal environments anyone not in your in-group is considered unsafe even if they look exactly like you (i.e. a tribe from 10 km away).
But the thing that has made humans the most successful species on Earth is our ability to override this behavior to cooperate at larger and larger scales.
Sure, I agree, at best it is a gross simplification.
But it’s useful and, in my opinion, captures the most basic relationship which is that some needs have higher priority than others and will drive those other needs to the recesses.
That's not what moving up means; they're cumulative from the bottom up. You can't move up to the next level until all lower levels are consistently met.
Moving up means those needs are being met satisfactorily and can be maintained without prolonged attention. And if a lower level stops being met, your level will fall to that level until it is met again.
I.e., if you're hungry and don't know when your next meal is, then who the hell cares if you're anxious, angry, or happy? You have more pressing concerns.
I suspect this trend will continue for at least another generation. And I don't believe it's restricted to teens; they're merely the most prominent examples.
The explanation I heard that strongly resonated with me was that, as a society, we're moving up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs from level 2, "Safety Needs," to level 3, "Love and Belonging."
When I read descriptions of life in the early 20th century, it's nearly impossible for me to connect with it because even the poorest people I've met have a standard of living that's nearly unimaginable to someone from 1910. People who grew up in the 1950-1970s saw this change happening, but going from neglecting a thing to caring about it is almost certainly a lagging indicator.
For the first time in history, there is psychological space to care about mental health and social issues en mass. So, of course, there's going to be an explosion of diagnoses and an apparent epidemic.
Couple this with the dawn of social media, and you've accelerated the trend 10x as we figure out how the hell to handle it responsibly.
The best description I've heard of why more diagnosis is better is that as a society we're moving up Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs from level 2 "Safety Needs"
to level 3 "Love and Belonging".
For the first time in history there is psychological space to care about mental health and social issues en mass. So, of course, there's going to be an explosion of diagnosis.