Is your gut trying to tell you something? How can you better protect yourself from potential dangers?
Understanding violence and trusting your intuition are key to personal safety. The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker explores these topics, offering potentially life-saving insights on predicting and preventing various forms of violence.
Read more to learn de Becker’s methods for recognizing warning signs, assessing threats, and responding to different types of violent situations.
Overview of The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker
Your intuition is trying to keep you safe, but are you listening? The Gift of Fear by Gavin de Becker contends that violence is a normal part of human nature, not an abnormality, and that we often misunderstand and fail to protect ourselves from it. De Becker asserts that we all possess the innate ability to detect warning signs of danger before it happens—known as our intuition. However, we often ignore intuition in favor of logic, which leaves us more vulnerable to dangers. By learning to identify warning signs and trust your intuition, you can better manage your safety and be more prepared for dangerous situations.
De Becker is an expert in predicting and managing violence, having provided threat assessment services to top government agencies, corporations, and celebrities. He is also the founder of Gavin de Becker & Associates, a security and consulting firm dedicated to threat assessment and management. His experiences with violence at a young age laid the groundwork for his creation of MOSAIC, a threat assessment tool used by various law enforcement agencies and universities.
In this overview, we’ll first discuss the predictability of violence and some common misconceptions about it. Next, we’ll look into the importance of trusting your intuition and explore de Becker’s methods for predicting violence. We’ll then discuss strategies for preventing and responding to different forms of violence, such as workplace, domestic, and youth violence.
Understanding Violence
To be able to predict and protect yourself from violence, you must first understand it. De Becker writes that there are several misconceptions about violence that make you more vulnerable to it.
The Misconceptions About Violence
The first misconception is we often assume we can rely entirely on others, like law enforcement, to keep us safe. However, de Becker argues that your safety is your responsibility. Relying solely on others to protect you from danger gives you a false sense of security and increases your risk of becoming a victim of violence.
The second misconception is we tend to believe that violence only happens to other people. However, de Becker contends that, no matter how unpleasant it is to think about, you must acknowledge that violence is common and can happen to anyone. Denying this possibility hinders your ability to prepare for it.
The third misconception is we mistakenly believe that violence is random, impossible to understand, and therefore unpredictable. De Becker explains that violence often seems unpredictable because we lack information about why it occurred. For example, when we’re not aware of a perpetrator’s history of violence and abuse, we assume by default that the violence came out of nowhere. The media often exacerbates this misconception, describing violent acts as “senseless” and portraying the perpetrators as quiet, normal individuals.
However, de Becker argues that violence is predictable because it’s part of human nature, not an exception from it. People’s actions, including violence, are driven by basic needs we all share—such as seeking connection and avoiding pain. Though most find nonviolent ways to meet their needs, with the right mix of variables, everyone can be motivated to act violently. Thus, de Becker argues that for those who do turn to violence, their actions aren’t random or senseless. They have a reason and meaning for the person carrying them out, and understanding this can help you better predict and avoid violence.
The Power of Your Intuition
Imagine you’re walking along a forest trail at night. Suddenly, you get a feeling that you should turn back. This feeling is your intuition. Although you can’t consciously explain why, your subconscious has picked up on signals that have made you uneasy—like the sound of sticks cracking or shifting shadows in the trees.
De Becker argues that, to predict danger and violence, you must learn to listen to your intuition. He explains that your intuition is a powerful survival tool honed by millions of years of evolution. You’ve been biologically programmed to detect signs of danger and to avoid it—it’s the very instinct that allowed your ancestors to avoid threats.
However, de Becker writes that we often block our intuition from doing its job. Many of us are reluctant to follow our intuition because we rely too heavily on logic. When we experience a gut feeling—like sudden unease or fear—we rush to find reasons to discredit it. For example, you might ignore a gut feeling telling you to leave a date early because you don’t want to be rude, dismissing the feeling as just nerves.
De Becker contends that putting logic before intuition prevents you from recognizing danger. He suggests two reasons you should always trust your intuition: First, gut feelings don’t appear without a reason—they’re always triggered by something happening around you. Second, the sole purpose of your intuition is to protect you, so listening to it is rarely a bad idea. For these reasons, de Becker urges you to honor your intuition at all times: When you get a gut feeling, keep an open mind, explore its origin, and look for potential threats.
Signs of Intuition
De Becker writes that your intuition speaks to you in various ways, but fear is the strongest and most important signal. Whenever you feel afraid, you should make it your immediate priority to identify and avoid any possible dangers. Even if your fear turns out to be unfounded, exploring its source can help refine your intuition for future situations.
De Becker urges you to heed genuine fear but cautions against inventing reasons to be afraid, as constant worry can lead to unnecessary stress and distract you from noticing real threats. True fear is an instinctive response to an actual threat, while anxiety is often voluntary and unlinked to real danger. For example, the feeling you get when you’re followed into a dark alley is fear, but constantly worrying about being mugged whenever you leave home is anxiety. Recognizing this difference allows you to focus on real threats rather than imagined ones. Listening to your intuition doesn’t mean living in constant fear but rather that you have the confidence that your instincts will alert you if there’s something that needs your attention.
De Becker points out that, besides fear, intuition can speak to you in subtler forms that you should also keep an open mind to—such as doubt, persistent thoughts, or even dark humor. People often use dark humor to voice worries without coming across as too serious about them. For example, if a colleague who’s about to walk home after a late day at the office says, “At least I’m wearing my running shoes in case a serial killer comes after me,” they’re indirectly expressing their worries about how safe their walk home is.
How to Apply Intuition in Your Daily Life
De Becker suggests you use your intuition in daily interactions with others to assess their trustworthiness. You can do this by addressing potential issues and difficult topics directly in conversations. While these conversations can feel uncomfortable, the responses you receive can trigger your intuition and provide valuable insights. Even if they don’t respond truthfully, the signals they give through their words, body language, and overall demeanor all inform your intuitive feelings about this person.
For example, if you’re trying to find a new roommate, explicitly ask questions about things you might be worried about—such as their rent payment history or whether they had previous conflicts with roommates. Their responses can give you clues about whether they seem like they’d be a good roommate.
Methods for Predicting and Assessing Violence
Now that we’ve broken down the common misconceptions about violence and discussed the importance of trusting your intuition, let’s discuss several methods for predicting, assessing, and responding to violence.
Warning Signs of Violence
According to de Becker, strangers who intend to do you harm often display warning signs that you can recognize to protect yourself. While these warning signs don’t guarantee that someone has bad intentions, be cautious if a person exhibits any of the following seven behaviors:
1. Creating common ground. People with bad intentions may try to create a shared experience with you to gain your trust. They’ll often use the word “we” to suggest that you’re in the same situation together. For example, if you’re waiting for a bus that’s running late, they might say something like, “Well, it looks like we’re in for a wait.”
2. Excessive niceness. De Becker writes that strangers don’t generally go out of their way to be nice to you. Although it’s possible a person might just be acting nice, if someone seems overly friendly or helpful without reason, be cautious and consider whether they have other intentions.
3. Making you feel indebted to them. People with bad intentions may go one step beyond just being nice and give you gifts or do unsolicited favors. By doing this, they hope you’ll feel obligated to repay them and be more open to their demands.
4. Not taking “no” for an answer. De Becker states that anyone who ignores your refusals and keeps insisting until you give in is a red flag. For example, this might be if someone insists on giving you a ride home even after you’ve declined multiple times. This is the most serious red flag, according to de Becker, because when someone refuses to accept your decision, and you let them, you give them control over you.
5. Oversharing. People with bad intentions often provide too many details in their stories to seem more believable and familiar. For example, they might explain that they’re waiting for a bus because they need to buy a last-minute birthday gift for a friend who loves red pandas. De Becker notes that truthful people don’t feel the need to overshare because they aren’t worried that you won’t believe them.
6. Challenging you. De Becker writes that potential aggressors might try to manipulate you by challenging you to do what they want you to do. For example, they may say, “You’re probably too afraid to do something this spontaneous,” in the hopes you’ll feel the urge to prove them wrong. If someone challenges you, you should simply not respond at all, suggests de Becker.
7. Making promises. De Becker argues that people make promises to convince you of something, but promises don’t actually guarantee anything. For example, just because someone says, “My car is just around the corner, I promise,” doesn’t mean that it really is. The fact that they feel the need to make a promise means they’ve noticed your doubt (a sign of your intuition), which is why you should be cautious.
The JACA Assessment
De Becker introduces a framework to assess the likelihood of someone committing violence. This assessment tool examines four key factors—justification, alternatives, consequences, and ability (JACA):
Justification: Does the person believe that violence is justified? De Becker explains that people who think they have a valid reason to use violence are more likely to do so. The threshold for justification can vary—for example, you might not view a simple disagreement like getting cut off in traffic as a valid reason to act violently, but others might.
Alternatives: Does the person see any nonviolent ways to achieve their goals? De Becker says that people who believe violence is their only option are more likely to resort to it. For example, if a bullied teenager feels like they can’t reach out to anyone for help, they may see fighting back as the only solution they have.
Consequences: What does the person think about the potential outcomes of a violent act? De Becker explains that people who anticipate negative consequences—such as getting a prison sentence or social stigma—will be less likely to engage in violence. Conversely, people who anticipate positive consequences—such as the attention that comes with infamy—or feel like consequences don’t matter are more likely to commit violent acts.
Ability to Act Violently: Does the person have the capability to commit violence? According to de Becker, people who have the skills and confidence to carry out violent acts are more likely to do so. Typically, these include weapon owners and people with a history of violence. In other words, someone who regularly shoots firearms has a greater ability to act violently than someone who has never touched a weapon in their life.
Threats as a Predictor of Violence
De Becker writes that threats can sometimes be a sign that someone will act violently but, at other times, be a sign that someone won’t. To determine which is the case, you must recognize what qualifies as a genuine threat as opposed to an intimidation.
When someone issues a real threat, they’re stating their intention to do harm without offering any conditions you can meet to prevent it—for example, “I’m going to make you regret what you did.”
However, if a threat contains words like “if,” “or else,” or “unless,” then it’s not a real threat but an intimidation. When someone makes an intimidation, they often want to avoid violence because they’re offering you a chance to prevent the harm they’re threatening. An example of intimidation is: “If you don’t stay off my property, I’m going to make you regret it.”
Assessing the Severity of a Threat
De Becker explains that contrary to popular belief, threats often suggest that someone is less likely to act violently. This is because people who issue threats usually want to scare you rather than commit violence. Clues that a person only wants to incite fear include:
- Using graphic language: For example, a message describing in brutal detail how they plan to harm you. Subtler expressions like “I can’t let this go on” can signify a more serious threat.
- Anonymity: Anonymous threats usually aren’t carried out since, often, their purpose is to inspire fear.
But when should you take a threat more seriously? De Becker argues that you should pay close attention to threats that emerge later in a conflict. Late threats often represent a more calculated decision to use violence, rather than an immediate emotional outburst.
Also, if you hear about a threat indirectly, you should take it more seriously—for example, if a college friend tells you that their roommate has been making threats about their professor. De Becker recommends you report such threats because they could reflect an actual intent to harm. These threats aren’t being delivered to the person they’re supposedly threatening but to someone else that the person wouldn’t be trying to scare.
De Becker points out that the impact of a threat depends on the recipient’s reaction. So if someone threatens you, avoid showing fear, as doing so can give more confidence to the person making the threat. Instead, calmly assess the situation, ask yourself whether you’re in immediate danger, and act accordingly.
Preventing and Responding to Different Forms of Violence
Now that we’ve discussed ways to predict, avoid, and respond to violence in a general sense, let’s explore strategies for preventing and reacting to different forms of violence: workplace violence, domestic violence, stalking, youth-related violence, and violence against public figures.
Workplace Violence
De Becker writes that violence in the workplace—physical attacks that occur in a work setting—can be prevented. He argues that workplace violence often happens because companies lack proper hiring practices and overlook early warning signs of violent behavior. To prevent this type of violence, de Becker provides the following tips for companies:
1. Conduct background checks. Many companies fail to thoroughly research the backgrounds of the people they hire. To avoid employing potentially dangerous individuals, use background checks and verify the information that applicants provide during the hiring process.
2. Be responsive to warning signs. Companies must identify high-risk employees early and address their issues through counseling or termination. De Becker suggests that businesses create an environment where employees feel comfortable reporting concerning behavior.
Intimate Partner Homicides
De Becker shares insights on how to predict and prevent the most severe outcome of domestic violence: intimate partner homicide. He argues that most intimate partner homicides are predictable. He writes that these killings rarely occur during heated arguments. Instead, they frequently happen after the victim has left the relationship, often following long periods of stalking by the perpetrator.
De Becker argues that seeking refuge in a shelter can be safer than relying on restraining orders for protection. Going to a shelter makes you physically unavailable, allowing you to avoid potential danger, whereas restraining orders don’t provide you any real protection from violence. He notes that restraining orders can be useful in cases with no history of violent abuse. However, they can worsen situations in which the abuser has a strong emotional investment in the relationship: They can provoke more violence by angering the person whom the order is issued against. Restraining orders can also create a false sense of safety, causing you to let your guard down.
Stalking
De Becker defines stalking as when someone repeatedly follows, contacts, or observes you against your wishes. He writes that if someone is stalking you, firmly tell them to stop and then cut off all contact. Don’t try to negotiate with them or explain your reasoning, as any form of contact—even telling someone you don’t want to hear from them anymore—can be seen as encouragement to keep reaching out to you. If you respond after promising to ignore the stalker, they’ll think their behavior is effective and continue to harass you.
If you’ve cut off contact and the stalker continues to harass you, de Becker advises you to avoid the temptation to confront them. Even asking someone else to confront the stalker or getting the police involved can escalate the situation, angering the stalker and causing them to harass you even more.
Youth Violence
De Becker writes that youth violence—which can include assault, murder, and even mass shootings—can be prevented. De Becker argues that there are numerous warning signs that might suggest a child’s inclination toward violence: an unusual attraction to weapons and brutal behavior, persistent anger, an obsession with media, and exposure to alcohol and drugs, to name a few. Often, youth at risk for violence are also missing important skills like self-motivation and emotional regulation.
Some people question whether violence in the media, like in video games and movies, could incite aggressive behavior in children. While the content of such media matters, de Becker argues that the real problem lies in the hours spent interacting with them, which often take away from valuable human connections. Real human connections help children develop empathy, communication skills, and emotional regulation. Without enough time spent interacting with others, children may never fully develop these skills.
Thus, to reduce youth violence, de Becker argues that parents, schools, and society as a whole must treat children with love and kindness and help them feel valued. He advocates instilling a sense of value, purpose, and empathy in them, as doing so makes them less likely to turn to violence.
Public Figure Attacks
De Becker writes that some people are motivated to attack celebrities as a way to gain fame and recognition. These attackers usually lack healthy relationships and develop a strong sense of connection to their famous targets. They see attacking a celebrity as a way to link themselves to that celebrity’s fame.
De Becker points out that after a widely covered assassination, the danger of copycat attacks soars. This is because the media sensationalize the attacks, portraying the perpetrators as highly competent and dangerous and giving others the confidence that they, too, can successfully carry out an attack.
To deter more attacks, de Becker suggests removing the promise of fame or recognition, as these are significant motives for these crimes. This means the media should portray criminals in a less appealing light—for instance, by using less flattering nicknames instead of sensational nicknames or full names, which tend to glamorize or aggrandize the criminal. Additionally, instead of focusing on the criminal and giving them the attention they seek, the media should focus more on the personnel and strategies in place to prevent such attacks.
