The human mind is remarkably adaptive.

It is able to absorb a huge amount of information and emotions, but it is also able to effectively filter incoming data so as not to be overloaded.

There are any number of examples of this.

For example, consider my theory of the information vacuum.

When an event is reported (say, a hostage-taking at a school), there is no information at first.

The reporters have not arrived yet, and the authorities, as usual, are hiding it.

And the mind requires, requires clarity.

And then, in this very moment of lack of clarity, anything can be fed to this mind.

Yes, even the advent of alien beings.

The vacuum sucks in any crumbs, no matter where they come from.

And here's another situation: there was a giant catastrophe.

Let's say two huge skyscrapers collapsed.

And perception expands to impossible limits, drawing apocalyptic pictures for itself.

Well, how much is there?

50 thousand victims?

100 thousand?

And then it turns out that three.

And the mind exhales with relief, because it was counting on something else.

Another situation is addiction.

I still have chronicles not only of Nord-Ost or Beslan, which I scrupulously kept by virtue of my profession.

But also, say, the chronicle of the great tsunami in Southeast Asia.

Let's remember her.

The first message about the tsunami appeared on December 26, 2004 at 07:49 Moscow time.

Reuters reported that the earthquake on the Indonesian island of Sumatra killed at least nine people.

The earthquake caused a storm and part of the island was flooded.

According to some reports, several dams and bridges were destroyed.

Two hours later, the same Reuters reported that it was not a storm, but a tsunami, that more than 50 people died in Sumatra, and even, probably, 300 in Sri Lanka.

Half past four in Moscow - 3 thousand victims.

Half past six - 8 thousand. Ten in the evening - 11 thousand.

The next morning: in the morning - 14.5 thousand people.

In the evening - 23.5 thousand. In a day - 68 thousand.

On December 30, the number of counted victims was already more than 120,000.

And there is the New Year.

After the New Year, days later, no one noticed the news anymore.

150 thousand 180 thousand 200 thousand 220 thousand

The higher the numbers of human losses, the less they affect the psyche.

The worst thing is when one person dies.

And 200 thousand is not scary at all.

That is, human perception has some kind of self-preserving barrier that grows if the horror of what is happening exceeds your ability to comprehend it.

We observe approximately the same thing in the situation with Turkey.

The first report of the earthquake appeared on agency tapes at about 05:00 on February 6.

The first message about the victims - in two hours.

There were about 20 of them. It was clear that the number of victims would grow, since no one could say in advance how many people were under the rubble and how many could not be saved.

But here's what's interesting: after a day, the number of actual victims ceased to be news.

It grows.

It grows not only in Turkey, but also in Syria.

But the media has already taken up other, more interesting news for them.

For example, more than 540 earthquakes have been recorded in the European-Mediterranean region over the past two days.

And this is not counting the earthquakes in the Kuril Islands and even in the state of New York, not far from the city of Buffalo.

The whole planet seems to be in motion.

Which, of course, is not surprising in the current situation of the growing Armageddon, but still somehow distracts from someone else's grief.

Enough, as they say, and his own.

There is another interesting aspect.

Here, for example, is the news of January 8, 2015.

“The victims of the attacks on the editorial office of the French magazine were 12 people, including two policemen.

The rest are journalists of the publication.

Response (google search for phrase in quotation marks to weed out noise):

“Muscovites bring flowers to the French embassy” – 25,700 references.

And here is another news from the same January 8, 2015:

"At least 50 people have been killed and dozens injured in an explosion Wednesday near a police academy in the Yemeni capital Sana'a."

Response (google search for phrase in quotation marks to weed out noise):

"Muscovites bring flowers to the Yemeni embassy" - no results.

Well, okay, what about the Yemeni police.

Something more expressive should be compared with cartoonists.

Let's say children.

Here is the news from December 17, 2014:

"More than 140 people, including 132 children, became victims of the terrorist attack in Peshawar."

Response (google search for phrase in quotation marks to weed out noise):

“Muscovites bring flowers to the Pakistani embassy” - no results.

This is an interesting phenomenon that I still cannot understand.

There is incomparably more news about the dead in Turkey than news about the dead in Syria.

Yes, of course, in Turkey, the earthquake claimed more lives.

But the earthquake is one for all, it cannot be divided.

And people are the same everywhere.

What is in Turkey, what is in Syria, what is in Pakistan, what is in Yemen.

And, of course, these are the same people as in France.

But somehow our perception is arranged in such a way that hundreds of thousands of victims somewhere where we are not, mean less than a few people where we either were or would like to be.

On the one hand, the Lord destroyed the Tower of Babel, so that people would not become proud and become divided.

On the other hand, these 540 earthquakes in two days are also unlikely to have occurred apart from the will of the Lord.

And we still see that people are, yes, divided.

Some are more important to some, while others are more important to others.

Others are not important to some.

Just like one for the other.

Of course, we will never understand God's plan.

But maybe this, as they say in Telegram channels, is a signal?

It's time, by the way, for such a signal.

Divided and unlucky, presenting each other for the momentary.

And isn't it time to change your mind?

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.