View Single Post
Old 01-16-2013, 11:56 PM
SchrodingersCat's Avatar
SchrodingersCat SchrodingersCat is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,435

Originally Posted by Helo View Post
My basic assertions are:

1. Psychological dependence and addiction are different things
2. Videogames are not inherently more or less prone to causing psychological dependence
3. The focus on videogame "addiction" is motivated primarily by profit and class distinctions
4. The correlation with anti-social behavior is a symptom rather than a cause
5. The criteria for and mechanisms of videogame "addiction" are terribly vague
6. It is a charge that is impossible to defend against
Ok, good point, I see where you're coming from and I don't disagree.

Prescription drug abuse is skyrocketing in the US and when you see a parent gargling a mouthful of Zoloft, most people's reaction is to make jokes; "Mommy's Little Helper." When's the last time you heard heroin referred to as "Daddy's Little Helper?" Prescription drug abuse is becoming more stigmatized because its starting to filter down to the lower classes but by and large its still a middle and upper class problem and as such it gets treated with far more levity than something like cocaine.
I personally have never heard of prescription drugs being referred to as "Mommy's Little Helper" and to hear that people do causes me sadness. But you're right that the average person doesn't really have an understanding of addiction, and that can lead to substance abuse and problem behaviour that people don't recognize as unacceptable.

I thought cocaine was thought of as a rich man's drug? In movies, it's romanticized as classy. Meth and crack are what I think of as the low-class drugs.

They dont have to know anything about games, anything about psychology, anything about ME, and yet they can drop a very serious accusation.
And I agree that diagnosing someone you don't even know is not acceptable. I realize it probably seems like that's what I was doing, but I wasn't. My intention was to point out a behaviour that sounded like it could be a problem, in order to trigger your conscious analysis of whether it is or not. I don't know you, and I accept you as the authority on you, so I accept your analysis.

I think you're very quick to pull out the addiction label. Simply because you stay up late on a website, how does that make you an addict?
This whole conversation got me thinking and talking to my girlfriend, who unlike either of us DOES have a degree in Psychology. She agrees that my behaviour is probably not an addiction, more of a compulsion or habit. I'm inclined to agree, since I don't spend every waking moment thinking about the internet, I don't arrange my schedule and life around it, nor do I reject all other activities in favour of it.

If you showed The Land That Time Forgot to a kid in the 1950's they'd have been terrified of it; our cultural norms change over time depending on their environment. A kid in the 1850's could slit the throat of a goat, gut it, and skin it without ever flinching whereas a kid in 2010 would probably ralph if they saw it happen in front of them.
Aww I still cry every time I see that movie. But I was never scared of Sharptooth, so I see your point.

I tried to break a chicken bone once for soup, to get more flavour out. It grossed me out so much, I did an "ew ew ew" dance around the kitchen, and turned the whole process over to my husband.

Point made.

From what I've seen and learned, people who abuse games do so for two reasons; self-medication and self-stimulation.
I think you've hit on a good point: the difference between "abusing" something and "being addicted" to it. I've always thought of them both as "a problem" and lumped them together, but you make a good point about the distinction.
As I am sure any cat owner will be able to tell you,
someone else putting you in a box is entirely different
from getting into a box yourself.
Reply With Quote