Video Game Addiction
Pages
| Author | Topic: Video Game Addiction |
|---|---|
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Friday, July 6 2007 19:11
Profile
quote:Agreed. I don't have a psychiatrist, never have, and doubt I ever will. Don't call it addiction. Call it compulsion, unbalance, or whatever you please. I can't imagine a psychiatrist not recognizing that some people's attachment to games is very unhealthy. Do you all think a person can be addicted to pornography? If yes, then why can't a person be addicted to video games? If no, why not? Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Friday, July 6 2007 21:06
Profile
Homepage
quote:And now we're playing fast and loose with jargon again. Is an unhealthy attachment the same as an addiction? As a non-psychiatrist, I think addiction is a more useful term when it's applied to physical dependence on a tangible substance. Compulsive porn watching and compulsive videogaming are certainly problems, but I don't see why the are necessarily in any way related to, say, heroin addiction. —Alorael, who would like to remind you that addiction is the only disease you can be blamed and censured for. Except for any other problem that's not obviously physical. Mental illness is treated very, very badly, by and large. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Saturday, July 7 2007 01:15
Profile
That's fair. Far be it from me to push medical views on what does and does not constitute addiction. The correlation between substance abuse and an "unhealthy attachment" to sex or video games is the behavior of the person. They are similar. That's the usefulness of title's such as "addict." We know what kind of things an addict does and how dangerous addiction can be. A person who is mentally ill through no fault of their own should not be blamed or mistreated. It's different when someone brings it on themselves. Why shouldn't they be blamed for what they've done? That doesn't mean they shouldn't get help. I don't see why they should be excused though. It's interesting that at some companies a person who works very poorly and irresponsibly can be fired. If the cause is drugs they'll retain him and help him though. I know someone that took advantage of a policy like that. I couldn't believe it. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, July 7 2007 05:24
Profile
Homepage
quote:That's the thing, though. There is a correlation and there are similarities, but the correlation is imprecise and the similarities inconsistent. Addiction implies compulsion and, particularly in popular use, inability to quit. Unhealthy attachment could involve those things, but doesn't normally, at least when I hear the phrase. quote:In theory I agree with you. In practice, this is a very hard line to draw. Suppose somebody lives in an area where heavy drug use is ubiquitous. Suppose their parents encourage them to use. Suppose they were actually introduced to addictive drugs prenatally. Suppose they turn to drugs to cope with sexual abuse. Suppose they just never developed strong coping skills and don't have a supportive social network, and they turn to drugs to cope with less extreme pressures. In which of these cases is it their fault? What about combinations of these factors? It's often hard to tease apart what an somebody really could have done differently, and what was simply a challenge they would inevitably have to face, without outside intervention. Really, who wakes up and says "I want to bring a mental illness on myself today!" The answer, at least for me, is to talk about responsibility, but not blame. If somebody has ended up in an addictive situation, it's their responsibility to get themself out of it -- nobody else is gonna do it for them, and if they aren't willing to take responsibility for their actions it will never happen. But blame just isn't a useful concept, unless you're looking to belittle somebody. [quote]It's interesting that at some companies a person who works very poorly and irresponsibly can be fired. If the cause is drugs they'll retain him and help him though. I know someone that took advantage of a policy like that. I couldn't believe it.[/quote]The theory behind such policies is presumably that some rehabilitation programs have fairly proven success rates, so if the employee is genuinely invested, after a couple of weeks or months you could have a high-functioning employee again rather than having to train somebody new. I know of no rehabilitation programs for general incompetence ;) . -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, July 7 2007 06:52
Profile
Homepage
quote:You may think so, and I probably agree, but the psychiatric community disagrees with the both of us. Addiction, in the authoritative manuals like the DSM-IV, is separate from physical dependence (as the relevant Wikipedia page explains). This is how we can say, for example, that someone is addicted to marijuana even though it can never cause physical dependence. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Saturday, July 7 2007 08:14
Profile
quote:It's called promotion or a job transfer to where the person should cause less damage. It doesn't always work. Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Saturday, July 7 2007 19:00
Profile
I see you point on the rehab policy. This person was selling drugs and they were found in his locker. He then took advantage of the policy by saying he was an addict. That's what I mean about accountability. In the case you gave it doesn't sound like the person brought the problems on themselves. That was what I said should not be excused by the title "addict" or "insane." Just because someone's ill doesn't mean they have to bring drugs to work, or steal from their parents, or lie. If someone kills my loved one and they say, "oh he was crazy," That doesn't make it ok. I'm all for forgiveness and assistance, but I'm also for responsibility. I'm just guessing that may be part of why some don't like the broad usage of "addict," because some may use it to deflect responsibility for their actions. And, I'm going to have to side with the medical establishment on the mental stuff. If you ever talk to addicts they will tell you about it. I have. If it wasn't mental then there would be no such thing as relapse. Once a person had conquered physical withdrawel he'd never go back. Kel's observation on marijuana is also accurate. I can testify from firsthand experience that there is a physical pull to it, but not enough to cause addiction. Yet my best friend is an addict. I partook quite regularly with him, yet was not. It's all in the mind. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Sunday, July 8 2007 16:54
Profile
Homepage
quote:It may be all in the mind, but the mind is all in the body. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 04:31
Profile
I think addiction is a pretty real affliction, because the truth is that we're all a lot less free-willed than we'd like to believe. After all, if we were completely free-willed, why on Earth would the forces of capitalism spend nearly as much money on advertising as they do? We're all pretty easily influence-able. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 05:39
Profile
Coca Cola is sugar water, with caffeine. People pay a premium for the caffeine, because drinking caffeine alters their brains in ways they like. Coca Cola is sugar water, with coolness. People pay a premium for the coolness, because drinking a 'cool' beverage alters their brains in ways they like. Proposition: brain alterations from caffeine and from coolness aren't really different in any important sense. Given this proposition (which I propose to explore, not defend), the only difference between the caffeine and the coolness in Coke is the delivery business model. The caffeine is physically put into the can, with the sugar water, at the factory. The coolness is put into the customer's mind, through advertising. The coolness is a sort of free download into the customer's brain. Actually drinking the cola is like buying the license code: only with both the advertising and the cola do you get to enjoy drinking a cool beverage. Advertising and caffeine injection are both manufacturing processes that add value to the product. So I think Drew's link between addiction and advertising is interesting because I think it can cut in different directions, depending on one's other attitudes. Being influenced by the outside world, whether through drugs or through advertising, might be bad, in some views, on principle. On another view, the question is only whether the influence is one that we want. Or want to want. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 06:08
Profile
Caffeine alters the brain regardless of how you feel about coke. You could give it to someone that's never heard of Coke and it would have the same effect. And does anyone really feel cool when they drink a pop? I would definitely agree that they are easily influenced if they do. I don't think that's true for everyone or even most people. Maybe I'm slow, but I see no link whatsoever between advertising and addiction. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 07:14
Profile
Homepage
EDIT: Eh, never mind. Not worth it. [ Monday, July 09, 2007 07:18: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 08:10
Profile
Homepage
quote:Are you really arguing that most people are not easily influencable? -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 08:24
Profile
I'm convinced! Oh wait. I don't believe that. -------------------- WWtNSD? Synergy - "I don't get it." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 09:09
Profile
It's a matter of degree. It seems the argument is that "we all" can be influenced into addiction or influenced into thinking that drinking a particular beverage makes us cool. If I see an effective coke advertisement every other day it may stay on my mind and I may be more prone to buy Coke. I think that's the extent of it with most people. With some, maybe younger consumers, it may go a bit farther. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 10:14
Profile
The main thrust of my argument, such as it was, is that a psychological addiction can be as real (though perhaps not as intense) as a physiological/chemical addiction, and I think to a certain extent the pervasiveness of advertising and frequent responses to it are evidence of how malleable, and therefore how "breakable" or "programmable" a human brain can be. --- SoT presented Coca-Cola as his example, but I think the obvious example of a product marketed as "cool" is tobacco. Consider the profound effect Joe Camel advertising had on teenage smoking prior to RJR pulling the ads as a part of various and sundry large settlements. Essentially all that was marketted in those ads was "cool," and yet kids under 18 either switched brands or started smoking Camels in droves as a result. --- Given the fact that advertising can effect our minds to such an extent, is it not the case that psychological addiction can be just as real/profound as chemical addiction? Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7472
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 10:18
Profile
Homepage
Peer pressure works as advertising also. People are far more likely to believe it's cool if they see other people doing it, and it'll be more apt to influence people who aren't influenced by the ads alone. -------------------- Scenarios need reviews! Please rate these scenarios at the CSR after playing them! Amnesia • Witch Hunt • Where the Rivers Meet • Foul Hordes Posts: 2686 | Registered: Friday, September 8 2006 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 14:29
Profile
Homepage
quote:No. The argument is that many can be influenced into thinking that drinking a particular beverage is cool. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 6754
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 16:01
Profile
quote:Funny you should use Coca-Cola as an example. Something I've known about for a long time is my addiction to that very beverage, Coca-Cola Classic. Pepsi works but I don't like it (I really can taste the difference!) and I get headaches if I don't get my fix. I drink a LOT of coke. Around 1.5L daily. Very unhealthy. Anyway, the headaches may be from caffeine withdrawal, but drinking coffee doesn't work. Earlier this week I went all day without coke and by nighttime my head was in dizzy pain, I was pacing without purpose. In fact I find myself unable to substitute it at all. My conclusion is that my need for coke is psychological. However, it harms me relatively little, so I keep quaffing it. Also, I know it's not about image because I never drink it much in front of people. Socially it's almost secret. I'm not sure if this makes a good case study. Pretty relevant to the video game thing, right? I think someone may have my same situation. Just read "drink coke" as "play video games." Incidentally, I'm about to finish the bottle next to me, which will make 1.5L today. Mmmm. -------------------- One of these words is mispelled. Posts: 284 | Registered: Tuesday, January 31 2006 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2820
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 17:16
Profile
That's... disturbing. I doesn't seem possible to me, though. I've never known anyone who loves Coke that much. -------------------- Thuryl: I mean, most of us don't go around consuming our own bodily fluids, no matter how delicious they are. ==== Alorael: War and violence would end if we all had each other's babies! ==== Drakefyre: Those are hideous mangos. Posts: 1415 | Registered: Thursday, March 27 2003 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4826
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 18:58
Profile
quote:You play 1.5L of video games? -------------------- "Of course, not all technology is good. Some is exactly the opposite (bad)." — Dave Barry Posts: 458 | Registered: Friday, August 6 2004 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 18:59
Profile
I understand your point now, Drew. I agree that we are all susceptible to suggestion. I agree that we are all affected by our peers. I still don't see much of a connection between psycological addiction and advertising other than the brain, which doesn't really say much. But I don't think we disagree that addiction can be psycological. Coincidentally, there's a show on Fresh Air (the NPR program) tomorrow dealing with the brain's involvement with addiction, for anyone interested enough to listen. If you miss it like I probably will they usually have the shows available for download a few hours after broadcast. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 04:40
Profile
My main point was that I believe that we're all a lot less free-willed and mentally tough than we'd like to think, and that psychological addiction is real. I'm not about to say that video game addiction is on par with heroin, but it nevertheless could be a substantive addiction, and probably worthy of inclusion in the DSMIV (is that the current one?). What other explanation could there possibly be for the fact that I just purchased a Nintendo DS for the purpose of playing frakking Pokemon, for the love of Pete? As for Coca-Cola addiction, I probably drink upwards of 5-6 Coke Zeroes a day, and definitely keep it under the radar from my wife. :( To the fellow drinking 1.5L a day of the hard stuff, I'd advise that you at least switch to diet, or I guarantee you'll put on at least a stone within a year. [ Tuesday, July 10, 2007 04:42: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4826
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 11:34
Profile
Except Diet actually tastes way different, and he might react to it the same as Pepsi. Gaining weight just might encourage him to stop anyway. -------------------- "Of course, not all technology is good. Some is exactly the opposite (bad)." — Dave Barry Posts: 458 | Registered: Friday, August 6 2004 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 12:08
Profile
Coke Zero is pretty close to the original, or at any rate, much closer than Diet Coke, which is probably why I drink so much of it. As for the weight gain, how does that old maxim go? You put the frog in a pot of room temperature water, and then slowly turn up the heat... Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |