3 ms·

>So please, let’s start talking about people, rather than irrelevant neurochemicals. Strange way to conclude an article that has quite successfully argued the

• scoutt 5y ago
  > pinpointing a neurological mechanism for a problem amounts to externalizing the problem I read it as "pinpointing a simpler reason to explain an often more complicated problem". It's easier to say "it's a dopamine rush" than "I'm on Facebook all day because I'm an insecure person and it's makes me feel bad and I don't know what else to do about it" (to mention a non-personal example). An addiction has for sure its chemical reasons, but limiting to only that when dealing with it, it's reductive (my wife is a Psycologist and I heard arguments like these many times already....).
  • dnilasor 5y ago
    > An addiction has for sure its chemical reasons, but limiting to only that when dealing with it, it's reductive Right, the point I got from this, particularly from all the examples pulled from pop science, is that folks are focusing on a reduced/mischaracterized biological mechanism instead of on the associated social behaviors. The social behaviors are the things we can (theoretically at least) actually change. Perhaps the author means to express that we should focus on whatever human behavior we think it problematic instead of "blaming" a component of the mechanism.
  • ljm 5y ago
    It's just that even with self-awareness, you're not going to dive into existential torment and intimate communication at every opportunity when "it takes the edge off" is a functional equivalent, even if you wade further into a swamp of denial with every utterance of it. The dopamine rush is just the latest iteration of taking the edge off, getting comfort in something that gives you some feelings short-term but is hugely unhealthy in the long-term. Beyond that, an excuse is an excuse. "I doomscroll on FB all day because I'm insecure and I was abused as a child" (to use a personal example) can become just as much of an excuse as "I get a dopamine hit from connecting with my friends on FB." Sounds awkward when you first hear that, but then you keep hearing it, and it becomes normal.
    • scoutt 5y ago
      I don’t think the article is about excuses but about finding reasons. Of course a reason can be used as an excuse, but I don’t think is the primary goal of attributing the causes to the dopamine rush.
• Barrin92 5y ago
  No what the author is simply describing is that some mechanical process in the brain should not be taken as causative for some process at the level of behavior. All behavioral processes manifest biochemically in the brain, regardless of the complexity of the cause. It would be magical if it didn't. If the local lead company pours lead into the drinking water every single affected person has extreme levels of lead in the brain. Yet, the correct conclusion is not to blame 'lead-brains' but the ultimate cause of the pollution. The same thing is true for dopamine and Facebook. Even if the entire explanation was as simple as 'dopamine turns you into a facebook zombie', dopamine is not actual root cause at the level of behavior (that would be the incentive design of the social platform), dopamine is just a proximate agent. people who buy into these simplistic explanations are actually the ones who engage in a body / mind fallacy. Anything that impacts behavior, regardless of how remote in nature, manifests in the brain, precisely because you are your brain, not despite of it.
  • richardatlarge 5y ago
    I think this is exactly right. To reduce love to dopamine says it all. No experience lacks a neurochemical underpinning so any correlation needs further evidence of causation. One interesting animal study showed that the dopamine effects of cocaine occurred in different brain areas depending on whether it was experimenter administered or self administered. It’s all highly ecological and focusing on a NT is a cheap way to turn all human experience into a video game