Becoming Addicted to Behaviors

 Becoming Addicted to Behaviors

There exists a great deal of comfort in the human mind when definitions are laid out within well-defined boundaries. The definition of "Addiction" illustrates this dilemma. Traditionally the term was used primarily in conjunction with ingested substance addiction. But what of behavioral addictions built up due to repetitive uses and habits. It is as devastating in terms of its psychological, biological and social effects. Limiting a definition is really blinding oneself to the existence of other problems in the same vein. (Having said that, too broad a definition, as is the case with autism; which has become a catch-all bucket; really dilutes the possibility of quickly attaining meaningful solutions). 

The challenge is that understanding behaviors continues to be an enigma for scientists and sociologists alike, as we have not still fully understand the workings of the human mind. It is rational and irrational all at the same time. The human consciousness is a very complex process. So the debate continues as to whether we can group pyschoactive physical addictions (eg: drugs) and say, the pathological need to gamble, which is a process or activity addiction. Nevertheless I believe that both substance abuse and behavioral addictions are “additions” – both lead to neuroadaptation. Only if both are recognized as such, will efforts be made to find solutions. 

Behaviors in our society have changed in its nature and scope over the last few decades. The internet for example was non-existent 2 decades ago, as was the concept of internet-addiction. Expectations have also changed - life has become confusing and complex. Behaviors that arise almost as coping mechanisms soon become obsessive compulsive addictions. Why are there so many obese people (due to eating disorders) in a society outwardly obsessed with the unrealistic model-thin beauty. Have our societal expectations changed so much that a percentage of the population can no longer keep up and resorts to "quick-fix" behaviors. 

These behavioral patterns are quick-fixes to begin with, but their effect is intense in the pleasure derived. It acts as a powerful emotional operand and appears an inviting outlet in which to lose oneself from all the stresses of societal reality. The step from craving to compulsion blurs. The internet for instance offers the chance of becoming another virtual persona. You can be everything you are not in real life. 

The consequences don't seem bad either. After all you are not abusing drugs or drinking and driving. Ergo, there can be no perceived risks! Activity additions are not even viewed as potential addictions by its victim (denial). But when the repeated activity has significantly changed behavioral patterns (quantitatively) such that it dominates to the detriment of other behaviors, it has truly become an addiction. The strength of the addition and the subjective change in experience it brings can cause significant shifts in neurochemistry, just like in substance addiction. Ironically, substance addiction is easier to identify and therefore, easier to treat as there is a tangible object of addiction.       

Even from a purely behavioral viewpoint (BF Skinner), a person will engage in more of the behavior that is positively reinforced. A feel-good behavior is therefore likely to be repeated. If this cause –effect relationship resulting in a repeated behavior crosses a threshold where it becomes detrimental, it has then become an addiction. This can apply to all kinds of things – be it gambling, internet use, or over-eating. Indeed, people can become addicted to behaviors.

So you want to be a Wolf Biologist!!

A Wolf Biologist!! When my classmate expressed this as a career goal, I thought they must be joking. Perhaps the sudden craze over fictional werewolves and vampires brought this on. Owww..

Turns out it is a real bonafide job - a specialty of wildlife biology, requiring a graduate degree at the least. Wolf Biologists work in places like Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone's Wolf Project for instance is trying to reintroduce wolves back into the wild - a missing link in that ecosystem for over 60 years - due to human misconceptions about the wolf. As with all other wildlife biology, the fundamental task is to study and understand our wonderful fauna and help preserve its habitat. 

To the future Wolf Biologist in my class - Good Luck. And what a nice career goal.

Accidental Misfit

Frankenstein by Mary Shelly 

My image of the creature in Frankenstein, prior to reading, had been far from positive. In fact I thought the creature’s name was Frankenstein, given the title of the book. I did not realize that his creator was Victor Frankenstein and that the creature himself is unnamed in the story.  I imagined a huge, grotesque, green, human-like figure that went around murdering innocents, for no rhyme or reason. Why green? – I don’t know, maybe I was confusing him with the Incredible Hulk who is a perpetual state of rage. Or perhaps since he was made of dead body parts, the green color represented the decayed body. The creature was in my mind just pure evil, a one-man slaughterhouse for any human that crossed his path. Perhaps he even tortured his victims before killing them. Maybe he even ate them. 

I felt that the creation itself was possibly an act of accident on the part of a wayward scientist -  Victor Frankenstein, which resulted in this intensely furious monster, bent on destruction, much like that depicted in many monster movies. Such a monster would logically chase and try to wipe out his creator and kin. For me, the two figures were on either side of black and white. The creator was the innocent victim; the creature was this evil black-hearted aggressor to be destroyed. A number of humans were bound to be killed over the course of the story to justify this. The happy ending would have been the creator destroying this evil creature and saving the girl.   

Reading the story put a different perspective on the characters of both Victor Frankenstein and the creature. It brought out the humanness of the creature and contrasted it with the duplicity of Frankenstein. It told the story of an accidental grotesque misfit, who desperately sought societal approval and of a scientist who did not want to take responsibility for his actions.  

Rest of Commentary continued on my Academic Blog. 

http://hariatwork.blogspot.com/2011/03/frankenstein-by-mary-shelley.html