61–70 of 101 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like you're not familiar with sociology nor macroeconomics literature.
Macroeconomists often can't run experiments, and some kinds of "macro-sociological" theories can't be tested either. That puts them in a fundamentally different epistemological class.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We should also ban other dangerously addictive activities, such as fiction books, non-video games, sports, DIY hobbies (e.g. electrical engineering, painting or storywriting), pets, hanging out with other people and lots of other things. I'm no expert on the matter, but I think you're completely missing the point. The keyword here is "gaming addiction" not "video games". Please, for the love of all the sanity that's…
All I said is that if video games were treated the same as drugs and alcohol they would be banned for minors. Video games are just as addictive as alcohol, cigarettes, or cocaine and just as destructive in terms of seriously impairing the ability of addicts to function in a socially acceptable way. If you think books or hobbies are as addictive or destructive as video games that is a matter of opinion, but I think mo…
Sorry, I had possibly misinterpreted this as you not just comparing but actually suggesting treating video games similarly to alcohol and banning those to minors. My apologies if you didn't mean that.
If you did - I strongly disagree.
> Video games are just as addictive as alcohol, cigarettes
Sorry but this is nonsense. No video game binds with receptors in the brain and cause physical dependence. Please, let's not equate gaming with substance addictions.
> If you think books or hobbies are as addictive or destructive as video games that is a matter of opinion
There are people who lost their friends, jobs or have other problems in their lives because of their hobbies or obsessions. I knew some hardcore anime otakus who had some personal issues - shall we ban Japanese animation and comics?
But you missed the point, again. Let me reiterate: video games are retreat, not a cause. Banning them won't help the person who can't control their urges a single little bit. You would either leave them empty, concealing the issue, or they'll divert to something else.
Adding games to DSM is a good idea, though. If someone has addiction and it manifests into video gaming addiction, it's easy to measure this. I could be wrong but as I get it, that's the whole point, having a concept of unhealthy obsession - not that games are something undesirable on their own.
I believe you perceive video games as something special only because they're easiest thing available out there, making them the common retreat. That, plus existence of some games that specifically concentrate on abuse of the addictions (see my next point).
> tracking player responses at a minute level and adapting games to maximize profits
Sorry, but if I got you right - you're talking about some specific niche (or several niches) of video games, generalizing this to the whole industry. You'd probably want to complain about in-game purchases and microtransactions (or whatever else this stuff is called).
Upd: Sorry for edits - I re-read my comment and did some edits to it to better clarify what I've meant. Finished editing now.
I had all the signs of addiction, I stopped hanging out with friends, I stayed awake all night, ate poorly and gave up in school. More than once I recognized my issue and smashed the CD, even one time glued it to a piece of paper and put it on our bulletin board for my mom to see. Two weeks later I'd be back playing at 3am.
I needed help but I don't think my parents knew what to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read a lot of your posts on this thread and appreciate your perspective. I agree with a lot of it. Honest question for you though: isn't it a bit weird to label something as a disorder if 5-10% of the population has it? Isn't it just a fairly standard human existence then? I think that's where a lot of the discomfort comes from.
Not the parent, and I don't mean this sarcastically, but isn't that akin to saying "Only 5-10% of people fracture a bone, so why bother treating it. It's just a standard part of human existence."?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You still need a reason to regularly take them in the first place, before the physical addiction kicks in.
I still remain unconvinced that loneliness is the primary precursor for alcohol, opiates, etc.
I think I would have met the qualifications for this as a 14 year old. My parents were going through a bad divorce and I spent all my time playing StarCraft to cope. I had all the signs of addiction, I stopped hanging out with friends, I stayed awake all night, ate poorly and gave up in school. More than once I recognized my issue and smashed the CD, even one time glued it to a piece of paper and put it on our bullet…
Thanks to my Dad for having the strength to let me be angry at him for years before coming to the right conclusion myself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the parent, and I don't mean this sarcastically, but isn't that akin to saying "Only 5-10% of people fracture a bone, so why bother treating it. It's just a standard part of human existence."?
Also poor eyesight, color blindness, partial deafness, &c. The reality all of these diseases/disorders are readily and inexpensively treated and not an issue in modern society.
Poor eyesight afflicts a large portion of the population, but the severity of the issue and the extremity of the treatment are not high. It doesn't impact your ability to maintain social relationships, for instance, and the treatment is very well understood and has low/no side effects.
Color blindness, partial deafness etc., are readily and inexpensively treated, but they do not afflict 5-10% of the young and healthy population.
The issue comes in when we start saying 5-10% of the population has an extreme condition (ie: impacts ability to maintain work, social relationships etc.) with a relatively severe (ie: fairly large % of users experiencing side effects) treatment necessary. When you put that in the context of our massively volatile understanding of mental illness over the last 50 years, as well as the massive incentives for pharmaceutical companies to push a specific narrative, it is difficult for me not to see a red flag.
I don't really care how we go about working the medical system to enable this.
Similar to how some people believe depression is not a mental disorder because it's not "physical" and that they just need to think more "positive" like the non-depressed people, I think any sort of addiction, be it drugs or games needs to be addressed from a medical stand point of view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without a doubt. This should have been a far more serious consideration than gaming addiction.
I wish I could upvote this more. Compulsion addiction and those companys (FaceBook,Twitter,EA,King, ect) that promote and profit from it are a dangerous threat to society. And obviously destructive to the individuals they target.