Let me guess, looking at a large screen on a desk?
Let me guess, looking at a large screen on a desk?
This really raises the moral question of what are people supposed to do with their time. If you have the means to care for yourself, who’s to judge you for what you do with your time? If you choose to not have a family or not participate in your community or give back to the world in any way, is an addiction really a problem? If you’re choosing to not have a healthy productive life, is an addiction to drugs or gambling or sex or social media detrimental to anything?
I’ve never met anyone with an apparent addiction - and I’ve met quite a few in my day - that were completely happy with the life they were leading. Probably because real addiction entails a loss of control that would be detrimental to your life and self-esteem. Even if you have no one around you, if you want to do anything else with your day besides drink and you constantly fail, it’s not a good thing for your mental health. You’d continuously find yourself in degrading situations.
Coming to terms with “choice” in the context of addiction is a difficult thing to me. I’m really not sure where I stand on it. It’s definitely not the same as making decisions when completely sober, you’re not completely helpless or without personal responsibility either.
And then some people seem to be able to consume copious amounts of drugs or alcohol at some time in their life and then just walk away from it without issues. Perhaps it’s genetics, or a personality thing, who knows.
What you’re describing doesn’t sound like an addiction, no, but does that mean no one is or could be addicted to their phone?
I take it you don’t know about Napoleon II and III? Or even Napoleon Dynamite?
I’m the opposite, Animals and Piper at the Gates of Dawn are the only Pink Floyd albums I like.
Fine by me, it’s obvious you no longer have an argument – or anything otherwise interesting – to contribute to this discussion anyway, so what would be the point?
Perhaps, probably not - not my point though. My native language has a lot of English loan words with local pronunciation, which is the correct pronunciation of those words in my language according to any dictionary, however to indignantly correct someone using the original english pronunciation for saying it “wrong” would just be bizarre.
In English, yes. My point is that cache/r/t is the root of both words, the pronunciation changed in english which often happens with loan words, and it certainly is OK to use the local pronunciation – but correcting someone who uses the correct pronunciation of that word, with self-righteous indignation even, is very silly behavior.
“But we’ve been pronouncing it wrong for 300 years!”
I’m sorry, you don’t get to maul the pronunciation of loan words and then correct people when they use the correct pronunciation. The word comes from the french cache/casher which is pronounced exactly cash-eh. Where do you think the -e comes from?
Well, how about reincarnation coupled with eternal lethal diarrhea?
Hey, I’m clumsy and confused already!
Well, the interesting thing about how to get a better understanding of the transaction is on Facebook, and Instagram or not the first time when it comes to be able to recall, long time when you have any questions about someone sacrificing yourself to the majority of them. Walk around the house and the sounds of it was a good day and I think it’s not convenient for a few minutes now I have a good time. So much for the update!
Academia heroes rising movie about gambling, debt and the idea of what to say about someone. Academic advising appointment for tomorrow morning sleep deprived and then that feeling must be the opposite of a rougher offshoot of the transaction on Paypal, app access to the consumer price index fund and I can tell you from experience with their attention, integrity and the sounds of silence of course, I will lose my mind but remember that one of those days I don’t know what entities possess you have any questions?
Well, the interesting thing about that quote is that Socrates was completely correct. People used to be able to recall long epic poems from memory, not just one, but an entire book shelf’s worth of information. This ability was lost among people in general. However people, and society, adapted.
Although the argument you and a lot of other people seems to be making is the equivalent of saying “well, I’ve had cancer before, and the doctor said it was serious then, but I survived - so it’s going to fine this time as well”. I don’t think it holds up.
Well, all this feels a bit weird to me as a european. Americans and british pronounce it as f-you-g, but it’s a french loan word, in french /fyg/ (y as in the last letter in particularly). The word itself however comes from the latin fuga, and in german and a lot of other languages the word is fuga or fuge. Fuga is of course pronounced foo-gah (well, not exactly, but close enough) so…I wouldn’t laugh that hard at someone mispronouncing the word in “English” if I were them is my point I guess.
Lots of greenwashing going on here too. The nordic countries are just as capitalist as anywhere else, we just had a strong labour movement in the 19th and 20th century. And sadly, a lot of what was won has been slowly whittling away in the last decades due to the complacency and inaction of the generations after.
For our younger audience: this is from when the show Cheers was popular, that’s why there’s a “Norm” setting.
Well, but what does “caring” mean? It means that their well-being affects your emotions.
That would be an extremely reductive definition that doesn’t really tell us much about how caring for others is actually experienced and how it manifests in the world. How would this for example explain sacrificing yourself to save another person, if the very core of caring is to create positive emotions in yourself? Dying is a pretty negative thing to experience and there will be no more positive emotions for you after that. I guess this idea that caring is in its essence transactional feels profound to people because we’re so ingrained with capitalist ideology… but it’s a lot more complex and multifaceted than that.
Of course, you only ever do things because there’s something in it for you,
No, sometimes you do things because you care about other people and want to help them. That you also probably feel better about yourself than you would if you did shitty things all day doesn’t mean that feeling is the only and single motivation.
You’re probably correct, although I also think once an addictive pattern is established there’s often a kind of feedback loop where the pattern interferes with your ability and options to have a better life.
I guess there’s a few ways to answer that question. In an extremely literal sense, no one is ever going to be diagnosed with anything if their behavior doesn’t affect themselves or others around them negatively. But if we define addiction as a certain behavioral pattern, this person would still be addicted to their phone given that this behavioral pattern is present. Do they “play video games or doom scroll or watch porn” every day simply because they’re bored, or because they can’t help themselves? And if an opportunity arose and this person’s life had a chance to turn significantly better somehow, would this behavior stand in their way?
I’m not saying I know the answer, by the way, and I’m certainly not judging anyone in this kind of situation.