Quoted Text

The Truth About Addiction: We’re All Junkies Now
BY STEVEN KOTLERON JAN 24, 2015| BRAIN, FEATURED, HEALTH 388  1
Isn’t it time we start telling the truth about addiction?

What is that truth? That we are all addicts and all the time.

For this to make sense, it helps to first understand that our ideas about addiction are built atop a deeper fallacy—the idea of normalcy—the notion that there is an unadulterated state of consciousness, a “normal” state where our interpretation of reality is accurate.

There are a number of huge problems with this idea. First, we know that ‘consciousness’ is a vast reduction in information. No one is exactly sure how vast. Estimates for how much information the senses gather on a moment–to-moment basis range from 11 million bits all the way up to 400 billion bits. This is a huge amount of data. Yet estimates for how much of this information actually makes it to our conscious mind ranges from 140 bits per second to around 2000 bits per second (for way more info on this check out Tor Norretranders’ amazing The User Illusion).

Whatever the actual number, the important point is that the reduction is massive. While we may think we live in the real world, what we’re calling reality is actually less than one percent of the information that’s out there.

The next problem with normalcy comes out of the so-called “special needs” world. The old idea is that sufferers of diseases like ADHD, Asperger’s and Autism were not normal. But I know plenty of folks in Silicon Valley who love the fact that they “suffer” from Asperger’s—meaning they’re more than willing to accept a difficulty in processing social cues for the boost in analytic and math skills that comes with the condition. To them, it’s a superpower, not a handicap.

Similarly, I know dozens of seriously ADHD professional athletes who believe they owe their careers to the “disease”—arguing that the only time they can focus is in a game (or on a mountain or whatever) and what others see as a condition to be cured, they see as a doorway into another universe—a universe where the impossible becomes possible.

Finally, the most obvious problem with normalcy is the simple fact that it’s a total fiction. In the world of addiction, normal means not on drugs, not chemically-altered. But we are—all of us and all the time—chemically altered.

Food alters our neurochemistry. Powerful emotions alter our neurochemistry. The chemicals in the air we breath (and the quality and style of our breathing) alters our neurochemistry. From a biological perspective, there is no such thing as not chemically altered. There is no baseline. There is no normal.

And not only is there no such thing as normal, the flipside of this coin is the fact that there’s no such thing as an un-addicted person. There are no non-addicts in the world for the simple reason that the brain functions by addiction.

Take, for example, habits. As Charles Duhigg taught us in The Power of Habit, there is a cycle of neurobiology beneath habit acquisition (cue, routine, reward) and the final stop on that cycle—the reward—comes from the nucleus accumbens releasing dopamine, the brain’s principle reward drug. This reinforcement locks habits into place. This cycle is how we learn.

But dopamine is the same neurochemical that makes amphetamines, morphine, nicotine, cocaine, shopping, porn, sex, gambling, eating, internet use, video games, falling in love and a host of other “addictions” addictive.

And this brings us to an important downstream corollary of the truth: Since addiction is unavoidable, what we need to do is start teaching people—and arguably this should start in grade school, with our children—how to manage their addictions.

In fact, at the Flow Genome Project, this is a large portion of what we do. The reason for this is that there is a recovery period that follows a flow state—and it’s not entirely pleasant. People go from the enormous high of flow (considered the most addictive feeling on earth) to a crashing low that follows. This low results from the fact that the brain has temporarily used up its supply of feel-good neurochemistry and it takes a little while for these chemicals to replenish themselves. It is unavoidable.

How you deal with this “recovery period” matters a great deal. If you go into it like an addict—craving more flow and right away—you’re not going to be able to recover enough to actually get the flow you desire. It’s a double-edged sword. Instead, it’s critical to know how to deal with the slew of negative emotions and negative thoughts that comes with that low. This is an addiction management problem.

Solving it means knowing how to hold your mud. It’s requires grit and emotional control and the ability to delay gratification. And it’s not easy.

For sure, the massive amplification in performance that flow brings is reason alone to start teaching people these addiction management skills—but modern technology turns what is already a good idea into something of a moral imperative.

The Swiss futurist Gerd Leonhard uses the phrase “digital obesity” to describe our current screen addiction—the fact that we are totally hooked on communication technology and have very little ability to deal with this addiction. Don’t believe me? Spend ten minutes talking to a teenager and count the times they interrupt the conversation to check their phone.

The issue here is big. The link between our desire for instant gratification and the Internet’s ability to deliver is pretty unbeatable. Sure, we can take “screen vacations” from time to time, but basic biology says we’re never going to be able to triumph over this “addiction.” It’s too fundamental and too omnipresent.

But, if we were honest about all these things, we could start teaching ourselves and our children how to manage these issues from the get-go. Addiction is a fact of life. We treat it as a disease—and, for all the damage it does, rightly so—but it’s actually just normal brain function. Which is to say, here in the 21st century, addiction management is a fundamental survival skill.

If we’re bringing children into a hyper-connected digital world, don’t we owe them the skills it takes to navigate this world?

Quoted Text

C. Wright Mills argued 50 years ago that one important measure of the demise of vibrant democracy and the corresponding impoverishment of political life can be found in the increasing inability of a society to translate private troubles to broader public issues. [1] This is an issue that both characterizes and threatens any viable notion of democracy in the United States in the current historical moment. In an alleged post-racist democracy, the image of the public sphere with its appeal to dialogue and shared responsibility has given way to the spectacle of unbridled intolerance, ignorance, seething private fears, unchecked anger and the decoupling of reason from freedom. Increasingly, as witnessed in the utter disrespect and not-so-latent racism expressed by Joe Wilson, the Republican congressman from South Carolina, who shouted "you lie!" during President Obama's address on health care, the obligation to listen, respect the views of others and engage in a literate exchange is increasingly reduced to the highly spectacular wed embrace of an infantile emotionalism. This is an emotionalism that is made for television. It is perfectly suited for emptying the language of public life of all substantive content, reduced in the end to a playground for hawking commodities, promoting celebrity culture and enacting the spectacle of right-wing fantasies fueled by the fear that the public sphere as an exclusive club for white male Christians is in danger of collapsing. For some critics, those who carry guns to rallies or claim Obama is a Muslim and not a bona fide citizen of the United States are simply representative of an extremist fringe, that gets far more publicity from the mainstream media than they deserve. Of course this is understandable, given that the media's desire for balance and objective news is not just disingenuous but relinquishes any sense of ethical responsibility by failing to make a distinction between an informed argument and an unsubstantiated opinion. Witness the racist hysteria unleashed by so many Americans and the media over the building of an Islamic cultural center near ground zero.

The collapse of journalistic standards finds its counterpart in the rise of civic illiteracy. An African-American president certainly makes the Rush Limbaughs of the world even more irrational than they already are, just as the lunatic fringe seems to be able to define itself only through a mode of thought whose first principle is to disclaim logic itself. But I think this dismissal is too easy. What this decline in civility, the emergence of mob behavior and the utter blurring in the media between a truth and a lie suggest is that we have become one of the most illiterate nations on the planet. I don't mean illiterate in the sense of not being able to read, though we have far too many people who are functionally illiterate in a so-called advanced democracy, a point that writers such as Chris Hedges, Susan Jacoby and the late Richard Hofstadter made clear in their informative books on the rise of anti-intellectualism in American life. [2] I am talking about a different species of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. Illiterate in this instance refers to the inability on the part of much of the American public to grasp private troubles and the meaning of the self in relation to larger public problems and social relations. It is a form of illiteracy that points less to the lack of technical skills and the absence of certain competencies than to a deficit in the realms of politics — one that subverts both critical thinking and the notion of literacy as both critical interpretation and the possibility of intervention in the world. This type of illiteracy is not only incapable of dealing with complex and contested questions, it is also an excuse for glorifying the principle of self-interest as a paradigm for understanding politics. This is a form of illiteracy marked by the inability to see outside of the realm of the privatized self, an illiteracy in which the act of translation withers, reduced to a relic of another age. The United States is a country that is increasingly defined by a civic deficit, a chronic and deadly form of civic illiteracy that points to the failure of both its educational system and the growing ability of anti-democratic forces to use the educational force of the culture to promote the new illiteracy. As this widespread illiteracy has come to dominate American culture, we have moved from a culture of questioning to a culture of shouting and in doing so have restaged politics and power in both unproductive and anti-democratic ways.

Think of the forces at work in the larger culture that work overtime to situate us within a privatized world of fantasy, spectacle and resentment that is entirely removed from larger social problems and public concerns. For instance, corporate culture, with its unrelenting commercials, carpet-bombs our audio and visual fields with the message that the only viable way to define ourselves is to shop and consume in an orgy of private pursuits. Popular culture traps us in the privatized universe of celebrity culture, urging us to define ourselves through the often empty and trivialized and highly individualized interests of celebrities. Pharmaceutical companies urge us to deal with our problems, largely produced by economic and political forces out of our control, by taking a drug, one that will both chill us out and increase their profit margins. (This has now become an educational measure applied increasingly and indiscriminately to children in our schools.) Pop psychologists urge us to simply think positively, give each other hugs and pull ourselves up by the bootstraps while also insisting that those who confront reality and its mix of complex social issues are, as Chris Hedges points out, defeatists, a negative force that inhibits "our inner essence and power." [3] There is also the culture of militarization, which permeates all aspects of our lives — from our classrooms and the screen culture of reality television to the barrage of violent video games and the blood letting in sports such as popular wrestling — endlessly at work in developing modes of masculinity that celebrate toughness, violence, cruelty, moral indifference and misogyny.

All of these forces, whose educational influence should never be underestimated, constitute a new type of illiteracy, a kind of civic illiteracy in which it becomes increasingly impossible to connect the everyday problems that people face with larger social forces — thus depoliticizing their own sense of agency and making politics itself an empty gesture. Is it any wonder that politics is now mediated through a spectacle of anger, violence, humiliation and rage that mimics the likes of The Jerry Springer Show? It is not that we have become a society of the spectacle — though that is partly true — but that we have fallen prey to a new kind of illiteracy in which the distinction between illusion and reality is lost, just as the ability to experience our feelings of discontent and our fears of uncertainty are reduced to private troubles, paralyzing us in a sea of resentment waiting to be manipulated by extremists extending from religious fanatics to right-wing radio hosts. This is a prescription for a kind of rage that looks for easy answers, demands a heightened emotional release and resents any attempts to think through the connection between our individual woes and any number of larger social forces. A short list of such forces would include an unchecked system of finance, the anti-democratic power of the corporate state, the rise of multinationals and the destruction of the manufacturing base and the privatization of public schooling along with its devaluing of education as a public good. As the public collapses into the personal, the personal becomes "the only politics there is, the only politics with a tangible referent or emotional valence," [4] the formative educational and political conditions that make a democracy possible begin to disappear. Under such circumstances, the language of the social is either devalued, pathologized or ignored and all dreams of the future are now modeled around the narcissistic, privatized and self-indulgent needs of consumer and celebrity culture and the dictates of the allegedly free market. How else to explain the rage against big government but barely a peep against the rule of big corporations who increasingly control not only the government but almost every vital aspect of our lives from health care to the quality of our environment?
Stripped of its ethical and political importance, the public has been largely reduced to a space where private interests are displayed and the social order increasingly mimics a giant Dr. Phil show where notions of the public register as simply a conglomeration of private woes, tasks, conversations and problems. Most importantly, as the very idea of the social collapses into an utterly privatized discourse, everyday politics is decoupled from its democratic moorings and it becomes more difficult for people to develop a vocabulary for understanding how private problems and public issues constitute the very lifeblood of a vibrant politics and democracy itself. This is worth repeating. Emptied of any substantial content, democracy appears imperiled as individuals are unable to translate their privately suffered misery into genuine public debate, social concerns and collective action. This is a form of illiteracy that is no longer marginal to American society but is increasingly becoming one of its defining and more frightening features.

The raging narcissism that seems to shape every ad, film, television program and appeal now mediated through the power of the corporate state and consumer society is not merely a clinical and individual problem. It is the basis for a new kind of mass illiteracy that is endlessly reproduced through the venues of a number of anti-democratic institutions and forces that eschew critical debate, self-reflection, critical analysis and certainly modes of dissent that call the totality of a society into question. As American society becomes incapable of questioning itself, the new illiteracy parades as just its opposite. We are told that education is about learning how to take tests rather than learning how to think critically. We are told that anything that does not make us feel good is not worth bothering with. We are told that character is the only measure of how to judge people who are the victims of larger social forces that are mostly out of their control. When millions of people are unemployed, tossed out of their homes, homeless or living in poverty, the language of character, pop psychology, consumerism and celebrity culture are more than a diversion: they are fundamental to the misdirected anger, mob rule and illiteracy that frames the screaming, racism, lack of civility and often sheer and legitimate desperation.

Authoritarianism is often abetted by an inability of the public to grasp how questions of power, politics, history and public consciousness are mediated at the interface of private issues and public concerns. The ability to translate private problems into social considerations is fundamental to what it means to reactivate political sensibilities and conceive of ourselves as critical citizens, engaged public intellectuals and social agents. Just as an obsession with the private is at odds with a politics informed by public consciousness, it also burdens politics by stripping it of the kind of political imagination and collective hope necessary for a viable notion of meaning, hope and political agency.

Civic literacy is about more than enlarging the realm of critique and affirming the social. It is also about public responsibility, the struggle over democratic public life and the importance of critical education in a democratic society. The US government is more than willing to invest billions in wars, lead the world in arms sales and give trillions in tax cuts to the ultra-rich but barely acknowledges the need to invest in those educational and civic institutions from schools to the arts to a massive jobs creation program — that enable individuals to be border crossers, capable of connecting the private and the public as part of a more vibrant understanding of politics, identity, agency and governance. The new illiteracy is not the cause of our problems, which are deeply rooted in larger social, economic and political forces that have marked the emergence of the corporate state, a deadly form of racism parading as color blindness and a ruthless market fundamentalism since the 1970s, but it is a precondition for locking individuals into a system in which they are complicitous in their own exploitation, disposability and potential death.

The new illiteracy is about more than not knowing how to read the book or the word; it is about not knowing how to read the world. The challenge it poses in a democracy is one of both learning how to reclaim literacy so as to be able to narrate oneself and the world from a position of agency. But it is also about unlearning those modes of learning that internalize modes of ignorance based on the concerted refusal to know, be self-reflective and act with principled dignity. It is a problem as serious as any we have ever faced in the United States. At the core of any viable democratic politics is the ability to question the assumptions central to an imagined democracy. This is not merely a political issue but an educational issue, one that points to the need for modes of civic education that provide the knowledge and competencies for young and old alike to raise important questions about what education and literacy itself should accomplish in a democracy. [5] This is not an issue we can ignore too much longer.