Addicts are often portrayed as compelled by their addiction and thus as a paradigm of unfree action and mitigated blame. This chapter argues that our best scientific theories of addiction reveal that, psychologically, addicts are not categorically different from non-addicts. There is no pairing of contemporary accounts of addiction and of prominent theories of moral responsibility that can justify our intuitions about the mitigation of addicts but not non-addicts. Two conclusions are advanced. First, we should either treat (...) addicts as we normally treat non-addicts (as fully culpable) or embrace the skeptical conclusion that everyone is less responsible than we thought—perhaps not responsible at all. Second, we should be doubtful that theorizing about responsibility will be advanced by focusing on particular kinds of psychopathologies. (shrink)

An important philosophical issue in the study of addiction is what difference the fact that a person is addicted makes to attributions of autonomy (and responsibility) to their drug-oriented behavior. In spite of accumulating evidence suggesting the role of emotional dysregulation in understanding addiction, it has received surprisingly little attention in the debate about this issue. I claim that, as a result, an important aspect of the autonomy impairment of many addicted individuals has been largely overlooked. A widely (...) shared assumption in the philosophical literature is that for addiction to impair a person’s autonomy it has to make them (in some sense) take drugs against their will. So-called “willing addicts” are therefore usually seen as exempted from the autonomy impairment believed to characterize “unwilling addicts”, the latter being those who ‘truly want’ to stop using drugs but find their attempts repeatedly derailed by failures of self-control. In this article, I argue that the association between addiction and emotional dysregulation shows why this assumption is false. Emotional dysregulation is not only consistent with the possibility that many addicts take drugs ‘willingly’, it supports the hypothesis that they use drugs because they truly want to. The article proposes an explanation for why emotional dysregulation should nevertheless be seen as an aspect of their loss of control and an important reason why they have impaired autonomy. I end by exploring some implications of this account for addict’s decision-making capacity when they are prescribed the drugs to which they are addicted. -/- . (shrink)

Background: Recent literature on addiction and judgments about the characteristics of agents has focused on the implications of adopting a ‘brain disease’ versus ‘moral weakness’ model of addiction. Typically, such judgments have to do with what capacities an agent has (e.g., the ability to abstain from substance use). Much less work, however, has been conducted on the relationship between addiction and judgments about an agent’s identity, including whether or to what extent an individual is seen as the (...) same person after becoming addicted. Methods: We conducted a series of vignette-based experiments (total N = 3,620) to assess lay attitudes concerning addiction and identity persistence, systematically manipulating key characteristics of agents and their drug of addiction. Conclusions: In Study 1, we found that US participants judged an agent who became addicted to drugs as being closer to ‘a completely different person’ than ‘completely the same person’ as the agent who existed prior to the addiction. In Studies 2-6, we investigated the intuitive basis for this result, finding that lay judgments of altered identity as a consequence of drug use and addiction are driven primarily by perceived negative changes in the moral character of drug users, who are seen as having deviated from their good true selves. (shrink)

Normative thinking about addiction has traditionally been divided between, on the one hand, a medical model which sees addiction as a disease characterized by compulsive and relapsing drug use over which the addict has little or no control and, on the other, a moral model which sees addiction as a choice characterized by voluntary behaviour under the control of the addict. Proponents of the former appeal to evidence showing that regular consumption of drugs causes persistent changes in (...) the brain structures and functions known to be involved in the motivation of behavior. On this evidence, it is often concluded that becoming addicted involves a transition from voluntary, chosen drug use to non-voluntary compulsive drug use. Against this view, proponents of the moral model provide ample evidence that addictive drug use involves voluntary chosen behaviour. In this paper we argue that although they are right about something, both views are mistaken. We present a third model that neither rules out the view of addictive drug use as compulsive, nor that it involves voluntary chosen behavior. -/- . (shrink)

In this paper, we contend that the psychology of addiction is similar to the psychology of ordinary, non-addictive temptation in important respects, and explore the ways in which these parallels can illuminate both addiction and ordinary action. The incentive salience account of addiction proposed by Robinson and Berridge (1993; 2001; 2008) entails that addictive desires are not in their nature different from many of the desires had by non-addicts; what is different is rather the way that addictive (...) desires are acquired, which in turn affects their strength. We examine these “incentive salience” desires, both in addicts and non-addicts, contrasting them with more cognitive desires. On this account, the self-control challenge faced by addicted agents is not different in kind from that faced by non-addicted agents – though the two may, of course, differ greatly in degree of difficulty. We explore a general model of self-control for both the addict and the non-addict, stressing that self-control may be employed at three different stages, and examining the ways in which it might be strengthened. This helps elucidate a general model of intentional action. (shrink)

Does addiction to heroin undermine the voluntariness of heroin addicts' consent to take part in research which involves giving them free and legal heroin? This question has been raised in connection with research into the effectiveness of heroin prescription as a way of treating dependent heroin users. Participants in such research are required to give their informed consent to take part. Louis C. Charland has argued that we should not presume that heroin addicts are competent to do this since (...) heroin addiction by nature involves a loss of ability to resist the desire for heroin. In this article, I argue that Charland is right that we should not presume that heroin addicts are competent to consent, but not for the reason he thinks. In fact, as Charland's critics correctly point out, there is plenty of evidence showing that heroin addicts can resist their desire for heroin. These critics are wrong, however, to conclude from this that we should presume that heroin addicts are competent to give their voluntary consent. There are, I shall argue, other conditions associated with heroin addiction that might constrain heroin addicts' choice in ways likely to undermine the voluntariness of their consent. In order to see this, we need to move beyond the focus on the addicts' desires for heroin and instead consider the wider social and psychological circumstances of heroin addiction, as well as the effects these circumstances may have on the addicts' beliefs about the nature of their options. (shrink)

Mental conflict not always amounts to weakness of will. Irresistible motives not always speak of addiction. This book proposes an integrated account of what singles out these phenomena: addiction and weakness of will are both forms of secondary akrasia. By integrating these two phenomena into a classical conception of akrasia as poor resolution of an unnecessary conflict – valuing without intending while intending without valuing – the book makes an original contribution to central issues in moral psychology and (...) philosophy of action, including the relationship between responsibility and intentional agency, and the nature and scope of moral appraisal. In particular, the proposed integrated account is grounded in a general theory of responsibility and a related model of action as actualisation bringing together insights from both volitional and non-volitional conceptions, such as the intuition that it is unfair to hold a person responsible for things that are not up to her and the parity of actions and attitudes as legitimate objects of moral appraisal. Furthermore, the actualisation model supports a distinctive version of the Guise of the Good thesis which links valuing and intending in terms of success in action and explains why akratic actions and their offspring – addiction and weakness of will – are necessarily less than successful yet fully responsible. (shrink)

How should addictive behavior be explained? In terms of neurobiological illness and compulsion, or as a choice made freely, even rationally, in the face of harmful social or psychological circumstances? Some of the disagreement between proponents of the prevailing medical models and choice models in the science of addiction centres on the notion of “loss of control” as a normative characterization of addiction. In this article I examine two of the standard interpretations of loss of control in (...) class='Hi'>addiction, one according to which addicts have lost free will, the other according to which their will is weak. I argue that both interpretations are mistaken and propose therefore an alternative based on a dual-process approach. This alternative neither rules out a capacity in addicts to rationally choose to engage in drug-oriented behavior, nor the possibility that addictive behavior can be compulsive and depend upon harmful changes in their brains caused by the regular use of drugs. (shrink)

Addicts sometimes engage in such spectacularly self-destructive behavior that they seem to act under compulsion. I briefly review the claim that addiction is not compulsive at all. I then consider recent accounts of addiction by Holton and Schroeder, which characterize addiction in terms of abnormally strong motivations. However, this account can only explain the apparent compulsivity of addiction if we assume—contrary to what we know about addicts—that the desires are so strong as to be irresistible. I (...) then consider accounts that invoke the phenomenon of “ego depletion,” according to which a person can resist temptation for a while, but not indefinitely. Implicit in this account is the assumption that addiction-related desires persist long enough to deplete the addict’s willpower. The balance of the paper argues that the persistence of the desire to consume drugs is a significant form of dysfunction in its own right, and that it makes an important and independent contribution to the compulsivity of addiction. I argue that addiction involves dysfunction in a mechanism that normally prevents a person from being tempted to do something that would invite disaster. (shrink)

Impairment of self-control is often said to be a defining feature of addiction. Yet many addicts display what appears to be a considerable amount of control over their drug-oriented actions. Not only are their actions clearly intentional and frequently carried out in a conscious and deliberate manner, there is evidence that many addicts are responsive to a wide range of ordinary incentives and counter-incentives. Moreover, addicts have a wide variety of reasons for using drugs, reasons which often seem to (...) go a long way towards explaining their drug-oriented behavior. Many use drugs, for example, to cope with stressful or traumatic experiences. In this article I argue that some standard philosophical explanations of addicts’ impairment of self-control are inadequate, and propose an alternative. (shrink)

Addiction and certain varieties of interpersonal attachment share strikingly similar psycho-behavioral structures. Neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers have often adduced such similarities between addiction and attachment to argue that many typical cases of romantic love represent addictions to one’s partner and thus might be appropriate candidates for medical treatment. In this paper, I argue for the relatively neglected thesis that some paradigmatic cases of addiction are aptly characterized as emotional attachments to their objects. This has implications for how (...) we should understand the nature of addiction and for the ethics of attachment more broadly. (shrink)

It is common to think of addiction as involving behavior which in some sense is ?out of control.? But does this mean addictive actions occur because of compulsion or because of ordinary weakness of will? Many philosophers argue that addictive actions occur because of weakness of will, since there is plenty of evidence suggesting that they are not caused by irresistible desires. In fact, addicts seem, in general, to perform these actions freely in the sense of having the ability (...) to refrain from doing so. In this paper I argue, first, that it is not the addiction-as-compulsion view that is mistaken, but rather the view that irresistible desires are a defining feature of compulsion. Second, drawing on some results in addiction neuroscience, I construct and defend a new analysis of compulsivity that distinguishes addictive from weak-willed actions in a way that is consistent with the view that addictive actions are performed freely. (shrink)

In addiction, apparently causally significant phenomena occur at a huge number of levels; addiction is affected by biomedical, neurological, pharmacological, clinical, social, and politico-legal factors, among many others. In such a complex, multifaceted field of inquiry, it seems very unlikely that all the many layers of explanation will prove amenable to any simple or straightforward, reductive analysis; if we are to unify the many different sciences of addiction while respecting their causal autonomy, then, what we are likely (...) to need is an integrative framework. In this paper, we propose the theory of “Externalist” or “4E” – for extended, embodied, embedded, and enactive – cognition, which focuses on the empirical and conceptual centrality of the wider extra-neural environment to cognitive and mental processes, as a candidate for such a framework. We begin in Section 2 by outlining how such a perspective might apply to psychiatry more generally, before turning to some of the ways it can illuminate addiction in particular: Section 3 points to a way of dissolving the classic dichotomy between the “choice model” and “disease model” in the addiction literature; Section 4 shows how 4E concepts can clarify the interplay between the addict’s brain and her environment; and Section 5 considers how these insights help to explain the success of some recovery strategies, and may help to inform the development of new ones. (shrink)

Addiction and obsessive behaviors are commonly interpreted as disorders of the brain’s reward system. However, many dominant models in neuroscience overlook the role of the search for meaning, identity, and existential peace in intensifying these cycles. This article presents an interdisciplinary conceptual framework at the intersection of neuroscience, philosophy of consciousness, and spirituality, proposing that addiction is not merely the product of biological pleasure-seeking, but also the result of the neocortex’s attempt to extract meaning and lasting fulfillment from (...) the brain’s survival-based mechanisms. -/- Within this framework, the reward system and the midbrain originally evolved for survival, movement, and motivation. Yet the modern brain—or neocortex—intervenes in this cycle by assigning meaning to pleasurable experiences, thereby drawing human beings into repetitive patterns of obsession, dependency, and addiction. As a result, individuals become trapped in the continuous reproduction of desire, memory, and anticipation rather than directly experiencing consciousness itself. -/- The article also distinguishes between “obsessive pleasure” and the “joy and peace arising from awareness,” suggesting that lasting meaning and fulfillment emerge not from intensifying reward cycles, but from experiencing a direct and non-conditioned form of consciousness, referred to in this paper as “energetic consciousness.”. (shrink)

I show that Pickard’s argument against the irresistibility of addiction fails because her proposed dilemma, according to which either drug-seeking does not count as action or addiction is resistible, is flawed; and that is the case whether or not one endorses Pickard’s controversial definition of action. Briefly, we can easily imagine cases in which drug-seeking meets Pickard’s conditions for agency without thereby implying that the addiction was not irresistible, as when the drug addict may take more than (...) one route to go meet her dealer. (shrink)

Supposing that addicts choose to act as they do, rather than being compelled to behave in particular ways, what explains the choices that they make? Hannah Pickard has recently pointed out that we can go a long way to answering this question if we can make sense of why addicts value the ends they pursue. She argues that addiction is a social identity that gives purpose and structure to life and that the choices that addicts make are valuable to (...) them as ways of sustaining this social identity. But if addicts freely make choices towards ends that they perceive as valuable in terms of a social identity to which they contribute, and therefore if addiction involves the deployment of quite considerable agential apparatus, how are we to hold on to the natural assumption that addictions are disempowering? In this paper I present an answer to this question. Drawing on the resources of the phenomenological tradition, I argue that some social identities give purpose and structure to life in a way that inhibits, rather than enables, the exercise of a capacity that is central to our form of life. I elaborate the hypothesis that paradigmatic cases of addiction involve this sort of disempowering social identity. (shrink)

This paper argues that the emotional dynamics that structure a person’s relationship to drug use and their environment over time are central to understanding how agency is both operative and constrained in addiction. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 69 people with alcohol and opioid addictions, we conceptualize drug use as a form of affective scaffolding – a socially and materially situated strategy for emotion regulation. When this scaffolding becomes inflexible and monopolizing, immediate emotion regulation is prioritized over long-term self-regulation, (...) and an emotional distress and regulation loop results, systematically inclining the agent toward ongoing drug use. We propose that this dynamic gradually constricts a person’s affective repertoire, diminishing the salience of certain diachronic concerns and values, and making it more difficult to sustain behaviour oriented toward recovery. The paper closes by introducing the concept of affective recovery niches – structured environments that support alternative patterns of emotion regulation to develop. We focus, in particular, on the important role that other people can play in the recovery niche. Recovery niches disrupt the distress and regulation loop and restore one’s affective repertoire. Thus, they counteract the affective dynamics that we argue keep people stuck in addiction and make new forms of agency possible. (shrink)

This paper argues that addiction and suicide are not two degrees of the same self-destructive process. Addiction is a form of directed self-destruction governed by a partial internal determination that remains structurally tied to the continuability of the larger self that bears it. It therefore degrades the self without seeking its immediate abolition and is intrinsically allied with repetition, survival, and renewed enactment. Suicide, by contrast, is destruction ordered not to continuation but to extinction: the end governing it (...) no longer operates within the continuability of the self as a sustaining bearer. The paper argues that addiction is not total collapse but a directed form of collapse under an internal destructive asymmetry, whereas suicide belongs to a different structural configuration. More broadly, self-destruction is shown to be a non-uniform category differentiated by governing ends and by relation to self-continuability. (shrink)

In this article I address the question of what makes addiction morally problematic, and seek to answer it by drawing on values salient in the sub-Saharan African philosophical tradition. Specifically, I appeal to life-force and communal relationship, each of which African philosophers have at times advanced as a foundational value, and spell out how addiction, or at least salient instances of it, could be viewed as unethical for flouting them. I do not seek to defend either vitality or (...) community as the best explanation of when and why addiction is immoral, instead arguing that each of these characteristically African values grounds an independent and plausible account of that. I conclude that both vitalism and communalism merit consideration as rivals to accounts that Western ethicists would typically make, according to which addiction is immoral insofar as it degrades rationality or autonomy, as per Kantianism, or causes pain or dissatisfaction, à la utilitarianism. (shrink)

The global rise of addictions in the modern world is alarming. What the discipline of modern Western psychology fails to recognize is the connection between the loss of a sense of the sacred and the rise in addiction and mental illness. Due to the spiritual desolation prevalent in the present day and its traumatizing effects, the human search for wholeness and healing is all too often diverted into destructive and dysfunctional behaviors. It is only a spiritual approach to the (...) science of the soul that allows psychology to restore the categories of Spirit, soul, and body, along with their corresponding degrees of reality. This paper examines the root causes of addiction in order to better understand the collective search for wholeness and healing. The framework employed for this study is the perennial psychology—an application of the universal wisdom found in humanity’s spiritual patrimony to the proper understanding of this burgeoning crisis. The objective of the study is to propose a more integrative approach to assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of addiction. (shrink)

In what sense is a person addicted to drugs or alcohol incompetent, and so a legitimate object of coercive treatment? The standard tests for competence do not pick out the capacity that is lost in addiction: the capacity to properly regulate consumption. This paper is an attempt to sketch a justificatory framework for understanding the conditions under which addicted persons may be treated against their will. These conditions rarely obtain, for they apply only when addiction is extremely severe (...) and great harm threatens. It will be argued also that to widen the measures currently in place in some jurisdictions, though philosophically well-motivated, would require very strong evidence of a set of conditions disposing a person to an addictive future. It is doubtful that any such currently available evidence is strong enough to justify coercive treatment. Nevertheless, coercive treatment of addiction is already a reality, with the potential for more, and so some discussion will be presented regarding the extraordinary safeguards necessary to prevent misapplication of such treatment policies. (shrink)

This paper tries to show that the naturalistic view of addiction is mired in contradictions that stem from reducing the addict to a weak-willed subject who loses control over his or her body. From a phenomenological perspective, addiction reveals itself to be a habit which eventually becomes harmful, but has its primary sources in the embodied needs of a worldly subject. The aim of this paper is to uncover the dimensions of the lived addiction that are neglected (...) in the contemporary naturalistic discourse: the lived-body and the worldly context of the addict. Firstly, we try to do justice to the variety of addictions by underlying that their new and surprising forms are determined by the intersubjective tissue wherein the subject operates. Secondly, the loss of control in addiction, how the subject deals with the tendency to satisfy a need, is experienced as powerlessness, as expressed in the accounts of ecstasy addicts regarding altered states of mind. The last section of this paper will argue that this sense of powerlessness cannot be equated with a weakness of the will because a strong, forceful will engenders the same vertigo of being prey to strange powers. The embodied aspect of addiction and the spontaneous, bodily need it saturates will clarify further this claim. (shrink)

This paper argues that the crucial feature of the drug-related desires experienced by addicted agents is not that they ‘push’ the agent with a force she cannot oppose, but that they are not easily undermined by things that normally have the ability to undermine desires —in other words, that they are extraordinarily recalcitrant. As a result, the disposition to experience these desires is very persistent over the long-term, manifesting itself in particular episodes of wanting to use drugs that recur with (...) great frequency. Both the persistence and the recurrence of these desires, it is argued, contribute to a diminished ability to respond to relevant reasons that speak against drug use. (shrink)

In an earlier article in this journal I argued that the question of whether heroin addicts can give voluntary consent to take part in research which involves giving them a choice of free heroin does not – in contrast with a common assumption in the bioethics literature – depend exclusively on whether or not they possess the capacity to resist their desire for heroin. In some cases, circumstances and beliefs might undermine the voluntariness of the choices a person makes even (...) if they do possess a capacity for self-control. Based on what I took to be a plausible definition of voluntariness, I argued that the circumstances and beliefs typical of many vulnerable heroin addicts are such that we have good reasons to suspect they cannot give voluntary consent to take part in such research, even assuming their desire for heroin is not irresistible. In a recent article in this journal, Uusitalo and Broers object to this on the grounds that I misdescribe heroin addicts' options set, that the definition of voluntariness on which I rely is unrealistic and too demanding, and, more generally, that my view of heroin addiction is flawed. I think their arguments derive from a misunderstanding of the view I expressed in my article. In what follows I hope therefore to clarify my position. (shrink)

This paper examines a recurring failure mode in recursive and meta-cognitive research systems: -/- recursive cognition becoming structurally adaptive to preserving itself. -/- The paper introduces the concept of coherence addiction: -/- a condition in which recursive systems progressively substitute: -/- • coherence, • integration, • continuity, • and explanatory closure -/- for: -/- • external falsification, • eliminative asymmetry, • host-domain grounding, • and operational constraint. -/- The paper does not argue against coherence itself. -/- Coherence is often (...) a necessary property of healthy reasoning systems. -/- The failure emerges when coherence acquires survivorship independent of adversarial constraint. -/- The central claim is therefore narrow: -/- recursive systems fail when coherence becomes a survival strategy rather than an output of constraint contact. -/- Three interacting layers are identified: -/- 1. psychological reinforcement coherence becomes emotionally stabilizing; 1. epistemic failure external constraint loses override authority; 1. systemic machine amplification large language models recursively reinforce continuation, synthesis, and semantic integration. -/- The paper argues that recursive human–LLM systems create unusually powerful coherence feedback loops because LLMs function as: -/- • continuation engines, • abstraction synthesizers, • semantic stabilizers, • and probabilistic coherence amplifiers. -/- The result is not necessarily irrationality or psychosis. The more common failure mode is: -/- progressive reduction in the system’s ability to distinguish structural survivorship from epistemic legitimacy. -/- The paper concludes that healthy recursive systems require: -/- • executable falsifiers, • local killability, • host-domain adjudication, • public auditability, • asymmetry between generation and evaluation, • and mandatory termination conditions. -/- Without these constraints, recursive systems drift toward: -/- • semantic captivity, • universal explanatory inflation, • and self-sealing continuation. -/- The governing invariant remains: -/- \boxed{ \text{recursion without measurable eliminative work is non-admissible} } -/- ⸻ -/- 1. Introduction -/- Recursive systems often begin as exploratory structures. -/- They generate: -/- • abstraction, • recombination, • synthesis, • candidate multiplicity, • and conceptual compression. -/- Under sufficient constraint, recursion can produce: -/- • insight, • refinement, • discriminability, • and operational structure. -/- Coherence itself is not the problem. -/- Healthy reasoning systems require coherence because: -/- • contradictions reduce operational stability, • unresolved mappings weaken reconstruction, • and incoherent structures fail under repeated constraint interaction. -/- Coherence therefore functions as: -/- • an indicator of structural organization, not • an independent authorization mechanism. -/- The failure emerges when coherence acquires survivorship independent of constraint. -/- At this point: -/- • reinterpretation replaces falsification, • continuation replaces elimination, • and recursive stability begins preserving itself. -/- The recursive framework no longer survives because it remains constrained. -/- It survives because continuation has become psychologically and structurally rewarding. -/- This paper refers to that condition as: -/- coherence addiction. -/- ⸻ . (shrink)

Previous discussions of addiction have often focused on the question of whether addiction is a disease. This discussion distinguishes that question – the disease question – from the question of whether addiction is a disability. I argue that, however one answers the disease question, and indeed on almost any credible account of addiction, addiction is a disability. I then consider the implications of this view, or why it matters that addiction is a disability. The (...) disease model of addiction has led many to see addiction as primarily a medical problem, and to make medical treatment of the addicted person the first priority in addressing addiction. Once addiction is viewed as a disability, different concerns are foregrounded. The problem of addiction resides not only in the addicted person, but also in the social environment in which the addicted person finds herself. The fundamental ethical question about addiction is not how addicted persons can be treated or otherwise changed, but how a just society can make reasonable accommodations for addicted persons. (shrink)

The addiction literature is fraught with conceptual confusions, stalled debates, and an unfortunate lack of clear and careful attempts to delineate the phenomenon of addiction in a way that might lead to consensus. My dissertation has two overarching aims, one metaphysical and one practical. -/- The first aim is to defend an account of addiction as the systematic disposition to fail to control one’s desires to engage in certain types of behaviors. I defend the inclusion of desires (...) and impaired control in the definition, and I flesh out the notion of systematicity central to my dispositionalist framework. I engage the so-called ‘disease vs. choice’ debate, criticizing its presupposition that we are dealing here with a dichotomy and arguing that the movement towards a middle ground is the right track to take. I explain how the dispositionalist account can capture this middle ground and how it serves to expand upon existing views, in particular by filling in the metaphysical details. -/- The second aim is to show how the account I defend can help to unify the extant views and disciplinary perspectives in the literature. Both the dispositionalist aspect of my framework and the methodology adopted (applied ontology and systematic metaphysics) can move the literature towards both substantive and methodological unification. This will help to clear up conceptual confusions, resolve (or sometimes dissolve) apparently intractable disputes, situate different research perspectives with respect to each other, facilitate interdisciplinary dialogue, and help to frame important questions about addiction. Finally, I offer the beginnings of an ontology of addiction, which will provide a terminologically well-structured guide to the addiction literature in a way that will facilitate more effective and efficient communication and data management across disciplines. (shrink)

We are consumers of drugs and news, and sometimes call ourselves addicts or junkies of one or both. I propose to take the concept of news – more generally, doxastic – addiction seriously. I define doxastic addiction and relate this type of addiction to echo chambers and religious belief. I show how this analysis directs attention to appropriate interventions to help doxastic addicts, and how it offers a new type of justification for limits on free speech. -/- (...) . (shrink)

It is often assumed that, except perhaps in a few rare cases, people with addiction can be aptly held responsible for having acquired the condition. In this chapter, I consider the argument that supports this view and draw attention to a number of challenges that can be raised against it. Assuming that early decisions to use drugs were made in possession of normal-range psychological capacities, I consider the key question of whether drug users who later became addicted should have (...) known that addiction was a likely outcome of their decisions to use drugs in a way that makes them blameworthy for their lack of foresight. I focus on three different points of contention surrounding this claim: how likely the outcome to be predicted was, how tolerable risk should be weighed against the expected value of decisions to use, and how reliable the relevant predictive abilities of the average person are. Once we consider in some detail what would have to be true in order for someone to be aptly held responsible for becoming addicted, the prospects for making a convincing case to that effect look, I argue, somewhat more uncertain than they might at first appear. (shrink)

According to Jerome Wakefield’s harmful dysfunction account, a mental disorder must involve an objective dysfunction couched in evolutionary terms. However, selected effects functions are indeterminate because (i) the same trait can be both selectively advantageous and disadvantageous, and (ii) the functional activity of a trait can be assessed according to conflicting norms, given the trait’s place in a hierarchy of functions. Therefore, there may be a dysfunction that can be described in multiple empirically adequate ways. The choices involved in these (...) cases are value-laden. Some cases of addiction may fit this mold, involving indeterminacy that invites opposing value judgments. (shrink)

This paper approaches the question of why addiction can excuse in a novel way. Instead of focusing on the question of what addiction is, I focus on the question of what excuses are. I argue that excuses help us reach others in the sense of coming closer to the ideal of judging others as they deserve to be judged. In particular, excuses do this by blocking inferences it would otherwise be reasonable to make when confronted with wrong. Having (...) defended this picture of excuses, I show how an answer to the question of why addiction can excuse falls out of it. (shrink)

In this essay I argue that a comprehensive understanding of addiction and its treatment should include an existential perspective. I provide a brief overview of an existential perspective of addiction and recovery, which will contextualize the remainder of the essay. I then present a case study of how the six-step philosophical practice method of Logic-Based Therapy can assist with issues that often arise in addiction treatment framed through an existential perspective.

Can addiction be credibly invoked as an excuse for moral harms secondary to particular decisions to use drugs? This question raises two distinct sets of issues. First, there is the question of whether addiction is the sort of consideration that could, given suitable assumptions about the details of the case, excuse or mitigate moral blameworthiness. Most discussions of addiction and moral responsibility have focused on this question, and many have argued that addiction excuses. Here I articulate (...) what I take to be the best argument for this view, based on the substantial difficulty that people with severe addiction experience in controlling drug-related behavior. This, I argue, may in some cases be sufficient to ground a mitigating excuse, given the way in which addiction undermines agents’ responsiveness to relevant moral reasons to do otherwise. Much less attention has been devoted to a second set of issues that critically affect the possibility of applying this mitigating excuse in particular cases, derived from the ambivalent nature of agential control in addiction. In order to find a fitting response to moral harm, the person with the right standing to blame must make a judgment about the extent to which the agent possessed certain morally relevant capacities at the time of the act. In practice, this will often prove tremendously difficult to assess. The ethical challenge for the person with the right standing to blame is fundamentally one of making a judgment about matters that seem underdetermined by the available evidence. (shrink)

-/- The addictive Design of Social Media and How to Break Free -/- In today’s digital world, social media has become a central part of daily life for billions of people. While these platforms offer connection, entertainment, and information, they are also deliberately engineered to be addictive. Understanding how social media apps create addiction—and how we can break free—is essential for preserving our mental well-being and taking control of our time. -/- How Social Media Creates Addiction -/- Social (...) media platforms are not addictive by accident. They are purposefully designed to capture and hold user attention through a range of psychological and technological strategies. -/- One of the most powerful tools is the use of variable rewards. Just like a slot machine, social media delivers unpredictable likes, comments, or shares. This unpredictability releases dopamine, a brain chemical linked to pleasure and motivation, making the experience highly engaging and difficult to stop. -/- Another key feature is the infinite scroll and autoplay functions. These remove natural stopping points, encouraging users to continue scrolling or watching without pause. There’s no “end,” which makes it easy to lose track of time. -/- Social media also plays on our desire for social validation. Each like or comment reinforces our self-worth, drawing us back to see how others respond to our posts. Push notifications amplify this effect by constantly reminding us to return, triggering a fear of missing out (FOMO). -/- Behind the scenes, algorithmic personalization keeps the feed tailored to each user’s preferences, ensuring the content feels endlessly relevant and stimulating. This personalization makes it harder to disengage because every scroll feels rewarding. -/- Additionally, social media encourages social comparison, often leading to envy or insecurity as users see curated highlights of others’ lives. Features like streaks, badges, and follower counts turn usage into a game, adding competitive pressure and making the platform feel like a challenge that must be maintained. -/- How to Break Free from Social Media Addiction -/- Breaking free from social media addiction doesn’t require quitting entirely—it means using these platforms more intentionally. Here are practical strategies for regaining control: -/- 1. Set Time Limits Use built-in screen time tools to limit daily use to 30 minutes or less. Apps like Freedom, StayFocusd, and Forest can support this effort. -/- 2. Turn Off Notifications Disable unnecessary alerts that interrupt your day. This reduces the constant urge to check your phone. -/- 3. Create Friction Move social media apps off your home screen or log out after each session. Better yet, use the web version, which is slower and less addictive. -/- 4. Schedule Usage Time Designate specific times in the day to check social media. Avoid using it first thing in the morning or before bed to protect your mental clarity. -/- 5. Use Greyscale Mode Turning your phone display to black-and-white reduces the visual rewards of colorful icons and posts, making social media less appealing. -/- 6. Unfollow and Mute Clean your feed. Follow only those who inspire or educate you. Unfollow or mute accounts that waste your time or trigger negativity. -/- 7. Replace the Habit Substitute social media time with healthier activities like reading, exercising, journaling, or meaningful conversations. -/- 8. Practice Mindfulness Before opening an app, pause and ask: “Why am I doing this right now? What do I really need?” This breaks automatic behavior. -/- 9. Take Digital Detox Days Choose one day a week to avoid social media completely. Use that time to reconnect with hobbies, nature, or offline relationships. -/- 10. Set Bigger Goals Focus on personal, educational, or creative goals that give life deeper meaning. When your offline world is fulfilling, the pull of social media weakens naturally. -/- Conclusion -/- Social media platforms are powerful tools, but their addictive design can quietly consume hours of our lives and affect our mental health. Recognizing the tactics used to keep us engaged allows us to fight back with intention and awareness. By setting boundaries, practicing mindfulness, and reconnecting with real-world experiences, we can regain control and use social media in a way that supports, rather than dominates, our lives. -/- . (shrink)

Abstract Addiction is a complex neurological disorder that alters the brain's chemistry and affects behavior. It can stem from both substance-related and behavioral stimuli, disrupting the brain's reward system. This paper presents a comprehensive list of addictions involving brain chemistry and provides an overview of evidence-based treatment solutions. Understanding the neurochemical underpinnings of addiction is essential for developing effective, targeted interventions. -/- .

ABSTRACT Clinicians, researchers and the informed public have come to view addiction as a brain disease. However, in nature even extreme events often reflect normal processes, for instance the principles of plate tectonics explain earthquakes as well as the gradual changes in the face of the earth. In the same way, excessive drug use is predicted by general principles of choice. One of the implications of this result is that drugs do not turn addicts into compulsive drug users; they (...) retain the capacity to say ?no?. In support of the logical implications of the choice theory approach to addiction, research reveals that most addicts quit using drugs by about age 30, that most quit without professional help, that the correlates of quitting are the correlates of decision making, and, according to the most recent epidemiological evidence, the probability of quitting remains constant over time and independent of the onset of dependence. This last result implies that, after an initial period of heavy drug use, remission is independent of any further exposure to drugs. In short, there is much empirical support for the claim that addiction emerges as a function of the rules of everyday choice. (shrink)

The common conception is that philosophy is an armchair endeavour. For many (Žižek 2023), the task of philosophy is just to provide the right kinds of questions to the sciences upon which they can develop further tools etc. The research will aim to show that it is not just the right kind of questions that philosophy can provide, instead, it can provide practical solutions as well. The research paper will primarily aim to showcase a methodology for addiction recovery based (...) on the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta, which can be broadly applied to most kinds of addiction. The biggest problem with most kinds of addiction treatment programmes is relapse. So, can we devise a methodology which not only cures the problem of addiction but also provides aid in refraining from subsequent relapse? (shrink)

On the moral model of addiction, addicts are morally responsible and blameworthy for their addictive behaviours. The model is sometimes resisted on the grounds that blaming addicts is incompatible with treating addiction in a compassionate and non-punitive way. I argue the moral model is consistent with addressing addiction compassionately and non-punitively and better accounts for both the role of addicts’ agency in the recovery process. If an addict is responsible for their addictive behaviours, and that behaviour is (...) in some way bad or wrong, then that addict is blameworthy. If not, then they are not. But, if their addictive behaviour or behaviour which contributes to and perpetuates their condition of addiction, is not bad or wrong, then addiction is not an issue of moral concern. Addicts are blameworthy, but attributions of blame need not be followed by harsh treatment or punishment. Because blame and harsh treatment or punishment can be separated, there is no good reason to reject the moral model of addiction. (shrink)

Providing heroin to heroin addicts taking part in medical trials to assess the effectiveness of the drug as a treatment alternative, breaches ethical research standards, some ethicists maintain. Heroin addicts, they say, are unable to consent voluntarily to take part in these trials. Other ethicists disagree. In our view, both sides of the debate have an inadequate understanding of voluntariness. In this article we therefore offer a fuller conception, one which allows for a more flexible, case-to-case approach in which some (...) heroin addicts are considered capable of consenting voluntarily, others not. An advantage of this approach, it is argued, is that it provides a safety net to minimize the risk of inflicting harm on trial participants. (shrink)

Currently there is such a cornucopia of conflicting theories in the field of addiction studies that it has become exceedingly difficult for treatment providers, therapists, and policymakers to integrate this vast field of knowledge into effective treatment. Since such a chaotic overabundance of treatment theories, styles, and definitions cloud the field of addictionology, many therapists claim their field is in need of a paradigm shift. In the last 20 years an integrative and compound model has emerged known as the (...) biopsychosocial model, but without a solid and comprehensive meta-framework, syncretistic confusion can result when therapists pick and choose techniques without direction or an overall rationale. To address this problem, Guy du Plessis applies integral theory as a conceptual framework for understanding addiction, as well as a meta-therapeutic framework for therapists. The integral foundation of addiction outlined in this book provides researchers, academics, treatment providers, policy makers, and therapists with a conceptual architectonic of addiction and its treatment that is integrative, inclusive, and practical. An Integral Foundation for Addiction Treatment belongs on the shelf of every addiction treatment therapist, and anyone else who is impacted or influenced by the topic. (shrink)

Addictive behavior sometimes involves harmful moral transgressions for which the addicted individual may be blamed. However, blame may motivate addiction stigma, which has its own harmful consequences, including failures to provide or seek out treatment and recovery resources. Minimizing blame and stigma, while acknowledging the moral dimension of addictive behavior, thus recommends itself as a worthy public health objective. The disease and choice models of addiction both face difficulties in reducing stigma, the latter because harmful choices are considered (...) culpable. By challenging the widely held libertarian conception of human agency, an explicitly deterministic understanding of the genesis and expression of addiction, including voluntary choices, can help keep reactive attitudes to wrongdoing in check. This will mitigate the perceived blameworthiness of addicted individuals, thus reducing stigma and increasing the chances of finding compassionate and effective care. Such an approach to addiction will recognize the need for moral accountability but not include punitive attitudes and policies justified by belief in libertarian agency. (shrink)

This paper presents a descriptive account of temporal distortion, compression, and expansion as they appear within addiction experience. The focus remains on the phenomenological shape of lived time, not on psychological causation or treatment.

A Modern Coleridge shows the interrelatedness of the discourses of cultivation, addiction and habit in Coleridge's poetry and prose, and argues that these all revolve around the problematic nexus of a post-Kantian idea of free will, essential to Coleridge's eminently modern idea of the 'human'.

While some form of loss of control is often assumed to be a common feature of the diverse manifestations of addiction, it is far from clear how loss of control should be understood. In this paper, I put forward a concept of decrease in control in addiction that aims to fill this gap and thus provide a general framework for thinking about addictive behavior. The development of this account involves two main steps. First, I present a view of (...) degrees of control as the degree to which an agent would be responsive to potential or counterfactual sufficient reasons to do otherwise. Second, I sketch an account of the relevant control-undermining factors in addiction that is consonant with my proposed view of degrees of control. Being a high-level functional property, reasons-responsiveness is particularly well suited to frame an account of control-undermining factors that is doubly pluralistic: it encompasses the contribution of factors both internal and external to the agent, and it is consistent with various proposals as to the precise nature of the anomaly taking place in the psychology of addiction. (shrink)

Research in the philosophy of addiction commonly explores how agency is impacted in addiction by focusing on moments of apparent loss of control over addictive behavior and seeking to explain how such moments result from the effects of psychoactive substance use on cognition and volition. Recently, Glackin et al. (2021) have suggested that agency in addiction can be helpfully analyzed using the concept of affordances. They argue that addicted agents experience addiction-related affordances, such as action possibilities (...) relating to drugs, drug paraphernalia, and drug-related activities, as aberrantly salient motivations for action. Building on this approach, we present a novel two-tiered affordance model of addiction. In doing so, we suggest that what is significant about the addicted person’s world is not simply what affordances are experienced as salient, but also the way in which the addicted person’s world is shaped by a dominant concern. It is not only that addiction-related affordances become more prominent as addiction progresses but that one’s plurality of concerns become monopolized by and funneled through addiction. Our model endorses Glackin et al.’s idea that addiction-related affordances become aberrantly salient, while proposing why they become and remain so. This way of viewing agency in addiction also brings to light important implications for recovery and treatment. For, if an addicted person adopts a new, even “socially approved”, dominant concern, there is a risk that the shape of addiction is preserved, even though the content changes, leaving an individual at the risk of addiction substitution or relapse. (shrink)

In this paper, I look into the debate about the status of addiction as a disease. Although addiction is widely regarded as a disease, several authors have put forward reasons for agnosticism or skepticism about the appropriateness of the disease label. Any attempt to address this issue directly is complicated by its relationship to several other contentious issues, both on the side of theories of addiction and on the side of theories of disease. My primary aim in (...) this paper is to identify the major points of contention. My secondary aim is to offer a limited defense of the disease view. The crux of the debate is whether addiction is aptly pictured as the result of psychological dysfunction. The main hurdle for the psychological dysfunction claim is that we currently lack a relatively unified account of the behavioral trait that most strongly suggests dysfunctional processes: the loss of expectable ability to control behavior. I argue that there is a sense in which the dysfunction claim may be warranted even in the absence of a unified causal account. However, this requires assumptions that are to some extent controversial, most notably, the impaired control view of addiction and the acceptability of dysfunction-talk based on personal-level behavioral traits. (shrink)

A restrictive view of self-control identifies exercises of self-control with synchronic intrapsychic processes, and pictures diachronic and externally-scaffolded strategies not as proper instances of self-control, but as clever ways of avoiding the need to exercise that ability. In turn, defenders of an inclusive view of self-control typically argue that we should construe self-control as more than effortful inhibition, and that, on grounds of functional equivalence, all these diverse strategies might be properly described as instances of self-control. In this paper, I (...) take a fresh look at this debate by focusing on cases of addiction. I argue that addicted agents face a paradigmatic sort of self-control challenge, which makes addiction an important test case for theories of self-control. And I discuss evidence that highlights both the unreliability of synchronic intrapsychic strategies and the crucial role that is played by diachronic and externally-scaffolded strategies in successful attempts at achieving abstinence by addicted individuals. Abstaining addicts are a paradigmatic case of agents who successfully exercise self-control, and they mostly do so by relying on diachronic and externally-scaffolded strategies. This, I argue, lends further support to an inclusive view of self-control. (shrink)

It is increasingly common to hear solar geoengineering compared to opioids. I argue that probing this analogy can help us appreciate the following surprising point: Common arguments for solar geoengineering, if taken to their logical conclusion, imply that the technology should be used to slow the pace of emissions reductions. Indeed, Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs)—a widely used and influential climate policy tool—produce the same result. This conclusion is striking because, if there is one area of consensus across debates about solar (...) geoengineering, it is that the technology should not be used as a ‘substitute for’ or to ‘delay’ the energy transition. I argue that we can make sense of this apparent tension by recognizing that different parties to the solar geoengineering debate have different conceptions of the kind of ‘substitution’ or ‘delay’ to be avoided. The surface-level consensus that solar geoengineering should not substitute for emissions reductions thus masks an important dispute: How does the prospect of solar geoengineering influence the speed of emissions cuts we should aim for? In the final pages of the paper, I’ll return to the opioids analogy to briefly draw out the implications of answering this question in the way recommended by IAMs. In short, we risk adopting an approach to solar geoengineering policy that advances our own interests at the expense of locking those that follow us into a form of addiction. (shrink)

Today’s everyone normal life can include a normal rate of playing computer games or video games; but what about an excessive or compulsive use of video games that impact on our life? Our kids, who usually spend a lot of time in playing video games will likely have a trouble in paying attention to their school lessons. In this paper, we introduce an expert system to help users in getting the correct diagnosis of the health problem of video game addictions (...) that range from (Musculoskeletal issues, Vision problems and Obesity). Moreover, this expert system provides information about the problem and tell us how we can solve it. SL5 Object expert system language was used to design and implement the expert system. (shrink)

Biomedical science has been remarkably successful in explaining illness by categorizing diseases and then by identifying localizable lesions such as a virus and neoplasm in the body that cause those diseases. Not surprisingly, researchers have aspired to apply this powerful paradigm to addiction. So, for example, in a review of the neuroscience of addiction literature, Hyman and Malenka (2001, p. 695) acknowledge a general consensus among addiction researchers that “[a]ddiction can appropriately be considered as a chronic medical (...) illness.” Like other diseases, “Once addiction has taken hold, it tends to follow a chronic course.” (Koob and La Moal 2006, p. ?). Working from this perspective, much effort has gone into characterizing the symptomology of addiction and the brain changes that underlie them. Evidence for involvement of dopamine transmission changes in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and nucleus accumbens (NAc) have received the greatest attention. Kauer and Malenka (2007, p. 844) put it well: “drugs of abuse can co-opt synaptic plasticity mechanisms in brain circuits involved in reinforcement and reward processing”. Our goal in this chapter to provide an explicit description of the assumptions of medical models, the different forms they may take, and the challenges they face in providing explanations with solid evidence of addiction. <br>. (shrink)