Quote:
Originally Posted by BWinmill
In the cases like this woman, you are probably right. Yet there is a definite value statement when we say that someone is addicted to something. For example: a person watching TV or playing video games for 4 hours a night will probably be labelled as addicted. A person who reads for pleasure for 4 hours a night would probably be labelled as an introvert, at worse. If someone spends their holidays watching TV or playing video games, it is a problem. If they spend their holidays reading books on a beach, it is called relaxing.
Or take a look at work-lives. Some people let work take over their lives, even when there is no financial need to do so. If they are single and without children, it is virtually never discussed as an addiction even if it is having a negative impact upon their life (e.g. socialization). It is only discussed as an addiction when it interferes with their family.
There is always a value judgement when we are talking about addictions.
|
Many people read or watch TV for 4 or more hours a day without being addicted I think. It is what they do to pass the time in an enjoyable way. My sister often appears glued to the set and has been since her first TV. But if someone suggest something more interesting it goes off instantly. I have known quite a few people like that. Then there are those who must watch one more play of a football game even if they have already watched it or can't leave the set while 'Their show' is on. A mild, but pretty common addiction. Maybe they only watch TV for one hour a day, but try to interfere with that is not a pretty picture. If you do convince them the house is burning down they are more twitchy about missing the show.
Time spent in a certain way is not IMO a valid measure of addiction. It is, as you said, the interference with other of life's aspects and the degree of discomfort, if any, that occurs when the addictive behavior is interrupted or prevented.
Helen