Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

Okay, but: "I don't think the 'my brain's reward system has been hacked' framing is useless at all when it comes to my boyfriend. Noticing the structural features of my boyfriend hat make him so addictive to me was useful in reducing my tendency to tackle-hug him at the door."

Sure, I guess the addictive features of your relationship could also be a useful thing to notice, if you feel like you're overly attached (in a way that's bad for you overall) We just tend to use "hacked" about systems that are more professionally engineered for addiction

ie, it's true my reward system already causes me to make sub-optimal choices in many cases, bc of evolutionary mismatch. But Twitter and other products have the additional feature of being adversarial; their designers are actively trying to take advantage of my reward system.

Clicking on Twitter and hugging one’s boyfriend or girlfriend are NOT analogous behaviors. There is a dopamine-modulated “reward” for finding a “favorite” on your tweet. Hugging a lover causes more of an oxytocin rush, causing a feeling of closeness and caring. Not “addiction.”

Do you really think the most useful distinction between Twitter and a lover is dopamine/oxytocin?

If you’re making the case that Twitter and hugging a boyfriend are either not addictive, or they both are, then yes, I think you need to know the neurophysiology.

Well that's clearly not true

Based on what? Julia says Twitter is addictive. You say it’s not, because then you’d have to say that hugging a boyfriend is also addictive. I’m suggesting that’s not a valid comparison because the neurophysiology is different. So which part is “clearly not true?”