Technological pacification: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== Medical Pacification == | == Medical Pacification == | ||
Evolution is about survival of the fittest. Over time characteristics that | Evolution is about survival of the fittest. Over time characteristics that made us less able in the world were replaced by characteristics which make us more able in the world. With 5.0% of adults in the world suffering from depression<ref>https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression</ref> this poses an evolutionary paradox as to why depression exists. The brain plays crucial roles in promoting survival and reproduction, so the pressures of evolution should have left our brains resistant to such high rates of malfunction. Mental disorders should generally be rare and be getting rarer — ''so why is depression so common and even more growing?'' | ||
Depression is a subjective issue with little to no objective parameters, one can only assume that the disease is partly caused by internal biochemistry and external circumstance. Perhaps higher rates of depression are being caused by external, societal issues? | |||
Psychopharmacology is the study of how specific substances affect how the brain operates. Humans tend to believe that their decision making and sense of self is constant however, it is well documented that specific blood parameters can have a wide range of effects on our decision making. For instance, fluoxetine a common antidepressant can cause people to become more moral<ref>[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20876101/ Serotonin selectively influences moral judgment and behavior through effects on harm aversion.]</ref> or even eating before citing judgement causes judges to become more lenient<ref>https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2011/04/14/i-think-its-time-we-broke-for-lunch</ref>. Quetiapine can increase risky decision making<ref>Rock, P. L., Harmer, C. J., McTavish, S. F. B., Goodwin, G. M., & Rogers, R. D. (2011). ''The effects of quetiapine on risky decision-making. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 26, e141.'' doi:10.1097/01.yic.0000405872.33849.22</ref>. Most of these effects are temporary, i.e. once food has been eaten the judges judgement return to normal, similarly with fluoxetine once it is out of the persons system for 15 days<ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8194283/#:~:text=Fluoxetine%20is%20well%20absorbed%20after,has%20a%20nonlinear%20pharmacokinetic%20profile.</ref>. Behavioural changes subside. One class of drugs which shows an incredible ability to change decision making in normal people for the long term are [[psychedelics]]<ref>William McGlothlin , Sidney Cohen & Marcella S. McGlothlin (1970) Long Lasting Effects of LSD on Normals, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 3:1, 20-31, DOI: 10.1080/02791072.1970.10471358</ref>. | Psychopharmacology is the study of how specific substances affect how the brain operates. Humans tend to believe that their decision making and sense of self is constant however, it is well documented that specific blood parameters can have a wide range of effects on our decision making. For instance, fluoxetine a common antidepressant can cause people to become more moral<ref>[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20876101/ Serotonin selectively influences moral judgment and behavior through effects on harm aversion.]</ref> or even eating before citing judgement causes judges to become more lenient<ref>https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2011/04/14/i-think-its-time-we-broke-for-lunch</ref>. Quetiapine can increase risky decision making<ref>Rock, P. L., Harmer, C. J., McTavish, S. F. B., Goodwin, G. M., & Rogers, R. D. (2011). ''The effects of quetiapine on risky decision-making. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 26, e141.'' doi:10.1097/01.yic.0000405872.33849.22</ref>. Most of these effects are temporary, i.e. once food has been eaten the judges judgement return to normal, similarly with fluoxetine once it is out of the persons system for 15 days<ref>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8194283/#:~:text=Fluoxetine%20is%20well%20absorbed%20after,has%20a%20nonlinear%20pharmacokinetic%20profile.</ref>. Behavioural changes subside. One class of drugs which shows an incredible ability to change decision making in normal people for the long term are [[psychedelics]]<ref>William McGlothlin , Sidney Cohen & Marcella S. McGlothlin (1970) Long Lasting Effects of LSD on Normals, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 3:1, 20-31, DOI: 10.1080/02791072.1970.10471358</ref>. | ||
Revision as of 01:25, 3 July 2022
Society tries to meet our every need however when they are met there is more need. This isn't some crazy paradox, only it reflects our most fundamental neurochemical pathways that have been created to make us productive. In society our technologies have met our every need except from pacification from want and they are now pacifying us from reacting to the ecological crisis. Movies have us believe that there is one villain Rothchilds, Illuminati, Darth Vader... but in fact, there is no conspiracy or person to blame it is the simply an emergent phenomenon of the system we are in.
Medical Pacification
Evolution is about survival of the fittest. Over time characteristics that made us less able in the world were replaced by characteristics which make us more able in the world. With 5.0% of adults in the world suffering from depression[1] this poses an evolutionary paradox as to why depression exists. The brain plays crucial roles in promoting survival and reproduction, so the pressures of evolution should have left our brains resistant to such high rates of malfunction. Mental disorders should generally be rare and be getting rarer — so why is depression so common and even more growing?
Depression is a subjective issue with little to no objective parameters, one can only assume that the disease is partly caused by internal biochemistry and external circumstance. Perhaps higher rates of depression are being caused by external, societal issues?
Psychopharmacology is the study of how specific substances affect how the brain operates. Humans tend to believe that their decision making and sense of self is constant however, it is well documented that specific blood parameters can have a wide range of effects on our decision making. For instance, fluoxetine a common antidepressant can cause people to become more moral[2] or even eating before citing judgement causes judges to become more lenient[3]. Quetiapine can increase risky decision making[4]. Most of these effects are temporary, i.e. once food has been eaten the judges judgement return to normal, similarly with fluoxetine once it is out of the persons system for 15 days[5]. Behavioural changes subside. One class of drugs which shows an incredible ability to change decision making in normal people for the long term are psychedelics[6].
Cultural Pacification
Media, computer games, smartphones are not unlike adult pacifiers.[7] Whilst a baby will have a need for milk and the mother's teat, adults have more complicated desires. Could it be that tolerance in the wider world for despots has occurred as our inventions provide an escape for our warriors?
References
- ↑ https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression
- ↑ Serotonin selectively influences moral judgment and behavior through effects on harm aversion.
- ↑ https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2011/04/14/i-think-its-time-we-broke-for-lunch
- ↑ Rock, P. L., Harmer, C. J., McTavish, S. F. B., Goodwin, G. M., & Rogers, R. D. (2011). The effects of quetiapine on risky decision-making. International Clinical Psychopharmacology, 26, e141. doi:10.1097/01.yic.0000405872.33849.22
- ↑ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8194283/#:~:text=Fluoxetine%20is%20well%20absorbed%20after,has%20a%20nonlinear%20pharmacokinetic%20profile.
- ↑ William McGlothlin , Sidney Cohen & Marcella S. McGlothlin (1970) Long Lasting Effects of LSD on Normals, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 3:1, 20-31, DOI: 10.1080/02791072.1970.10471358
- ↑ Shiri Melumad, Michel Tuan Pham, The Smartphone as a Pacifying Technology, Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 47, Issue 2, August 2020, Pages 237–255, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucaa005