What point are you even making here? You know there's a difference between physical dependence and addiction, right? Someone who isn't a heroin addict can easily stop taking it if they are weaned off. And heroin addicts relapse all the time after physical withdrawals have subsided.
That's a bit dubious as a blanket statement. Perhaps you're creating a distinction without a difference?
My point pretty much sums to "addictive things are addictive"
Yes, addiction is more nuanced than that, some people are exposed to addictive things and don't get hooked.
But it seems like people in this thread are trying to advance this idea:
addiction = addictive thing + preexisting problem
Therefore, the solution is to get rid of that preexisting problem and voila, addiction is fixed.
I'm not sure I buy that. I'm sticking with the idea that certain substances, or technologies, are inherently likely to create habits and dependency in most humans who are exposed to them.
I count social media and heroin in that category.
There is certainly a difference. Your body, physically, will be fine without heroin. But emotionally, you feel empty without it, and as soon as some emotional trauma - stress, sadness, fear or despair rears its head, you relapse. I guess you could argue that emotional need is no different than physical need, but I don't think that's quite the point you're trying to make
> I just disagree with this whole idea that there HAS to be some "missing hole" that phones fill.
I don't think there is one either. I think there's a general sense of ennui growing in our society that is partly responsible here.
I just disagree with this whole idea that there HAS to be some "missing hole" that phones fill. These apps are addictive, that's not really a secret they are designed to be by teams of brilliant people.
It's possible that many heroin addicts have "holes" in their life that they fill, but it's also pretty much a certainty that if you take a random person and unwittingly feed them heroin for awhile telling them it's harmless, they're going to have withdrawal symptoms if they stop.
I'm aware of the Rat Park study and it's interesting but it's pretty isolated and hasn't been replicated, and either way it's just one intriguing counterpoint, not dispositive.
It's often a misconception that 12 step programs talk about getting to "root causes" first. They do, to some extent, but they always focus immediately and completely on total abstinence until that has been achieved.
Then, the "root causes" stuff is really better described as picking up the pieces of a broken life, and specifically a ton of broken relationships, since the one thing all addicts have in common is a large number of close relationships with people that they have ruined.
Sobriety in that context really isn't about getting to and fixing "root causes" to be honest. It's more about setting up a set of current habits, and social support, that are based around non addictive behaviors.