thereallegend
Raw Carnivore
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2021
- Posts
- 25,762
- Reputation
- 31,372
It's often assumed that spending too much time passively consuming digital entertainment will lead to both physical and mental ill health, the reason often cited being that stuff like internet browsing, tv-show binging or video gaming is too stimulating. That is to say its unhealthy is because these activities stimulate too much dopamine release and thus “burn out” your system and makes you addicted and unmotivated to pursue more wholesome activities such as exercising, meditating or social networking.
But is the problem with digital entertainment and other forms of easy passive entertainment really that they are _too_ stimulating? Peat has mentioned the importance of enough proper stimulation for good health and he seems to think the “dopamine hypothesis” proposed by nofappers and others about why excessive screen time activities are detrimental to mental health is wrong. When I look at people around me it seems that the healthiest ones actually tend to live the most stimulating lifestyles, filling their lives as much as possible with fun and exciting activities, such as sports, games, adventures, parties, music, etc. I mean, doing an actual dirt bike race or exploring the unknown in real life has got to be far more stimulating in every possible sense than doing the same sitting in front of a tv screen.
Could the problem with video games, tv shows, porn or internet browsing rather be that they are _understimulating_ since they only partially engage your senses and your brain knows its fake compared to the real thing and thus spending too much time in front of a screen actually causes a stimulation _deficit_ by displacing real-life equivalent activities that are far more stimulating? Could it be video games and tv shows are simply not exciting _enough_ to achieve a healthy level of stimulation - which is why many people turn to them, because they cannot handle the excitement of real life. If this is true, as virtual reality games become better at engaging all your senses and give you a far more exciting and stimulating experience than presently possible with video games, they should also become better at providing stimulation that is physiologically and mentally beneficial.
Or are there other aspects that determine whether an activity provides beneficial or harmful stimulation? I just find the debate about the dangers of addictive behaviours a little strange because it singles out certain behaviours that stimulate your dopamine system (such as gambling or porn viewing) as unhealthy, and ignores other behaviours (such as travelling, meeting a new partner, working on a project you are passionate about, finding novel "fun stuff" to do ) that I would argue are far more stimulating. I mean, the neurochemical effects of dating a novel partner has been compared to that of taking crack cocaine. Yet no one would argue that engaging in these highly stimulating activities will make you a depressed burn-out, rather the more people engage in such activities the healthier and more motivated they seem to be.
It would also suggest that people who try to solve problems caused by too much screen time by adopting an a ascetic "monk mode" lifestyle, removing activities they enjoy and replacing them with meditation, boring exercise and disciplined self-improvement activities, may be misguided, rather they should be aiming to add _more_ fun and stimulating activities into their lives.
Repost from RayPeat
@BrahminBoss @Nad @Manletmachine
But is the problem with digital entertainment and other forms of easy passive entertainment really that they are _too_ stimulating? Peat has mentioned the importance of enough proper stimulation for good health and he seems to think the “dopamine hypothesis” proposed by nofappers and others about why excessive screen time activities are detrimental to mental health is wrong. When I look at people around me it seems that the healthiest ones actually tend to live the most stimulating lifestyles, filling their lives as much as possible with fun and exciting activities, such as sports, games, adventures, parties, music, etc. I mean, doing an actual dirt bike race or exploring the unknown in real life has got to be far more stimulating in every possible sense than doing the same sitting in front of a tv screen.
Could the problem with video games, tv shows, porn or internet browsing rather be that they are _understimulating_ since they only partially engage your senses and your brain knows its fake compared to the real thing and thus spending too much time in front of a screen actually causes a stimulation _deficit_ by displacing real-life equivalent activities that are far more stimulating? Could it be video games and tv shows are simply not exciting _enough_ to achieve a healthy level of stimulation - which is why many people turn to them, because they cannot handle the excitement of real life. If this is true, as virtual reality games become better at engaging all your senses and give you a far more exciting and stimulating experience than presently possible with video games, they should also become better at providing stimulation that is physiologically and mentally beneficial.
Or are there other aspects that determine whether an activity provides beneficial or harmful stimulation? I just find the debate about the dangers of addictive behaviours a little strange because it singles out certain behaviours that stimulate your dopamine system (such as gambling or porn viewing) as unhealthy, and ignores other behaviours (such as travelling, meeting a new partner, working on a project you are passionate about, finding novel "fun stuff" to do ) that I would argue are far more stimulating. I mean, the neurochemical effects of dating a novel partner has been compared to that of taking crack cocaine. Yet no one would argue that engaging in these highly stimulating activities will make you a depressed burn-out, rather the more people engage in such activities the healthier and more motivated they seem to be.
It would also suggest that people who try to solve problems caused by too much screen time by adopting an a ascetic "monk mode" lifestyle, removing activities they enjoy and replacing them with meditation, boring exercise and disciplined self-improvement activities, may be misguided, rather they should be aiming to add _more_ fun and stimulating activities into their lives.
Repost from RayPeat
@BrahminBoss @Nad @Manletmachine
