Haven't read enough of his essay to form an opinion yet, but I very much appreciate the following from the intro. Engaging with reasonable skepticism is important.
> In sum, it’s reasonable to start with skepticism of my claim (with Jean Twenge) that there is an epidemic of mental illness that began around 2012, and that is related in large part to the transition to phone-based childhoods, with a special emphasis on social media. It makes sense to embrace as a null hypothesis the skeptics’ view that there is nothing to see here, just another moral panic, and the kids are fine. I am in full agreement that the burden of proof falls on me.
The DSM-5 was released in 2013 with some extensive changes - but this is not mentioned in Jonathan Haidt’s essay.
The DSM-5 had several changes in diagnosis that could explain the sharp rise in his graphs. That we simply got a view of how bad our society’s mental health is, rather than it increasing at a dramatically higher rate than pre-2012.
Diagnosis around women’s mental health has also become much better in recent years. The amount of gaslighting around disorders and “hysteria” in women historically is troubling and completely unethical.
I find Gabor Mate’s work much more enlightening in understanding why mental health is such an issue in the modern world. I highly recommend his books if you are curious.
Gabor’s definition of addiction is that it is a coping mechanism to seek relief from pain, often with negative consequences. Therefore social media does not explain the pain. It’s an effect not a cause, despite how it can contribute to feelings of loneliness and inadequacy.
Instead it is worth understanding how our youth are raised, and the trauma their parents carry onto them despite their best intentions and effort.
Addiction meant something in old 1500s Latin. It meant to 'devote or give onself up to a habit or practice'.
Offering one's self up to social media can allow you to mechanistically escape pain, but it also does damage at the same time.
The more you offer yourself up to social media, you are giving away a chunk of your mental health to be liked and adored by instagram.
How could anyone own their mental health, when you can dump your hopes and dreams into the void anytime you want, to offer yourself up in hopes of relief.
> In sum, it’s reasonable to start with skepticism of my claim (with Jean Twenge) that there is an epidemic of mental illness that began around 2012, and that is related in large part to the transition to phone-based childhoods, with a special emphasis on social media. It makes sense to embrace as a null hypothesis the skeptics’ view that there is nothing to see here, just another moral panic, and the kids are fine. I am in full agreement that the burden of proof falls on me.