| This still isn't right. I think you're throwing around the word "addict." Perhaps you are using a very loose definition of the word "addict" while the author and I are using a narrow, clinical, definition. When I, and the author, say "internet addiction" we don't mean that the person just has a thirst for knowledge. We mean that if a person has a behavioral addiction then that person has "an inability to control how often or how intensely you engage in an activity, even when you feel the negative consequences." This is probably just a semantic disagreement. The people that can browse the web all day, hold down jobs, care for themselves, these aren't the people the author is talking about. They are talking about the ones that drop out of school, quit their jobs, etc. >Since you mentioned it; In my opinion that statement unfortunately seems to get the causality and effects mixed. Do you hold the same stance if we swap out internet addiction for another addiction, such as gambling or heroin? > Trying to establish, that just because a person seeks out and consumes a lot of data does not make them an internet addict or an information addict. This wasn't implied in the article. Maybe the grandparent comment implied it, but I don't think so. As to your comments about "real disorders" and "serious issues" well, we take the bottle away from the drunkard, but that's really another discussion on its own. Example of loose use of the "addict" label: http://qz.com/304179/brazil-has-the-worlds-biggest-internet-... |