The rat in the cage…

[Murdock]

“Put a rat in a cage and give it 2 water bottles. One is just water and one is water laced with heroin or cocaine. The rat will almost always prefer the drugged water and almost always kill itself in a couple of weeks. That is our theory of addiction.

Bruce comes along in the ’70s and said, “Well, hang on. We’re putting the rat in an empty cage. It has nothing to do. Let’s try this a bit differently.” So he built Rat Park, and Rat Park is like heaven for rats. Everything a rat could want is in Rat Park. Lovely food. Lots of sex. Other rats to befriend. Colored balls. Plus both water bottles, one with water and one with drugged water. But here’s what's fascinating: In Rat Park, they don’t like the drugged water. They hardly use it. None of them overdose. None of them use in a way that looks like compulsion or addiction. What Bruce did shows that both the right-wing and left-wing theories of addiction are wrong. The right-wing theory is that it’s a moral failing, you’re a hedonist, you party too hard. The left-wing theory is that it takes you over, your brain is hijacked. Bruce says it’s not your morality, it’s not your brain; it’s your cage. Addiction is largely an adaptation to your environment.

Now, we created a society where significant numbers of us can't bear to be present in our lives without being on something, drink, drugs, sex, shopping... We’ve created a hyperconsumerist, hyperindividualist, isolated world that is, for many of us, more like the first cage than the bonded, connected cages we need.

The opposite of addiction is not sobriety. The opposite of addiction is connection. And our whole society, the engine of it, is geared toward making us connect with things not people. You are not a good consumer citizen if you spend your time bonding with the people around you and not stuff. In fact, we are trained from a young age to focus our hopes, dreams, and ambitions on things to buy and consume. Drug addiction is a subset of that."

Credit: Johann Hari

 

[Oerdin]

Try googling the rat paradise experiment. Basically, no matter how perfect you make their existence within a few generations they destroy their whole colony.

 

[realgrimm]

 

[Murdock]

Try googling the rat paradise experiment. Basically, no matter how perfect you make their existence within a few generations they destroy their whole colony.

I have a mom raising teenager theory called “reject the nest syndrome”… because if it wasn’t hardwired into our DNA, why would any normal family/household raised child ever leave the comforts of their home? I’m sure some of us have raised independents as much as there are the ones who raised children who will never have the tools or resources to leave home. It’s not an easy milestone to accomplish, especially for this most recent generation.

My kids had bank accounts since they were born. They also had college funds, allowances and other financial perks of being raised in a shared money household. They were also required to deposit half of their birthday money income into that account for a rainy day, ie when you’re at the store and you want something and don’t have any allowance on the books with mom. It taught them to manage money, and I attribute that lesson to their ability to leave home and not have to rebound by coming back. I’m extremely independent, and I’m sure that was also passed down through my instinctual parenting.

But as I shifted away from the generational dysfunction of my own family, I never considered that getting my own family on track could eventually lead to a full rebellion in a few generations.

WTF is wrong with us as a whole that this is what we do? Is it ever enough?

 

[Blurt]

But enough about Biggies and the Assbox....