I love to listen to NPR. In fact my clock radio and my car radio have been tuned exclusively to NPR for decades. Today’s episode of Science Friday really captured me though, which is weird because it was about economics. Well, not economics exactly; neuroeconomics, a combination of neuroscience, economics, and psychology to study how people make decisions. It looks at the role of the brain when we evaluate decisions, categorize risks and rewards, and interact with each other. You can listen to the episode here, and if you have a scientific bent it is really worth the listen.
The research they discuss is related to human decision making, specifically as making decisions relates to the economy. The study of economics has always held that people people know what they want and are able to optimize their choices, based on their options, even when decisions are very complicated or ambiguous. Neuroeconomics, on the other hand, suggests that “people have some normal limits on what they can compute on greed and on will-power.” “People have an automatic tendency based on strong drives, at the motivational system, to choose actions that have been associated with good outcomes in the past and to avoid those that have had negative outcomes. That is of course an adaptive thing to do. ”
As an addict, I know that contrary what economic theory would have us believe, my actual behavior has often been in conflict with what will actually achieve the best outcome. Furthermore, though I am intellectually capable of understanding the probable results of a decision, that understanding, at times, is insufficient to cause me to choose differently. I am quite incapable, at times, of recalling with sufficient force, the suffering and humiliation of even a week or a month ago. In economic terms, each behavior has an outcome that can be valued. I know, from my own experience that while I may appear completely normal at times, even for extended periods of time, I am sometimes quite incapable of choosing the right option or of placing the correct outcome on the correct behavior. In effect, the disease of addiction is a pathology of valuation.
The disease resides in my mind; specifically in the part of my brain where decisions are made, and it causes me to make terrible decisions sometimes. I’ve learned that I get better results when I ask for help, when I am open to suggestions from others and when I pause before acting. This has been particularly helpful over the last month when I have been possessed with the idea that I can have a drink and be fine.
It seems crazy for me to even be saying that I’m symptomatic, but for awhile recently I have been. The only thing that I’ve been able to really cling to is the empirical evidence of my own experience and the research of the good people at Harvard University, and of course the company and support of other addicts who have had experiences like mine. I may think that I can drink now and then – and that is what it is to be an addict. We think ridiculous things, and in the absence of a full knowledge of our condition and a higher power (even if it is only the group) we make what seems to be a rational decision to drink or use in spite of the fact that everyone else can see what a horrible choice it is.
I’m grateful that I don’t have to act on that thought today. I’m grateful that I have enough evidence to combat it. And I’m grateful that there are people around me who love me, with whom I can be truthful, and who support me while I wait for the little insane idea to pass.
Recent Comments