Hollow Pursuits...

[flemm]

I don't see why someone would just become addicted to something like VR if there wasn't something puching him into it. For your theory to work you would have to say that Barclay is a neurotic because of the Holodeck and leaving it would cure him. Judging from his other episodes it doesn't..

Fortunately we have some exact parallels in modern life that are becoming more and more prevalent. For example, people become addicted to fantasy online games all the time. Some of these individuals might have pre-existing conditions, or a tendency to flee from reality, while others simply spend more and more time and energy on the fantasy world to the point where it disrupts their lives more or less severely.

There is no need to postulate cruelty or abuse on the part of others to explain this behavior.

Riker, Geordi, and Wesley all had no idea Barclay was a VR addict when they started bullying him with nick names and such.

No, they do not understand the nature of his addiction, they think he is just slacking off and disinterested. Part of what happens over the course of the episode is the crew, or at least certain members of it, especially Geordi and Troi, come to a better understanding of what Barclay is coping with.

They are insensitive and callous along the way, but that is part of what makes the episode compelling. This reaction is unfortunately very plausible, even in response to more widely known conditions such as depression.

And if Barclay's addiction to VR was solely his own problem then why was his fantasy life about torturing his crewmates? Obviously he's in the holodeck to get even for his treatment. That's about all I can possibly say on the matter.

It isn't solely his problem. It is everyone's problem. I think the episode deals with this pretty directly. Barclay's behavior is of a cyclical nature and certainly involves the crew.

I don't think it is accurate to say, though, that he is in the holodeck to get even. It is a coping mechanism, albeit a self-destructive one.

 

[adamisme]

it did feel to me that everyone was a bit arsey towards Barclay, but that could have been just the initial I don't like you phase that you sometimes get with people, wher eyou think you don't like them and then grow to like them

 

[Anwar]

That, and he wasn't doing his job up to standard. It was more than just a social thing, it was a professional thing as well.

 

[matthunter]

I don't see why someone would just become addicted to something like VR if there wasn't something puching him into it.

This assumes that VR has no addictive qualities in and of itself. If it were merely a case of saying "well, I've got a great life, I guess that blocks out all the nasty withdrawal side-effects of quitting smoking", it'd be easy as hell to quit.

Psychologically, being able to enter a world where you can't be challenged and always get your own way has GOT to be as addictive as crack. Having a good life outside might help break you away from it, but only if the mind is willing to consider "real" achievements superior to VR ones. With something as seemingly real as the holodeck, there's a very real danger that it won't.

 

[Gary Sebben]

Fortunately we have some exact parallels in modern life that are becoming more and more prevalent. For example, people become addicted to fantasy online games all the time. Some of these individuals might have pre-existing conditions, or a tendency to flee from reality, while others simply spend more and more time and energy on the fantasy world to the point where it disrupts their lives more or less severely.

This argument revolves solely around the above supposition. And without numbers to prove that some one with an otherwise healthy life could just suddenly fall prey to addiction that supposition is no better than a "reefer madness" religious tract.

This assumes that VR has no addictive qualities in and of itself. If it were merely a case of saying "well, I've got a great life, I guess that blocks out all the nasty withdrawal side-effects of quitting smoking", it'd be easy as hell to quit.

Smoking is physically addictive. It's in no way a good analogy.

 

[Anwar]

No, he's got the right idea. People take drugs for the physical and psychology pleasure they give and how it helps take their minds off of their normal life and normal problems. Escaping to a VR world where you can do anything gives pretty much the same pleasurable experiences and can be as addictive but without the physical addictions it causes, instead it's a psychological addiction which can be considered a worse thing.

 

[flemm]

This argument revolves solely around the above supposition. And without numbers to prove that some one with an otherwise healthy life could just suddenly fall prey to addiction that supposition is no better than a "reefer madness" religious tract.

Well, I'll ignore the ad hominem aspect of your post, and focus on the question of addiction. In passing, why would I need "numbers" to prove this? All I would need would be a verifiable example. That said, I have no ambition to "prove" anything within the context of this informal discussion, nor any obligation to do so.

Let's take the very common case of alcohol addiction. Of the many, many individuals who are afflicted with this addiction, I'm sure you could find some cases where people were driven to this by cruelty or neglect, but I don't think it can be asserted with any seriousness that there are no alcoholics that are responsible for there own addiction. Indeed, the twelve steps and other such programs focus on shouldering responsibility for one's own behavior and avoiding wallowing in self-pity and blaming others, as would of course always be the temptation.

As for VR addiction, I think it is an open question as to whether it is truly an addiction, or just "like an addiction," but anyway it is at least analagous to certain types of addiction, especially in their potential to erode the addict's existing social network.

Even if one were to deny the existence of any such VR addiction in our own world (which I don't think is sustainable as an opinion, but whatever let's consider it for a moment), I agree with matthunter above that the existence of VR that is as lifelike and as interactive as the holodeck would necessarily be powerfully addictive, since you could create any reality you possibly desired.

Who would not be powerfully drawn to this? It certainly wouldn't take some special neurosis or cruel treatment for the holodeck to be extremely seductive, like a siren's song.

 

[Gary Sebben]

With out numbers what you have is hearsay at best and manipulation of facts at worst. It doesn't hold up in court or debate.

And that wasn't an ad hominem at all. I'm just saying the two arguments follow the same line, not that you are a religious tract writer.

People take drugs for the physical and psychology pleasure they give and how it helps take their minds off of their normal life and normal problems.

The discussion isn't whether people become addicted to stuff or if Barclay was addicted to something or not. The discussion is was Barclay addicted because of his treatment by others, or was his addiction the reason people treated him in a cruel manner. And to me it seems impossible that someone would become an officer if he was distracted this badly from reality. Obviously something triggered it and his choice of programming seems to back this up.

 

[flemm]

With out numbers what you have is hearsay at best and manipulation of facts at worst. It doesn't hold up in court or debate.

Well, no, in more than one respect. What might not be an acceptable argument in court, might be perfectly acceptable even in a formal debate, or in an informal discussion such as this. Different situations, different standards. Also, numbers are far from the only way to support an argument or a line of thinking. I think you will find that much evidence that is presented in court, for example, is unrelated to "numbers."

And that wasn't an ad hominem at all. I'm just saying the two arguments follow the same line, not that you are a religious tract writer.

Certainly it had an ad hominem aspect. Associating my previous statement with widely discredited "religious tracts" is a way of insinuating that my statement that VR addiction is a real phenomenon is equivalent to raving about "reefer madness."

Any substantive link between these unspecified tracts and our discussion remains tenuous at best since you did not specify what argument used there was similar to my own.

As to the reality of MMO addiction in particular, a simple google search will provide you with ample material for reflection.

There's an editorial at RPGamer.com, for example, that points out that many standard signs of drug addiction also apply to mmo addiction, including notably: "Change in overall attitude / personality with no other identifiable cause."

http://www.rpgamer.com/editor/2006/q1/031306mc.html

Interestingly for this thread, there is also an article on a study that investigates the possiblility that people with Asperger's might be more sensitive to mmo addiction.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6189003.html

Since it is the gaming community itself that is exploring this issue, and psychologists, any comparison with religious tracts about pot seems somewhat out of place

The discussion is was Barclay addicted because of his treatment by others, or was his addiction the reason people treated him in a cruel manner. And to me it seems impossible that someone would become an officer if he was distracted this badly from reality. Obviously something triggered it and his choice of programming seems to back this up.

I don't think we can pretend to know for sure, since this is not covered in the episode and there is no way to obtain more information. However, it is most definitely not obvious that Barclay is not at least partly responsible for his own difficulties. What is good about the episode, in my view, is that it seeks to present a difficult situation involving addiction in which many people are involved, and for which many are at least partly responsible, including but not limited to Barclay himself.

If we were able to just look at the situation and say for certain who is at fault, the episode would be a lot less interesting than it is.

 

[Gary Sebben]

Well, no, in more than one respect. What might not be an acceptable argument in court, might be perfectly acceptable even in a formal debate, or in an informal discussion such as this.

No, any debate that revolves around a disputed fact needs a source. You can't just say something without a source. Since you are not an athority I can challenge you.

Certainly it had an ad hominem aspect. Associating my previous statement with widely discredited "religious tracts" is a way of insinuating that my statement that VR addiction is a real phenomenon is equivalent to raving about "reefer madness."

Again, didn't say vr addiction was equal to reefer madness. I said saying an addiction to vr can spontaneously occur in an otherwise healthy person is reefer madness. That the medium itself is addictive and will draw in the unsuspecting everyman is reefer madness. Its a warning to you, someone I actually assume is intelligent and critical person that your argument has an undesirable analogue.

There's an editorial at RPGamer.com, for example, that points out that many standard signs of drug addiction also apply to mmo addiction, including notably: "Change in overall attitude / personality with no other identifiable cause."

Bad context. That should really read "With no other identifiable cause readily apparent to those around them" That doesn't mean that there isn't an underlying cause. That's something a psychologist or a support group would have to fish out.

 

[flemm]

No, any debate that revolves around a disputed fact needs a source. You can't just say something without a source. Since you are not an athority I can challenge you.

LoL? This is the first time you said anything at all about needing sources. You said I needed numbers. Twice.

Furthermore, refering to sources is only one way to progress in any discussion of this kind. Making reasonable judgements and inferences is also important.

For example, it is reasonable to infer that among the very large number of alcoholics in this world, there will be some who were driven to addiction by cruel treatment, and others that became addicted for reasons entirely unrelated to that. It is also reasonable to infer that among those people who are addicted to mmo games, a similar mixture of different causes would be present.

Again, didn't say vr addiction was equal to reefer madness. I said saying an addiction to vr can spontaneously occur in an otherwise healthy person is reefer madness. That the medium itself is addictive and will draw in the unsuspecting everyman is reefer madness. Its a warning to you, someone I actually assume is intelligent and critical person that your argument has an undesirable analogue.

This is why it is important to state your argument plainly. The above has little relation to what is meant by "reefer madness." The expression comes from a cinematic morailty tale that depicted the use of pot as inevitably leading to a chain of ever more serious crimes and events, such as rape, manslaughter and suicide, in other words that using pot could lead to any and all evils. There is no similarity at all to anything I have argued.

Someone could easily become addicted to alcohol without being mistreated by those around him and without any serious underlying neuroses. That is a far cry from arguing that alcohol is by nature insidious and will inevitably lead to all manner of evils in the manner of "reefer madness." The same reasoning would apply to VR addiction.

I think you must have been aware of these after all rather obvious distinctions and were merely casting aspersions

That doesn't mean that there isn't an underlying cause. That's something a psychologist or a support group would have to fish out.

An underlying psychological cause is a far cry from something readily identifiable such as people being rude or insensitive at work. What we are discussing here is whether or not the crew's sometimes insensitive conduct toward Barclay is the only plausible explanation for his addiction. The answer is clearly: No. It is at best one possible contributing factor.

 

[Gary Sebben]

LoL? This is the first time you said anything at all about needing sources. You said I needed numbers. Twice.

Now you're just being obtuse. A good source for your information would hopefully include stats backing up your assertions.

For example, it is reasonable to infer that among the very large number of alcoholics in this world, there will be some who were driven to addiction by cruel treatment, and others that became addicted for reasons entirely unrelated to that.

Then lets also infer that its possible that Barclay loves the holodeck because he was bitten by a bunny when he was 5. We can infer lots of stuff all day long. None of it would be backed up by whats on screen and therefore writer's intention.

This is why it is important to state your argument plainly.

I did state it very plainly several times. Reefer madness is about healthy people doing horrible things because they took pot. You're saying Barclay's problems stem from the Holodeck but ignore what sent him there.

The answer is clearly: No. It is at best one possible contributing factor.

Not in a two dimensional piece of television drama. This will pretty much be the same answer I gave you above. Infer all you want, but the writers more than likely have given you the answers on screen. And this is now all the energy I can spend on an episode I don't even really like. Have a great day.

 

[flemm]

Then lets also infer that its possible that Barclay loves the holodeck because he was bitten by a bunny when he was 5. We can infer lots of stuff all day long. None of it would be backed up by whats on screen and therefore writer's intention.

...

Not in a two dimensional piece of television drama. This will pretty much be the same answer I gave you above. Infer all you want, but the writers more than likely have given you the answers on screen. And this is now all the energy I can spend on an episode I don't even really like. Have a great day.

Let's focus on this since it seems to be the crux of the issue. The episode as written does not suggest that the crew has driven Barclay to addiction by tormenting him. Quite the opposite. It suggests that certain members of the crew have reacted insensitively to Barclay's discomfort and poor job performance because they do not understand that these are symptoms of his addiction.

The question then is: is it plausible that Barclay's social discomfort and poor performance on the job could be caused or greatly exacerbated by VR addiction? The answer is, yes, that is perfectly plausible.

Dismissing this episode by suggesting that it is about nothing more than the TNG crew being jerks is not an opinion that stands up to any scrutiny.