![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Addictive Personality Mechanics
Apr. 3rd, 2012 10:24 pmSo I was reading up on gaming addiction and came across this article By Erin Hoffman who poses this question:
I can even extend my answer from peers to any other human. There is no extent to which you are obligated as an individual human being to fulfil the expectations of another human. That we do this anyway is a socially advantageous adaptation, and fulfilling the expectations of other humans is something people do for several reasons. Among the most compelling of these reasons are: anticipation of reward for doing so, the actual reward, and the kudos (the respect you get from other humans for being nice).
Really the only reason anyone does anything is for the reward, and the respect. This feeds the ego in anticipation of further reward for doing the same things better, which continues the cycle. Its not a bad cycle to be in, which is why people find themselves doing it a lot. We also do things purely for ourselves for the same reason, but the respect you get from other people for doing something well is worth only such goodwill as that respect carries without some form of tangible reward.
It feels good to fulfil your own expectations, better if others fulfil them for you in reward for your fulfilling their expectations. Thus the cycle continues. Despite the obvious benefits to a social organism for this ever-increasing expectation/reward cycle continuing, the fact of its continuance still fails to place anyone under any obligation to fulfil anyone else's expectations. None whatsoever.
Just ask any profoundly autistic child if you can, or mass-murdering dictator if you dare. Suicides happen every day. We are under no obligation even to engage with reality, that we do so regardless because we exist inside it just makes our engagement mutually advantageous.
"...to what extent are we obligated as individual human beings to fulfill the expectations of our peers, when they run counter to our individual desires?"To which I posit the simple answer; none. None at all. Not even if they run parallel to your individual desires. That you do so anyway means only that you are engaged in the practice of being a good person (the practice itself being arguably addictive).
I can even extend my answer from peers to any other human. There is no extent to which you are obligated as an individual human being to fulfil the expectations of another human. That we do this anyway is a socially advantageous adaptation, and fulfilling the expectations of other humans is something people do for several reasons. Among the most compelling of these reasons are: anticipation of reward for doing so, the actual reward, and the kudos (the respect you get from other humans for being nice).
Really the only reason anyone does anything is for the reward, and the respect. This feeds the ego in anticipation of further reward for doing the same things better, which continues the cycle. Its not a bad cycle to be in, which is why people find themselves doing it a lot. We also do things purely for ourselves for the same reason, but the respect you get from other people for doing something well is worth only such goodwill as that respect carries without some form of tangible reward.
It feels good to fulfil your own expectations, better if others fulfil them for you in reward for your fulfilling their expectations. Thus the cycle continues. Despite the obvious benefits to a social organism for this ever-increasing expectation/reward cycle continuing, the fact of its continuance still fails to place anyone under any obligation to fulfil anyone else's expectations. None whatsoever.
Just ask any profoundly autistic child if you can, or mass-murdering dictator if you dare. Suicides happen every day. We are under no obligation even to engage with reality, that we do so regardless because we exist inside it just makes our engagement mutually advantageous.
