The Internet is like the world, and people have an addiction in their life and world. They are not addicted to life off the Internet, or on the Internet?

I have many interests on the Internet, just like I have in real life, and this is reaL life. (there is ‘real’ life on the Internet and ‘unreal’ life, just like everywhere else.)

So, it makes a difference whether I am hanging out with a friend, or going to a casino. If I am hanging out some, or a little more than some, for some time, on PsychCentral, or going to a porn site?

It is, in essence, a matter of a name. We know what we’re talking about in terms of the behavior, and possible consequences if we’re talking about a specific case. What to call it? Who cares?

The trouble is with the arbitrary nature of trying to classify certain sets of psychological “criteria” which are all outrageously subjective. It is sheer mimicry of the medical field where it makes more sense. If you know which bacteria it is, you have a better chance of knowing what will kill it. In Psychology, it just doesn’t make any sense. Ok, you had how many hallucinations in what period of time? Oh! Oh! I know what it is! It’s ________.

It’s nonsense. I think we’re better off talking about the specific behavior in the specific situations we’re actually talking about, rather than trying to lump them together somehow, based on arbitrary lines drawn in the sand. The only result of classification is losing track of the pertinent differences in individual cases. In other words, increasing the chances of over generalizing.

30 hours a week of internet might cause big trouble, anxiety and sleep loss for one guy, and no problem whatsoever for another. It is, by nature, subjective, and not quantifiable.

Although of course the volumes of Psychology journals crammed with numbers would have you believe otherwise.