prioritizing desire over utility tends to be a uniquely capitalist trait.
I don’t think that’s necessarily true either but that’s not the original claim. The original claim is the whole point of capitalism is turning people into addicts or praying on their addiction. I don’t really think that’s true. It may be some of the point, but I don’t think it was as bad as it currently is until very recently.
I think it’s a relatively new phenomenon that has to do with weaponizing recent scientific advances in knowledge of human psychology and neuroscience. We didn’t always know why gambling was addictive to people, but now we do, and what this guy is terming limbic capitalists take special care to weaponize that new knowledge against us (for instance, using smart phones).
Think “gamification”… That just wasn’t really a thing 30 years ago. That’s what the author is saying. Decades ago it was maybe cigarettes and alcohol. Now you have drug companies pushing prescriptions, Facebook and shitter tweaking algorithms for “engagement”, and even just the whole smartphone ecosystem in general: notifications and micro transactions.
Which isn’t technically the same as “turning people into addicts”.
But maximizing profit is mathematically about maximizing sales and profit margins. Which is most powerful when maximizing demand or desire. The most potent form of demand is addiction.
So addiction isn’t necessary a design purpose of capitalism, but it’s emergent.
I think we fully agree. I mean there were things like trading companies selling opium to villagers as well to reference a historical example.
I just think what he’s calling limbic capitalism is way more prevalent in the range of sources it comes from and who the targets are.
I think summarily what’s changed is that in centuries past people didn’t gather round a conference table with an understanding of human psychology and nuero science and ask each other, “how can we get 5 year olds addicted to our iPhone game?”. And while it’s likely a slight exaggeration to say they’re literally doing that now…I don’t think it’s very far off.
I don’t think that’s necessarily true either but that’s not the original claim. The original claim is the whole point of capitalism is turning people into addicts or praying on their addiction. I don’t really think that’s true. It may be some of the point, but I don’t think it was as bad as it currently is until very recently.
I think it’s a relatively new phenomenon that has to do with weaponizing recent scientific advances in knowledge of human psychology and neuroscience. We didn’t always know why gambling was addictive to people, but now we do, and what this guy is terming limbic capitalists take special care to weaponize that new knowledge against us (for instance, using smart phones).
Think “gamification”… That just wasn’t really a thing 30 years ago. That’s what the author is saying. Decades ago it was maybe cigarettes and alcohol. Now you have drug companies pushing prescriptions, Facebook and shitter tweaking algorithms for “engagement”, and even just the whole smartphone ecosystem in general: notifications and micro transactions.
I kinda agree with you but don’t.
Capitalism is about maximizing profit.
Which isn’t technically the same as “turning people into addicts”.
But maximizing profit is mathematically about maximizing sales and profit margins. Which is most powerful when maximizing demand or desire. The most potent form of demand is addiction.
So addiction isn’t necessary a design purpose of capitalism, but it’s emergent.
And it’s not new, it dates back to the 1700’s: https://www.etymonline.com/word/addiction
Government regulations combat capitalism exploiting addiction with varying success in verying industries over the last several hundred years.
I think we fully agree. I mean there were things like trading companies selling opium to villagers as well to reference a historical example.
I just think what he’s calling limbic capitalism is way more prevalent in the range of sources it comes from and who the targets are.
I think summarily what’s changed is that in centuries past people didn’t gather round a conference table with an understanding of human psychology and nuero science and ask each other, “how can we get 5 year olds addicted to our iPhone game?”. And while it’s likely a slight exaggeration to say they’re literally doing that now…I don’t think it’s very far off.
Yup I think we fully agree.