An interesting empirical question is about brain/neural processes when watching tv. My 16 month old daughter is a very active, very fun, and very dynamic little person. She can hardly stay in one place for more than a few minutes, although she does get absorbed by crafts and artistic endeavors.
Now, I'd like an explanation as to why she can sit still, completely absorbed, if we put her in front of the computer while a dvd is playing (cartoon about a turtle named "Benjamin" (French version anyhow...)). I would love to get MRI scans of children engaged in art, engaged in play with friends, and (dis)engaged in watching television. What is going on? This is why my wife and I categorically refuse to introduce a television in our home. Yes, we can control it. Yes, we can even use it for the greater good of our children's education. But why bother, when there is so much more to do out there? And I don't even want to get into the discussion o who owns the media, and the ultimate objective of ALL media: profit! I cannot trust that network shows have my best education at heart. I know there is some good stuff. But who decides what gets aired when, for how long, at what time, and so on... I am of the opinion that objectivity does not even come close to existing in the world of media, and as such, I'd rather ignore it almost all together. Of course, one has to obtain information somewhere, which proves to be an issue (in terms of finding value-free info). The internet is a relatively decent place to look, if one is careful. As has been mentioned in an earlier post, I do not want television to socialize my children. I'd rather count on my family and community to do that. Cheers! And if you happen to have studies of brain scans while watching tv, let me know! I'd love to hear about them... -----Original Message----- From: David Epstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 1:03 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] Re: I like my TV time! On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Marie Helweg-Larsen went: > But it is necessary to use the addiction model? I don't think we > want students thinking that everything is addictive or that you're > either addicted and admit it or you're addicted and deny it (I'm not > suggesting that is what you teach your students; I think many > already believe that). Isn't it possible just to watch tv and enjoy > it (without further qualifications)? I think an addiction model is implicit in the behavior of those who decide that they can't have a TV in their home because they'll watch it to excess. That sounds like an extension of the AA slogan "one drink, one drunk." It may well be true for some people (in terms of drinking or TV watching), but that doesn't make it so for everyone. What I'm proposing is an alternative to that sort of all-or-nothing thinking--a model that holds that an "abusable" thing can be also be used moderately and responsibly by most people if the contingencies and situations are set up correctly (thanks, Marc). By the way, I'm completely agnostic on the extent to which substance addictions share biological substrates with other excessive behaviors. But the behaviors themselves often seem to respond to the same kinds of manipulations. --David Epstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang= english --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
