Target America: Visual Culture, Neuroimaging, and the 'Hijacked Brain' Theory of Addiction

Addiction is not a brain disease

“…Hence under the primitive philosophy of 'brain disease' the finding of, say, an action of coffee on dopamine levels would warrant the classification of coffee drinking as a 'brain disease'. Needless to say, the ability to take pictures of the insides of people heads and colour them in (Hickman 2014) sheds no light on these issues whatsoever, regardless of whether the pictures devolve from cocaine, caffeine, or watching the Super Bowl; or indeed doing brain disease research. 2 The argument that direct drug action on specific brain function explains why people take drugs can only be rescued by asserting that 'reasons', if they exist, are epiphemonenological, that people 'really' take drugs for no real reason, that voluntary action only 'feels' voluntary, that drug taking is not 'reasoned' but only 'caused', and consequently there are no reasons that need to be explained.…”

Protecting Prohibition

“…Neuroscientific explanations about the dangers of cannabis seem to create more legitimacy than socially situated explanations, and with metaphors such as ''the hijacking of the brain'' complex brain mechanisms are made understandable and commonsensical (cf. Campbell, 2007, p. 200-201;Hickman, 2014). Although these symposia are framed as scientific and by that claim to convey the truth about the cannabis problem, the use of metaphors like ''the hijacked brain'' illustrates how scientific results are used as political catchphrases to promote prohibition (cf.…”

“…Although these symposia are framed as scientific and by that claim to convey the truth about the cannabis problem, the use of metaphors like ''the hijacked brain'' illustrates how scientific results are used as political catchphrases to promote prohibition (cf. the reasoning on ''the hijacked brain'' metaphor and the war on drugs in Hickman, 2014).…”

Keeping secrets: Leslie E. Keeley, the gold cure and the 19th‐century neuroscience of addiction

“…This reference to the further development of Paul Broca's 1861 findings on the brain's language centres indicates Keeley's engagement with the mainstream of 19th‐century neuroscience . He also noted the problems of brain plasticity, which remains a strong challenge for those who argue that brain function can be linked unequivocally to discrete cerebral regions (, p. 211). In 1896 Keeley explained the difficulty, writing that ‘when the left brain becomes diseased the right side gradually takes up the duties and functions.…”

“…NIDA also backs its claims with evidence that was not available to Keeley. Modern neuroimaging—brain scan technology—supplies the evidence that NIDA uses to back its statements, but the information provided by the scans is not self‐evident and is deeply controversial, even within its own field . Recent work in Science and Technology Studies, a relatively new field whose goal is to enable critical thought by understanding science and technology as social productions, argues further that neuroimaging does not, in itself, offer sufficient explanation for the NIDA model's acceptance.…”