Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Brains are Important Too: Reply to Hall, Carter, and Barnett

  • Letter
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Article was published on 01 February 2017

Abstract

The authors and I agree on many features of addiction, such as its developmental (versus pathological) nature. But because I rely on much of the same data as the Brain Disease Model of Addiction (BDMA), they seem to conflate my work with that of my opponents. Indeed they are generally skeptical of the use of neuroscientific data to help understand addiction, calling it "immature." Thus my work is also suspect. Hall and colleagues believe that it is impossible to look at neural and social processes at the same time, yet that is exactly what I do. I suggest that interdisciplinary approaches to addiction are crucial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hall, Wayne D., Adrian Carter, and Anthony Barnett. 2017. Disease or developmental disorder: competing perspectives on the neuroscience of addiction. Neuroethics 10. doi:10.1007/s12152-017-9303-1.

  2. Lewis, Marc D. 2017. Addiction and the brain: development, not disease. Neuroethics 10. Neuroethics. doi:10.1007/s12152-016-9293-4.

  3. Alexander, Bruce K., Robert B. Coambs, and Patricia F. Hadaway. 1978. The effect of housing and gender on morphine self-administration in rats. Psychopharmacology 58: 175–179. doi:10.1007/BF00426903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Koob, George F. 2013. Negative reinforcement in drug addiction: The darkness within. Current Opinion in Neurobiology. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2013.03.011.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Peele, Stanton, and Ilse Thompson. 2014. Recover! Stop thinking like an adict and reclaim your life with the PERFECT program. New York: Da Capo Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Szalavitz, Maia. 2016. Unbroken brain: a revolutionary new way of understanding addiction. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Segal, Gabriel, and Nick Heather. 2016. Addiction and choice. Rethinking the relationship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lewis, Marc D. 2015. The biology of desire. Why addiction is not a disease. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Developmental Psychology, University of Toronto, 27 King’s College Cir, Toronto, ON, M5S, Canada

    Marc Lewis

Authors
  1. Marc Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Lewis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lewis, M. Brains are Important Too: Reply to Hall, Carter, and Barnett. Neuroethics 10, 111–114 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9326-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9326-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation