Yes, Precision is a Good thing. Reply to Flanagan

Neuroethics 10 (1):99-101 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Flanagan asserts that my model of addiction would apply as well to sonnet writing. Yet his most interesting point is that “addiction” is an imprecise label for a cluster of distinct phenomena. I agree with him that we need to examine these distinctions, but that doesn’t negate their shared features. Neuroscience can play an important role in advancing our understanding of both commonalities and distinctions within the phenomena of addiction.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Addiction by Any Other Name.Jesse S. Summers - 2015 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 22 (1):49-51.
What Is It Like to Be an Addict?Owen Flanagan - 2011 - In Jeffrey Poland (ed.). MIT Press. pp. 269-292.
Addiction-as-a-kind hypothesis.Petri Ylikoski & Samuli Pöyhönen - 2015 - International Journal of Addiction and Drug Research 4 (1):21-25.
The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism Naturalized.Owen Flanagan - 2011 - Cambridge, Massachusetts: Bradford.
Hijacking Addiction.Neil Levy - 2017 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 24 (1):97-99.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-05-04

Downloads
31 (#486,401)

6 months
18 (#125,972)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Is Addiction a Brain Disease?Kent C. Berridge - 2016 - Neuroethics 10 (1):29-33.

Add more references