Content area
Full Text
Psychopharmacology (2014) 231:39233927 DOI 10.1007/s00213-014-3627-x
COMMENTARY
Is a general theory of addiction possible? A commentary on: a multistep general theory of transition to addiction
Aldo Badiani
Received: 20 January 2014 /Accepted: 23 February 2014 /Published online: 3 June 2014 # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Deroche-Gamonet and Piazzas thoughtful and ambitious paper contains much that can be agreed upon. By weaving into a single narrative, theories, models and experimental findings, its authors have provided the readers with a superb synopsis of much that has taken place in the field of addiction neuroscience over the last three decades.
This paper, however, is much more than a synopsis. As befitting to any major piece of scholarly work, it is a catalyst of ideas concerning the very nature of addiction, thus triggering a number of considerations, many more than can be crammed into a commentary. Out of these considerations, possible stumbling blocks for the present theory appear to emerge. I will limit myself to highlight three sets of issues that may be of general interest to researchers in the field, one set for each of the three sections of the paper.
Defining addiction
Herald: It is Othellos pleasure [] that [] every man put himself into triumph; some to dance, some to make bonfires, each man to what sport and revels his addiction leads him. (Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Othello, Moor of Venice, 2.2.11161120).
Any theory is critically dependent on a preliminary definition of its object, drug addiction in this case. However,
Deroche-Gamonet and Piazza, decline to define addiction, in order to avoid a circular definition, and instead invite the readers to leave preconceptions aside and focus on the patient (i.e., the addict). Yet, despite their best intentions, they immediately enter a circularity trap, as they base their definition of an addict on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) criteria for dependence (i.e. addiction). It would be difficult to think about a more circular definition than this. The notion of full addiction appears often in the paper, but, again, without a clear-cut definition except for its equivalence to loss of control. Thus, it is not clear what the operational definition of transition to addiction is, as this would require the definition of start and end points.