One of the best pieces I've read on Substack. There's two points I'd like to make which aren't an attack on anything that's said:
1. Ray Bradbury made a comment about how destroying books wouldn't be necessary amongst the MTV generation as their attention is already captured.
2. Orwell spoke about how football, beer and gambling occupied the horizons of our minds. Keeping us in control isn't difficult.
Our current problems are much much worse. Firstly, the internet algorithms and hold on attention are far greater than MTV music videos. Also, the addictiveness of algorithmic content is much more intense than beer or anything Orwell mentioned.
I have zero optimism the populace can awaken to any of this. Yeonmi Park mentioned how the truly oppressed don't even know they're oppressed.
This article accurately diagnoses the problems, but unfortunately it's impossible to communicate to the masses.
I feel the majority of us have a dopamine addiction, which is explored by Anna Lembke in 'Dopamine Nation.'
I'd love nothing more than for us to collectively cure this addiction, but it's impossible to see how.
Books won't replace twitter.
Romance won't replace porn.
Real in-person friendships won't replace WhatsApp.
Society cannot be saved, living a parallel life to this rancid way of life is only the means of achieving sanity.
Your despair is understandable and your analysis is largely correct—the situation is dire and the systems capturing human attention are more sophisticated than anything Bradbury or Orwell imagined. But I'd offer a few counterpoints:
First, you've just demonstrated that the capacity for sustained attention and critical analysis hasn't disappeared entirely. Your thoughtful engagement with this essay proves that some people can still break through the noise when presented with ideas that resonate with their experience.
Second, the "parallel life" strategy you advocate is actually part of the solution I'm proposing. What I call "epistemic ballast" includes exactly what you're describing—people creating alternative practices and institutions that operate outside the attention extraction economy. The key is connecting these parallel lives rather than isolating them.
Third, social change rarely happens through mass awakening—it happens through what researchers call "social contagion." Small networks of people practicing different ways of living create demonstration effects that gradually spread. The question isn't whether we can convince everyone simultaneously, but whether we can build enough cognitive sanctuaries to preserve and propagate the capacities needed for human flourishing.
Finally, your observation about dopamine addiction points toward a crucial insight: this isn't just a political problem, it's a physiological one. But that also means it's addressable through the same kinds of individual and community practices that help people recover from other addictions—peer support, environmental changes, alternative sources of meaning and connection.
The battle isn't lost because people like you are still capable of seeing it clearly. The question is whether enough people like you will choose to build alternatives rather than retreat into private despair.
Hi Mike, thanks for taking the time to respond and your words of encouragement.
I genuinely feel like doing my bit now, instead of retreating into private despair.
Perhaps, it's best to see our own behaviour as contagious and practicing cognitively healthy habits will hopefully influence others to do the same.
There's an example Mel Robbins speaks of in her let them theory book, about how eating an apple on a train increases likelihood of others doing the same.
We can all do small things to change the culture from chasing instant dopamine hits, and instead engage with reading books or listening to podcasts instead.
Hopefully with this shift, democracy can thrive again.
As an 83-year-old MD, educator, writer, etc, I agree with almost all of what you have said. Even in my profession, there has been what I term a "dummying down." Instead of seeing overexpression of the curiosity gene, the opposite has occurred. The joy of reading is evidenced in fewer and fewer people, but it seems more epidemic in the US than in the rest of the world. Just as obesity has become the norm in the US, perhaps as an expression of the "drive" to a state of inertia, so too has the American mind shied away from matters requiring cognitive effort. I think there is a more significant dopamine deficiency and a need to augment dopamine, and perhaps that is what Lembke writes about. I have not read her book, but I have been focused on the prolactin-dopamine interrelationship in medicine for many decades.
Really took my time with this one. Priceless. I noticed a few times recently I was so sucked into Facebook Reels or YouTube Shorts, I allowed my phone battery to die and that is when I realized it was well past bedtime. That screen time made it difficult to fall asleep.
I don’t need to wonder anymore why I’m having difficulty concentrating on the latest novel I am reading. In the past I could read for hours, now I am lucky to get through a chapter or two.
By the way, I created in Canva a T-shirt with 2+2=4 on the front and Truth Matters on the back.
I think you’re on to something here but I am wondering what gives you confidence that enough people are educable’ in the ways that you describe are essential to avoiding rule by thuggery?
Isn’t it possible that the recurring cycles of warfare in human history are the only vehicles we’ve ever developed that can at least temporarily —if horrifyingly— settle what seems to be a species-long battle between the warriors/conqueror/homogeneity-bound tribes/clans versus the settler/communal/heterogeneity-valuing tribes/clans?
As a physician/scientist, I am astounded at how many of my medical colleagues were and remain pro-Trump. As a family member, I have no understanding why my college-educated sister and her children are not only pro-Trump but have essentially cut off all ties with me. As one of the neighbors in a middle to upper-class community of elders, I am puzzled by the lack of logic, fact-finding, and religious zeal of many of my neighbors who remain adamantly pro-Trump.
Just as with AI assistants that are not programmed fully and "hallucinate" or "confabulate" when they do not know an answer, the above pro-Trumpers seem to have the same issues of faulty programming when it comes to processing information or having access to a more complete database. Session after session, pointing out the faulty issues has never converted one such person, just as my Gemini Pro AI assistant needs to have its programmers upload more data to stop it from hallucinating. The parallels are striking.
Jon & others, consider this. In my many exchanges with pro-Trumpers, they become defensive with a "you versus me" attitude. It is akin to a "turf war," or "I told you so" reaction. The AI is without emotion. It is an arbitrator or mediator who not only can listen but also possesses a fund of knowledge that can substantiate their findings, essentially serving as a fact-finder. Therefore, it is possible that in a sincere "confrontation" between a pro-Trumper and a liberal thinker, the former would not become overly defensive or defensive at all. You can try Google's Gemini for free. I subscribe to 2 AI assistants-- Gemini Pro and ScienceOS.
I can assure you that I have not detected any bias. I have, for example, criticized Gemini Pro for hallucinating peer-reviewed journal citations and asked why I should not cancel my subscription. It agreed with me and also stated that my other AI was a better fit for my needs in science and medicine, providing details on the pros and cons of ScienceOS compared to itself. I think AI may be a way to encourage clearer and more critical thinking in the minds of highly constrained pro-Trumpers.
A backlash of sorts would involve people with effective attention and cognitive organization skills becoming more marketable employment-wise, so that parents and young people would put a higher value education and social media self-discipline.
It is, like most influences, a generational one. We who read, reflected upon and derived from this piece will be the ones who pass that (skill, ethic, habit?) to our children and children we influence, and they to theirs. In this way, the advantages of critical awareness are sustained beyond our own lives.
The most recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test shows that only 22% of American 8th graders are “proficient” in U.S. government and civics, and only 13% are proficient in U.S. history. Adults fare a little better, with 47% able to name all three branches of government, according to the Annenberg Public Policy survey. The decline in civic knowledge is due to the increase of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects at the expense of civic education in our school system, and when civic education is taught, its content is politicized, as in the New York Times' 1619 Project.
I would add that the actual issue of civics, that frank discussions of RACISM in America, that the classic literature of Plato, St. Augustine, and for sure the Gnostic Biblical texts, are not to be found on the bookshelves of the majority of Americans in the US today.
I doubt that most Americans have read Isabel Wilkerson's Caste or Trump-related books, such as Authoritarian Nightmare, How Democracies Die, Rage, or The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump. In my discussions with those who favor Trump, they often lack a reading background. They remain fixated on the corruption of the Biden family and relate that the Bidens are no different from Trump in terms of corruption. They find no fault with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) or the alleged double-dealing of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. They see no lack of morality in Mike Johnson, the Congressional GOP, or Trump's cabinet.
You have to wonder, how can such people live a life of delusion, fantasy, and just plain stupidity?
As with all innovations, humankind can either use it properly or abuse it. I am very impressed with the assistance of AI in science and medicine, and even in day-to-day practical matters. But give H. sapiens a tool, and they will turn it into a weapon, often.
One of the best pieces I've read on Substack. There's two points I'd like to make which aren't an attack on anything that's said:
1. Ray Bradbury made a comment about how destroying books wouldn't be necessary amongst the MTV generation as their attention is already captured.
2. Orwell spoke about how football, beer and gambling occupied the horizons of our minds. Keeping us in control isn't difficult.
Our current problems are much much worse. Firstly, the internet algorithms and hold on attention are far greater than MTV music videos. Also, the addictiveness of algorithmic content is much more intense than beer or anything Orwell mentioned.
I have zero optimism the populace can awaken to any of this. Yeonmi Park mentioned how the truly oppressed don't even know they're oppressed.
This article accurately diagnoses the problems, but unfortunately it's impossible to communicate to the masses.
I feel the majority of us have a dopamine addiction, which is explored by Anna Lembke in 'Dopamine Nation.'
I'd love nothing more than for us to collectively cure this addiction, but it's impossible to see how.
Books won't replace twitter.
Romance won't replace porn.
Real in-person friendships won't replace WhatsApp.
Society cannot be saved, living a parallel life to this rancid way of life is only the means of achieving sanity.
Your despair is understandable and your analysis is largely correct—the situation is dire and the systems capturing human attention are more sophisticated than anything Bradbury or Orwell imagined. But I'd offer a few counterpoints:
First, you've just demonstrated that the capacity for sustained attention and critical analysis hasn't disappeared entirely. Your thoughtful engagement with this essay proves that some people can still break through the noise when presented with ideas that resonate with their experience.
Second, the "parallel life" strategy you advocate is actually part of the solution I'm proposing. What I call "epistemic ballast" includes exactly what you're describing—people creating alternative practices and institutions that operate outside the attention extraction economy. The key is connecting these parallel lives rather than isolating them.
Third, social change rarely happens through mass awakening—it happens through what researchers call "social contagion." Small networks of people practicing different ways of living create demonstration effects that gradually spread. The question isn't whether we can convince everyone simultaneously, but whether we can build enough cognitive sanctuaries to preserve and propagate the capacities needed for human flourishing.
Finally, your observation about dopamine addiction points toward a crucial insight: this isn't just a political problem, it's a physiological one. But that also means it's addressable through the same kinds of individual and community practices that help people recover from other addictions—peer support, environmental changes, alternative sources of meaning and connection.
The battle isn't lost because people like you are still capable of seeing it clearly. The question is whether enough people like you will choose to build alternatives rather than retreat into private despair.
Hi Mike, thanks for taking the time to respond and your words of encouragement.
I genuinely feel like doing my bit now, instead of retreating into private despair.
Perhaps, it's best to see our own behaviour as contagious and practicing cognitively healthy habits will hopefully influence others to do the same.
There's an example Mel Robbins speaks of in her let them theory book, about how eating an apple on a train increases likelihood of others doing the same.
We can all do small things to change the culture from chasing instant dopamine hits, and instead engage with reading books or listening to podcasts instead.
Hopefully with this shift, democracy can thrive again.
There is only one solution. The same solution for ANY addiction - porn, gambling, drugs, alcohol, sex or sexual perversion. Or, dopamine.
CHRIST
As an 83-year-old MD, educator, writer, etc, I agree with almost all of what you have said. Even in my profession, there has been what I term a "dummying down." Instead of seeing overexpression of the curiosity gene, the opposite has occurred. The joy of reading is evidenced in fewer and fewer people, but it seems more epidemic in the US than in the rest of the world. Just as obesity has become the norm in the US, perhaps as an expression of the "drive" to a state of inertia, so too has the American mind shied away from matters requiring cognitive effort. I think there is a more significant dopamine deficiency and a need to augment dopamine, and perhaps that is what Lembke writes about. I have not read her book, but I have been focused on the prolactin-dopamine interrelationship in medicine for many decades.
Mike:
Really took my time with this one. Priceless. I noticed a few times recently I was so sucked into Facebook Reels or YouTube Shorts, I allowed my phone battery to die and that is when I realized it was well past bedtime. That screen time made it difficult to fall asleep.
I don’t need to wonder anymore why I’m having difficulty concentrating on the latest novel I am reading. In the past I could read for hours, now I am lucky to get through a chapter or two.
By the way, I created in Canva a T-shirt with 2+2=4 on the front and Truth Matters on the back.
It’s a start.
Thank you for all you do.
John
Mike I continue to deeply appreciate all of your writing 🙏
I think you’re on to something here but I am wondering what gives you confidence that enough people are educable’ in the ways that you describe are essential to avoiding rule by thuggery?
Isn’t it possible that the recurring cycles of warfare in human history are the only vehicles we’ve ever developed that can at least temporarily —if horrifyingly— settle what seems to be a species-long battle between the warriors/conqueror/homogeneity-bound tribes/clans versus the settler/communal/heterogeneity-valuing tribes/clans?
As a physician/scientist, I am astounded at how many of my medical colleagues were and remain pro-Trump. As a family member, I have no understanding why my college-educated sister and her children are not only pro-Trump but have essentially cut off all ties with me. As one of the neighbors in a middle to upper-class community of elders, I am puzzled by the lack of logic, fact-finding, and religious zeal of many of my neighbors who remain adamantly pro-Trump.
Just as with AI assistants that are not programmed fully and "hallucinate" or "confabulate" when they do not know an answer, the above pro-Trumpers seem to have the same issues of faulty programming when it comes to processing information or having access to a more complete database. Session after session, pointing out the faulty issues has never converted one such person, just as my Gemini Pro AI assistant needs to have its programmers upload more data to stop it from hallucinating. The parallels are striking.
Not sure data as we think of it would make a difference. What they need is to become disillusioned with their orange idol.
Jon & others, consider this. In my many exchanges with pro-Trumpers, they become defensive with a "you versus me" attitude. It is akin to a "turf war," or "I told you so" reaction. The AI is without emotion. It is an arbitrator or mediator who not only can listen but also possesses a fund of knowledge that can substantiate their findings, essentially serving as a fact-finder. Therefore, it is possible that in a sincere "confrontation" between a pro-Trumper and a liberal thinker, the former would not become overly defensive or defensive at all. You can try Google's Gemini for free. I subscribe to 2 AI assistants-- Gemini Pro and ScienceOS.
I can assure you that I have not detected any bias. I have, for example, criticized Gemini Pro for hallucinating peer-reviewed journal citations and asked why I should not cancel my subscription. It agreed with me and also stated that my other AI was a better fit for my needs in science and medicine, providing details on the pros and cons of ScienceOS compared to itself. I think AI may be a way to encourage clearer and more critical thinking in the minds of highly constrained pro-Trumpers.
A backlash of sorts would involve people with effective attention and cognitive organization skills becoming more marketable employment-wise, so that parents and young people would put a higher value education and social media self-discipline.
It is, like most influences, a generational one. We who read, reflected upon and derived from this piece will be the ones who pass that (skill, ethic, habit?) to our children and children we influence, and they to theirs. In this way, the advantages of critical awareness are sustained beyond our own lives.
Teach your children well.
I just received this today, 7/26/25, at 7:43 AM:
The most recent National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test shows that only 22% of American 8th graders are “proficient” in U.S. government and civics, and only 13% are proficient in U.S. history. Adults fare a little better, with 47% able to name all three branches of government, according to the Annenberg Public Policy survey. The decline in civic knowledge is due to the increase of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects at the expense of civic education in our school system, and when civic education is taught, its content is politicized, as in the New York Times' 1619 Project.
I would add that the actual issue of civics, that frank discussions of RACISM in America, that the classic literature of Plato, St. Augustine, and for sure the Gnostic Biblical texts, are not to be found on the bookshelves of the majority of Americans in the US today.
I doubt that most Americans have read Isabel Wilkerson's Caste or Trump-related books, such as Authoritarian Nightmare, How Democracies Die, Rage, or The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump. In my discussions with those who favor Trump, they often lack a reading background. They remain fixated on the corruption of the Biden family and relate that the Bidens are no different from Trump in terms of corruption. They find no fault with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) or the alleged double-dealing of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. They see no lack of morality in Mike Johnson, the Congressional GOP, or Trump's cabinet.
You have to wonder, how can such people live a life of delusion, fantasy, and just plain stupidity?
As with all innovations, humankind can either use it properly or abuse it. I am very impressed with the assistance of AI in science and medicine, and even in day-to-day practical matters. But give H. sapiens a tool, and they will turn it into a weapon, often.
True I’m a home health OT and it’s amazing at helping me with research and treatment plans