Addiction, Agency, and the Locus of Control

One of the YouTube videos I've seen recently, titled The Science of Learned Helplessness, reminded me of something I've been thinking about for a while now. When we talk about addiction, we sometimes talk about how it erodes one's agency. Just as with the Positive Feedback Loops and Spiritual Inertia, the idea is that every time a person makes a decision that feeds into their addiction, that decision becomes easier to make the next time, which makes the decision even easier to make the time after that, and so on. There's also some talk about brain chemistry and neuropathways, but I don't know a whole lot about that, so I can't really comment on it. What I can say is that, whether this belief is true or not, believing that an addiction weakens one's agency can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If a person starts to believe that they don't have a choice, they can hardly be expected to make the right choice. One cannot be expected to exercise their agency when they believe they have, to some extent, lost that agency.

In the video, The Science of Learned Helplessness, video essayist Travis Gilbert spoke about a concept called the locus of control. To summarize and paraphrase, having an internal locus of control means that you believe that control over your life rests primarily inside you, whereas having an external locus of control means that you believe that your life is basically outside of your control. An internal locus of control fosters self-determination, whereas an external locus of control contributes to a phenomenon called learned helplessness. Gilbert gives the example of an adult elephant tethered by a small rope or a thin chain. Even though the elephant could easily break the restraint, it doesn't even try because it was secured with a stronger restraint when it, the elephant, was younger and much weaker. As a calf, the elephant became convinced that there was no way to break that chain, so even when it grew bigger and stronger, it didn't even try. The elephant had learned helplessness, and so do we.

We learn that addictions are dangerous and powerful, and maybe they are, but we learn that they are difficult to escape, which may be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people believe that their addiction is outside of their control, they may not be motivated to do much to escape them. After all, why would they? It's out of their hands. Even relying on God is a bit risky, since people can learn to rely on God too much, passing the responsibility to God rather than taking responsibility for themselves. They place their locus of control outside of themselves, hoping to absolve themselves of any wrongdoing.

And granted, there are cases where people truly can't control their actions, including some true addictions, with the brain chemistry and neuropathways. But in most cases, I'd say that it's better for a person to believe that they're in control of their own actions so they're more likely to take control of and responsibility for their actions. Just as believing in one's powerlessness can be a self-fulfilling prophecy, so can believing in one's strength. Someone once said "whether you think you can or you can't, you're right." That may not be a universal truth, but it might be wise for people to act like they believed it. We do better at making choices when we acknowledge that we have the power to make choices, a power which, incidentally, I don't think Satan can fully take away. I believe that people almost always have their agency, even in the face of addiction, and that they should never give up their internal locus of control.