The above-mentioned system can be enriched with two more elements – affective cogito and well-known to us reward center. Then we’ve a sound enough and quite convenient structure to analyze the addictive behavior. The affective cogito we can define (following the logic of above-mentioned Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Notes from Underground) as a simply independent choice, a counterpart of a rationally advantageous choice. Unfortunately, the English translation of the novel doesn’t fully render the figurative meaning in the Russian original and makes it closer to the strict scientific terminology. What’s a simply independent choice? Firstly, the simplicity isn’t only about something easy to understand, it’s something that can’t be divided to any components. Secondly, such a choice or better say the manifestation of our desires (which is a more accurate translation of the original meaning in Russian) is hereby considered independent from socially programmed narrative cogito. Let’s remark here that autonomous cogito for an ordinary human is an abstraction for it requires having zero rational cogito or the one with no contact with the external environment and, therefore, incognizable and inexpressible. In most cases, the so-called independent choice is just a riot, and therefore a denial of externally imposed on us choice models. In fact, most affects are still a reaction to external circumstances, although the reaction may go beyond the rational control. It means it doesn’t come from the narrative cogito structure alone. When we say that our mind has a complex structure we shall suggest some models to represent its elements interactions. We won’t be too bold if we assume that narrative cogito plays the leading part in this sophisticated mechanism. The thing we can use to describe the domination option may be the notion of endurance. It suggests voluntary inhibition of other mental manifestations for the sake of aim to be achieved. Sometimes this process is described as the manifestation of willpower or volition.
The above-mentioned system can be enriched with two more elements – affective cogito and well-known to us reward center. Then we’ve a sound enough and quite convenient structure to analyze the addictive behavior. The affective cogito we can define (following the logic of above-mentioned Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Notes from Underground) as a simply independent choice, a counterpart of a rationally advantageous choice. Unfortunately, the English translation of the novel doesn’t fully render the figurative meaning in the Russian original and makes it closer to the strict scientific terminology. What’s a simply independent choice? Firstly, the simplicity isn’t only about something easy to understand, it’s something that can’t be divided to any components. Secondly, such a choice or better say the manifestation of our desires (which is a more accurate translation of the original meaning in Russian) is hereby considered independent from socially programmed narrative cogito. Let’s remark here that autonomous cogito for an ordinary human is an abstraction for it requires having zero rational cogito or the one with no contact with the external environment and, therefore, incognizable and inexpressible. In most cases, the so-called independent choice is just a riot, and therefore a denial of externally imposed on us choice models. In fact, most affects are still a reaction to external circumstances, although the reaction may go beyond the rational control. It means it doesn’t come from the narrative cogito structure alone. When we say that our mind has a complex structure we shall suggest some models to represent its elements interactions. We won’t be too bold if we assume that narrative cogito plays the leading part in this sophisticated mechanism. The thing we can use to describe the domination option may be the notion of endurance. It suggests voluntary inhibition of other mental manifestations for the sake of aim to be achieved. Sometimes this process is described as the manifestation of willpower or volition.