Creatix / December 16, 2025
Auguste Rodin’s The Thinker depicts a man hunched forward, elbow on knee, chin resting on fist, absorbed in silent concentration. Two centuries later, the same posture fills cafés, subways, offices, and living rooms across the world except nowadays thinkers are doom scrollers addicted to their phones. The resemblance is uncanny. The question is unsettling: are we witnessing a modern form of thinking, or a modern form of self-harm? Is scrolling the new thinking or the new smoking?
This article explores the neuroscience of deep thinking versus scrolling, the historical suspicion toward “unproductive thought,” the recurring panic around disruptive technologies, and whether our critique of scrolling is exaggerated, incomplete, or fundamentally correct.
The Posture That Didn’t Change, Only the Object Did
Rodin’s Thinker looks inward. The modern scroller looks downward. But physically, the two are nearly identical: curved spine, bent neck, withdrawn attention. From a distance, one might confuse the thinker with the doom scroller and vice versa.
That similarity is more than aesthetic. Both thinking and scrolling involve sustained attention, internal simulation, and dopaminergic engagement. Yet the direction of cognition differs profoundly.
The Thinker: attention turned inward, slow, generative, effortful
The Scroller: attention pulled outward, fast, reactive, externally driven
Same posture. Different neural economics.
The Neuroscience of Thinking vs. Scrolling
Deep Thinking: Slow and Constructive Dopamine Flow
Deep thinking—reflection, problem-solving, imagination—relies heavily on the prefrontal cortex and the default mode network (DMN). These systems allow us to:
Simulate futures
Integrate memory and meaning
Build coherent narratives
Exercise self-control and abstraction
This mode is metabolically expensive. The brain consumes more energy, effort feels real, and progress is slow. But the payoff is learning, insight, and long-term value.
Scrolling: Quick and Destructive Dopamine Hits
Scrolling primarily exploits the dopamine prediction system. Each swipe is a variable reward:
Novelty without commitment
Information without integration
Stimulation without memory consolidation
The brain isn’t “thinking deeply” so much as sampling endlessly. Attention fragments. The DMN never stabilizes. The prefrontal cortex yields control to habit loops. This doesn’t mean scrolling equals complete stupidity, but that it trains the brain differently.
Was Thinking Ever Considered a Problem?
Surprisingly, yes.
For most of human history, thinking without visible output was suspicious. In agricultural, military, or slave-based societies, value was measured in physical labor. A person lost in thought could easily be accused of laziness, disobedience, or rebellion. They would be severely punished unless they would get back to work immediately and stop "wasting time".
Imagine a slave sitting silently, head down, unmoving, lost in deep thinking. Is he avoiding work? Resisting" Planning escape? Questioning authority? Historically, thinking was dangerous when thinking was not your job.
Philosophers, monks, scribes, and scholars existed precisely because societies carved out exceptions for thought. The rest were expected to work. In that sense Rodin's The Thinker sculpture was socially provocative: a man doing nothing, yet portrayed as noble.
Is Scrolling Just the New Thinking—and We’re Misreading It?
This is the charitable interpretation.
Scrolling can:
Democratize information
Expose us to ideas we would never encounter
Enable informal learning
Provide social connection and emotional regulation
Spark curiosity that leads to deeper inquiry
Just as reading once seemed passive compared to oral tradition, scrolling may appear shallow only because it’s new, fast, and poorly integrated into norms of discipline.
Socrates famously distrusted writing, arguing it would weaken memory and genuine understanding. He was partly right, and spectacularly wrong. Writing didn’t destroy thinking; it restructured it.
Every disruptive technology looks cognitively corrosive at first:
Printing press → fear of information overload
Novels → fear of moral decay
Radio → fear of mental passivity
Television → fear of attention collapse
Scrolling may simply be the latest chapter in that story.
Or Is Scrolling Actually Like Smoking?
Here’s where the analogy gets uncomfortable.
Smoking offered:
Immediate pleasure
Stress relief
Social bonding
Aesthetic rituals
But also:
Dependence
Tolerance
Health damage
Diminishing returns
Crucially, there was no healthy dose.
Scrolling shares several alarming traits:
Designed for compulsion, not completion
Escalates in time without intention
Degrades attention even at “moderate” use
Competes directly with sleep, focus, and presence
Unlike food or alcohol, scrolling has no natural satiety signal. There is always one more swipe. Content is also practically infinite and more and more is added every minute. By now, with billions of humans on social media, there are billions of comments, posts, photos, videos uploaded every single day. Social media addictive scrolling is not a moral failure, but a design feature of modern society.
This is why many people report that balance feels impossible. Not because they lack discipline, but because the system is optimized against it. You can't beat the system. There are no limits. Your brain is at risk of complete overload because it did not evolve for worldwide social media. Put simply, evolution did not engineer you to have so many "friends" and follow so many people. You are the guinea pig of a generational social engineering experiment.
So Which Is It: Balance or Abstinence?
The honest answer is: nobody knows yet. We all know that smoking kills, but smokers centuries ago didn't.
Intentional scrolling (searching, learning, connecting) should be able to coexist with deep thinking.
Reflexive scrolling (automatic, bored, anxious) replaces deep thinking.
The danger is not that scrolling exists, but that it crowds out the mental silence required for thought. The Thinker needs boredom; the brain needs boredom. Scrolling annihilates boredom.
If scrolling is used like a tool, balance may be possible. If it is used like a pacifier, quitting may be the only path.
History suggests humans eventually adapt:
We invented libraries, not endless pamphlets
Curricula, not infinite books
Broadcast schedules, not 24/7 novelty
If scrolling proves truly harmful, cultural norms—and individual strategies—will evolve to contain it.
From Scroller Back to Thinker
Rodin’s Thinker reminds us that thought has always looked unproductive from the outside. Yet civilization is built on moments when people appeared idle when, but were silently rearranging the world.
Scrolling may not be totally hazardous like smoking, but we don't know yet. If complete abstinence is "impossible", try deep moderation.
Balance is required. It's essentially impossible to live without a smartphone these days. Now, we don't need to become their slaves. We should not surrender to technology. We should welcome boredom back into our brains to reclaim the ability to sit still and think on our own like Rodin's Thinker. Also we need to move our butts around as often as possible engaging in physical activities that prevent us from doom scrolling.
Now you know it.
www.creatix.one (creating meaning...)
ForLosers.com (now on Kindle)
Comments
Post a Comment