This great post made me feel like I am back on my studies again! :D

Anyway, I guess that there is a continuum going from not committing to something (or anything) to fully committing to something. And there is a balance between those two as probably an ideal in most of the cases. Additionally, regardless of all the theories, I believe that there are people prone to addictions, and those who are not, as well as those who are between. So, while my friends start watching some series and cannot stop until they finish (so, watching 16 hours a day :D), I usually just start but can't continue, although I usually find them interesting, but I just switch to something else.
So, if we make it this simple, my question (for myself and for the world :D) is what makes a person not being able to commit to some activity that can be benefitial if done balanced. Why is someone workaholic, and why am I struggling to find motivation on daily basis? If workaholism is a stress relief, what is my antiworkaholism (that causes me so much pressure and anxiety)? :D

I also believe that, as addiction is a ventil, or a stress-reliever, everyone finds their own that they can have. Someone can afford shopping, so they can become shopping addicts. Me, for example, I am obsessed with health, so although I could smoke once a month for fun, I could never become a smoker. So, I believe (but it is just an assumption), that in curing addictions, it would be good for psychologists to find that unique mechanism that allows that ventil to exist in a person, and then to work on changing that mechanism to be more useful for a person's life.

Also - I didn't know that only substance addictions are included in the newest version of DSM. And well, it is easy to define them. However, about addictions in general, I think that they should be named 'addictions' only when they cause distress or harm either to a person or to their environment. So, for example, @lifenbeauty would not be able to say that he is TANGdiccted! :D