View Full Version : Addiction, physical or spiritual
Peace,
Addiction: Latin, addicere, give assent (to agree ,express acceptance ,or agreement)
1)to give (oneself) up to a strong habit: usually in the passive voice
2) one addicted to a habit
Synonyms: fixation, inclination,bent, obsession, prone accustomed,attached, devoted, fanatic about ,obsessed with ,hooked on....
One, can for instance, be given a compulsive desire for certain (drugs) simply by having them administered to him or her over a course of time. (ie war vets and morphine)
Suppose, then, that i do with neither my knowledge nor consent, thus become a victim of such a desire and act upon it. (is it the vets fault for his addiction?)
Do i act freely, merely by the virtue of the fact that I am unimpeded in my quest for (drugs) ? In a sense I do , surley, but I am hardly free with respect to whether or not I shall use (drugs). I never chose to have the desire for (drugs) inflicted upon me.
Even if ones acts are caused by his/her own own will, and even if they are not externally constrained, they can fail to be free.
If your will is not under your control-(drug dependent) if your choices are not up to you ( intense need, desire for)
---your action are not free they are determined by some outside force or influence.(the drugs)
This next statement is in no way antagonistic it is pragmatic and empirical.
It is easy to understand the last synopsis as to why addicts behave the way they do due to external forces (the chemical addiction) , self inflicted or impressed upon them. There are many types and levels of addicts, and they have many types and levels to their extroverted and introverted tendencies. One now only has to import the word (god) in place of (drugs) and the synopsis still remains applicable.
It is better to believe in "god" and be wrong, then to not believe in "god" and be wrong.....
-Blaise Pascal,
Peace
Peace,
Now lets go a little further in our supposition.
Each of us wants to do many things, and often the wants conflict. All of us have desires for various objects and states of affairs. We desire things like food , clothing, shelter as well as conditions like being healthy, being well informed, spiritual contentment, being well paid.
Desires that are directed on objects or states of being are called FIRST ORDER DESIRES.
A person who acts immediately on their first order desire may be described as executing a FIRST ORDER VOLITION.
Self conscious beings like ourselves are not only aware of the first order desires we have, but we can have desires about those desires. A smoker for example , can have the desire not to smoke. That is, he can desire not to be the sort of person who has a desire for cigarettes.
Desires that are directed on first order desires are called SECOND ORDER DESIRES.
it is possible to have a second order desire without wanting to act upon it. Suppose for example, that you were a preist who regularly counseled people with marriage problems. In such a situation, you might have a desire to know what its like to be married. But you probably wouldnt act on that desire because if you did, you would no longer be a preist.
Second order desires that we want to act on are called SECOND ORDER VOLITIONS.
TO act freely is to act on a second order volition. If one does not formulate second order volitions, or if one does not act on the upon the ones you form, your actions are not free - you are slave to your first order desires.
Hence additiction pure first order desire.
I. E.
Addict no. 1 hates his addiction and struggles desperately
, to no avail, against it power. He tries everything to overcome his addiction but the desires are to powerful and in the end he submits. He is an unwilling addict , helpless to his own desires.
(2nd order volitions but unable to act) not a free action or chioce
Addict No. 2 Indifference or wanton . His sole purpose is self fullfillment throught the drug use by any means and without volition or repose. It never occurs to him to consider whether he wants the relation among his desires to result in his having the will he has.
(no 2nd order volitions) not a free action or choice
Addict No. 3 The willing addict is happy as he is and wouldnt have it any other way, if his desires start to fade he will find new ways to instill them and their intensity.
He exhibits all traits of free action and thoughts, 1st ord desire, 2nd order volition and action. He like being a drug addict so his use of the drug is a free action.
One can easily transfer this logic to many behaivioral exhibitions, beliefs, choices, actions and ones defense of said choices,beliefs, and actions. (Physical or spiritual)
Yet the neccesary requirements for a free action or thought seem to rest purely on the fact of volition after desire and critical analysis of both before action.
Peace
Peace,
In conclusion this is the thought process every one uses with or without malice in their daily choices and decisions on all subjects and desires.
1st order desire, (thought)
1st order volition (willed action) addicts etc...
2nd order desire (2nd thought about 1st thought) logic, reason
2nd order volition (action willed upon 1st or 2nd thought)
logical, reasonable, choice
Of course there is more than this, such as desires upon volitions to the 3rd and 4th powers respectively and consideration of past, present and possible thoughts and volitions. Keeping it simple. the small guide above will assuredly help anyone understand why we make or dont make the choices we do, as well as, why and why not we may or may have not thought about them.
Peace
Peace,
To make a competent rational choice one must have some doubts about their resolve. This is to say that one should pursue their doubts as adamantly as their beliefs. One must research all sides of the equation. For example if one wishes to comment on the benefits of a republic versus a fascist state then one must and should be as well versed in both positions. It is not subversive to know thy enemy as thy self. Admittedly if one were to walk around with the communist manifesto in the pocket they would undoubtedly be chastised to say the least by their peers. However if one were to walk around with that as well as the constitution and declaration ones argument of their quest for understanding would be irrefutable. Remember evil loves and needs ignorance that how it maintains control. Now its not enough to just have these polar opposites in your pocket, although it will deter the armchair philosopher, one with more skills would assuredly turn their argument to the definition of the lexicon instead of the subject matter. That is to say when an educated tyrant can not subvert ones obvious understanding of the truth of the subject matter, they will argue the definition of the word "is" or "of" etc etc. Ergo one now knows that they have turned the debate to their favor because we all know this defense is fruitful only, in as much as the confusion by interpretation it creates. One must carry the dictionary as well or as I like to call it "the big book of words". In conclusion the debate at this point will end with the tyrant resorting to personal defamation and bigotry, intimidation, and all the wonderful behavior despots enjoy.
Take no heed of these attacks as they are the confirmation that you are victorious in your debate, because evil reigns in the darkness of ignorance and abhors the light of the truth. Interpretation is a liberty immeasurable.
Peace
Txanne
03-06-2007, 08:36 AM
Physical addiction--mental obsession which brings on a spiritual //moral decay!!
3 fold---and only a Power Greater than my self pull me back from the brink of total destruction!
PERIOD!!
annie
peace,
You are the supreme power in your physical existence on this planet, having "faith" in a "higher" being or self should only denote ones desire to "do"(be) and "think" (believe) the good.
This philosophically is a "good" thing, the existence of society is dependent upon it. However there really is no argument that can prove or disprove the existence of a "God" in the end it truly is a matter of belief, choice, faith, free will, and that free will is another whole subject in philosophy .
Peace
candy
03-06-2007, 01:51 PM
333
no argument intended 333 , but I know God exists . I know 100% without a doubt, that he exists.
That said addiction can be a tool of Satan, or a form of demon problems of one kind or another.
Coarse you can have just a weak minded human who can't control their urges and impulses too.
Then their are the extreme kind the ones that have a physical background.
But trust me go to God and lay those things at his feet.
Presto, Bam they are gone.
Coarse you gotta believe !
Peace
OK , now heres how it works, its called thought experiments.
Please to the best of your ability , describe in your own words that which is "god" .???
Food For Thought, the discourse previously stated as to why it is certain that "god" exists, and supplements provided ,are the same arguments drug addicts make when they justify their need and usage of their choice drug. It not to disparage or be argumentative it is truth. So....
Please to the best of your ability and in your own words, define "god"???
Peace
Txanne
03-07-2007, 02:44 AM
Physical addiction--mental obsession which brings on a spiritual //moral decay!!
3 fold---and only a Power Greater than my self pull me back from the brink of total destruction!
PERIOD!!
annie
333,
What wonderful a mind you have---and you cut and paste with the best of em.
You research beautifully.
I can tell you--all that typing doesnt mount to a hill of beans to an addict--alcoholic---
Pycho--bable means death to them---all an addict/alcoholic needs is that crap--to use to feel sorry for themselves--pour pour me--another drink/fix.
It is a 3 fold sickness---you will die--go insane or go to jail.
I prefered death---to the insanity.
Reaching out--to GOD --He is that to me---IMO---saved my life--
no long desertation on the evils etc etc did one thing for me.
Now I understand the need of shrinks to autopsy addiction----let em----
I do appreciate your extensive commentaries tho.
annie---in the Spirit
333,
What wonderful a mind you have---and you cut and paste with the best of em.
You research beautifully.
Many thanks I try to do my best.
I can tell you--all that typing doesnt mount to a hill of beans to an addict--alcoholic---
Same could be said of ardent / adamant disciples..
Pycho--bable means death to them---all an addict/alcoholic needs is that crap--to use to feel sorry for themselves--pour pour me--another drink/fix.
See above statement..
It is a 3 fold sickness---you will die--go insane or go to jail.
I prefered death---to the insanity.
Reaching out--to GOD --He is that to me---IMO---saved my life--
Agreed, yet giving human qualities to all that is, seems to fall short...of accurate, divine feminine and all.....saved me as well on several occasions.
no long desertation on the evils etc etc did one thing for me.
Now I understand the need of shrinks to autopsy addiction----let em----
I do appreciate your extensive commentaries tho.
I try to keep it short and on target, difficult with so much to reference .....
annie---in the Spirit
Peace,
In the spirit of objective philosophy, it is simply the same argument form, the addict that is, and the "god" addict. I must try to refrain from my "beliefs' to keep the board objective, I don't have a little "editorial " light to turn on.
I truly relish these discussions and thought experiments as they do not have to our personal preferences, One of my professor's used say it was lonely in his chair simply because he was forced ethically to always play the "devils" advocate so we could learn to free think and grind his argument down. It is never personal. It is just necessary. People need a better argument other than "because I know, or I believe, or worse because some old book says so" these stances unfortunately hold no water in philosophical truths.
In the end most all great philosophers do argue for the existence of an" All that is" or "God", nothing to lose in the end even if we are mistaken, we would have spent a life of pursuing the "good" for ourselves and others.
Peace
LOL sometimes one is forced to cut and paste, its a wonderful feature.
That aside in philosophy we must use objective, debate with thought experiments to divine the truth, in us, for us or better yet for oneself . Admittedly I have had quite a few personal experiences that have proven to me an existence of "All that is"
Txanne
03-07-2007, 04:13 AM
Ahhhhhhhhhhhha a god addiction?
Ok that is new to me!!
and i know you'll explain it to me.
;D annie
Peace,
Ok, so we are agreed that the paradigm or systematic arguments an addict uses are applicable to the drug addict as well as the god addict. Its not personal its how objective discussion transpires, Also for certain, many (recovering) addicts do trade their physical dependence for a (spiritual) substitute , that is to say "they get or find god". More power to them ,what ever gets you through the day, to each their own, no harm no foul. So their obsessive nature still exists , just the focus of their needs and desires has changed. They have traded one "crutch " for another, either way they differ personal empowerment or self reliance, responsibility. They no longer depend on their drug they depend on their, imaginary friend, an awesome powerful friend all be it, but a "belief" none the less. Some would argue that "god" is not as harmful as "drugs" , still others might disagree, both sides with solid supportive debate.
Underlying all these suppositions still remains the fact that the "addict" has not changed the way he thinks and believes hence his transfered "addiction". The cycle is still the same , only the "crutch " has changed. In the end it is the thought process that enslaves or frees a person. Free your mind and your heart and spirit will follow. "All that is"
would undoubtedly prefer his/her creation to not have the need for any crutch, and be the fullest expression of life there is in his/her image, a self reliant, self created, physical, mental, spiritual complete expression of "all that is". That would be the most honorable , homage paid to "god" . IMO
Peace
You are saying that replacing an addiction to drugs with God can be as destructive as doing the drugs?
Actually you said some people could argue so.
I want to see these arguments.
You are saying that replacing an addiction to drugs with God can be as destructive as doing the drugs?
Actually you said some people could argue so.
I want to see these arguments.
Peace,
NO, Other's with greater minds then I have said these things, it is philosophical pragmatic method, and they are saying that the behavioral paradigm, or process of thought, that makes a drug addict , a drug addict, is is is the same process and behavioral paradigm, a God fanatic exhibits.
If you want to see these arguments please open any literature of a philosophical nature, turn to the subject, free will and determinism and formulate your own conclusion.
In the end I would stand my ground a declare, that wanton use of "god" has by far done more damage at large then wanton use of "drugs".
Peace
No, it doesn't work like that.
You came on here and started this topic. You made wild claims, you back them up, or they mean nothing! You claim some people with greater minds than yours have argued that replacing an addiction to drugs with God can be as destructive as doing the drugs!
You come on here and you show us where great geniuses of our time have made such statements, and link us some relevant facts to back those statements up.
I will not research your claims for you!
The only problem I have ever seen with replacing drug use with God is that quite often it isn't enough to keep the person off of drugs. Quite often it's nothing more than a ploy to get something from the Christians willing to give them a hand in their time of trouble, and in these cases they always go back to the drugs, and it causes a lot of headache and heartache for the Christians that just wanted to help.
When a woman deserts her husband and two baby girls for a crack dealer because he will keep her high, when a person is willing to leave their own precious children for a crack pipe, and then willing to do things even more unimaginable than that, things I won't describe here, to get that fix, I don't think anything would be enough. God gives them their choice, and they choose that life.
And anyone that would claim that choosing God over that, is no expert at anything other than hating God!
nancy1340
03-09-2007, 01:47 AM
Well I am certainly no "educated expert" but I know of two people who have substituted God for drugs. Do I think it is more damaging? NO! Not in the two cases I know of. And I know these two people pretty well. Their my son and my son-in-law. One has been clean and "on" God for 15 years and the other clean and "on" God for 5 years.
They both have compulsive personalities. They both are married and one has one child and another on the way.
They both are loving, caring husbands. The father is a good father. Way beyond what I thought his capacity for caring about others could ever be. He owns a very successful business and now lives in a very nice home.
The other is married and his wife is in her mid 40's so they are not taking a chance on her having a child and will someday adopt. She does have a 16 year old and he and my son have a great relationship. After a rocky start. LOL
But I can only speak for these two.
Txanne
03-09-2007, 02:34 AM
333---you would rather a person be on drugs that a Jesus freak?
I had a spiriutal awakening---it took the complusion to drink FROM me--in an instant---I drank out of grief and sorrow--it caught up with me--I wasnt a drinker per say--a Dr recommended I take a little [[drink to ease my nerves ]]since I wouldnt take his dope [[prescribed ]].
Believed in God--was Ordained to the missionary field---
but became over=powered by grief.
Addiction to spiriuality? Sure am---and will remain so---
Where do you come up with this stuff? oh Its a hobby--cool!
annie
Txanne
03-09-2007, 02:37 AM
333
*no argument intended 333 , but I know God exists . I know 100% without a doubt, that he exists.
*That said addiction can be a tool of Satan, or a form of demon problems of one kind or another.
*Coarse you can have just a weak minded human who can't control their urges and impulses too.
*Then their are the extreme kind the ones that have a physical background.
*But trust me go to God and lay those things at his feet.
*Presto, Bam they are gone.
*Coarse you gotta believe !
quoting---of coarse you can have a weak minded person------You certainly can.
See above poster.
annie
No, it doesn't work like that.
You came on here and started this topic. You made wild claims, you back them up, or they mean nothing! You claim some people with greater minds than yours have argued that replacing an addiction to drugs with God can be as destructive as doing the drugs!
You come on here and you show us where great geniuses of our time have made such statements, and link us some relevant facts to back those statements up.
I will not research your claims for you!
Peace ,
Yes, you will do your own research or you will never find the truth, nothing Anyone can ever suggest "in a thought experiment" will have any validity if you play the ignorant ,lethargic ,bigot and refuse to do your own homework, I have read these things , Discussed them, tested, and orated with many folks, everything to you is a fight, or personal, these are not my "claims" they are "thought experiments" they are supposed to stimulate research on your own so you can prove or disprove them on your own.
I have posted one maybe two "personal" post on this forum, none i repeat none , in here. Link yourself, look for yourself that what gives the knowledge some value , bu t apparently your the type that likes it handed to them so you can scoff and turn their nose up. Philosophy is based in truth , not yours or my opinion,.
Deny, that throughout history millions, tens of millions, of people have been killed or worse in the name of "GOD", or because of their personal preference of their own "GOD".
If you want to be mean and spiteful ,or cant handle some objective "thought experiment" please go some where else, theres plenty of threads where you can bicker.
Its not about me , its not about you, its about philosophy.
The "thought experiment" was about the "process of thought " a "drug" addict makes and uses, and its similarities to that of "god " addict, if its more palatable, use the adrenaline addict, or sex addict, or any other addictive behavior it is the same thought process, plenty of research in the first few pages of this thread, to support. Or should I just burn all my books and trust the internet alone.
Peace
Annie,
Please don't take this as an attack, I am only trying to understand your point.
Your post confused me. Are you calling Candy weak minded? If so, please explain why?
I'm only confused because it looks to me like you would agree with what she is saying here.
Dave
333,
Thought experiments, bah!
You are talking through your ass from nothing more than a hatred for God! God didn't kill people, people killed people because they have a choice, because they twist his words. I have a problem with organized religion, but to suggest a person is worse off or at least just as bad on God as on drugs is a far reach, a freaking far reach!
I didn't want to fight with what you said, but your game of "it's true and if you want the truth look it up for yourself" made me that way! You back up what you say or you are spouting drivel and can keep your mouth shut!
I assumed as much when I saw you talking to yourself on this forum about educating people about Philosophy, and ignored much of your drivel!
Claim that you believe it, and you'll have a discussion, state ignorant comments like this as researched fact without backing those statements up and you will have a fight, and you can blame someone else all you want!
You know nothing about God, and probably the same about drugs! Put down the books with some other "experts" twisted beliefs, considering they probably know as much about either of these as you, get out into the real world, go to a church and see those people, then go watch the people buying crack from a dealer somewhere, observe the two groups, and draw your own conclusions!
333---you would rather a person be on drugs that a Jesus freak?
I had a spiriutal awakening---it took the complusion to drink FROM me--in an instant---I drank out of grief and sorrow--it caught up with me--I wasnt a drinker per say--a Dr recommended I take a little [[drink to ease my nerves ]]since I wouldnt take his dope [[prescribed ]].
Believed in God--was Ordained to the missionary field---
but became over=powered by grief.
Addiction to spiriuality? Sure am---and will remain so---
Where do you come up with this stuff? oh Its a hobby--cool!
annie
Peace,
I would rather a person not have the "need" for either, I would rather a person choose freely and be able to verbally "explain" their choice, (see volitions) the spirit is more powerful then the mind, the mind is more powerful then the body. What is so hard to understand about the scientific method of thought experiments. THEY ARE NOT PERSONAL and should not be. This "hobby" that has been denied existence in our "schools " curriculum until college , is the pinnacle of any society, its no wonder the country is in the state its in, we are the only "educated" nation I know of that does not expose their Jr high and high school students to philosophy.
We really need to try and stay "objective" and stick to the topic. I have no personal stake in this, only the desire for objective discussion on any subject. Maybe this one was a little to "deep" , of a thought experiment.
Aside, to make trivial something ,someone is seriously enamored with, is hurtful and mean, annie.
The way humans "think" and "believe" ergo subsequently "act" upon those beliefs is their "Philosophy" not a frivolous hobby.
Peace
Txanne
03-09-2007, 04:30 AM
Annie,
Please don't take this as an attack, I am only trying to understand your point.
Your post confused me. Are you calling Candy weak minded? If so, please explain why?
I'm only confused because it looks to me like you would agree with what she is saying here.
Dave
Dave----I donot agree with her uses of weak minded---weak willed person.
Got nothing to do will power--weak minded.
That is a term used to make one feel superior to others.]]
I wouldnt agree with candy on a very good day--I resent the condesending--superior additude--always have always will.
Do I sound like a weak willed person? Dam sure dont have a weak mind.
Demon possesion? Sure---that exisit I believe --look at some of the posters on here! ;D
The question asked orginally---addiction spiritual or physical?
I ans it is a 3 fold condition--mind body and spirit-/-soul.
I know of a man that sobered up--using a catus as his God---he's as sober as anyone after 17 yrs--But for me--it was God--and I am so adamant in that belief---
frosty wants to start the arguement --that its one addiction replacing another--iicaught that right off.
annie---
You know nothing about God, and probably the same about drugs! Put down the books with some other "experts" twisted beliefs, considering they probably know as much about either of these as you, get out into the real world, go to a church and see those people, then go watch the people buying crack from a dealer somewhere, observe the two groups, and draw your own conclusions!
Peace,
You truly are a sad soul, I see people sitting in pews listening to the "drivel" of some strangely dressed male figure, their dogma and incense choking the air one breaths, and after they all get their god fix, the pass the collection plate, to support their collective habit.
On the street corner its the same only the crack dealer get his money first and then delivers his little piece of heaven , either way its the predator and prey of all weak minded ,subjugated sad souls like you.
There that better you terd, is that the type of discussion that full fills you, you mindless waste of life, I try and raise the level of awareness and like a good little NAZIS you tell me to burn my books.
Ill pray to everyones "god" for your sad sack of a life.
Peace
You know nothing about God, and probably the same about drugs! Put down the books with some other "experts" twisted beliefs, considering they probably know as much about either of these as you, get out into the real world, go to a church and see those people, then go watch the people buying crack from a dealer somewhere, observe the two groups, and draw your own conclusions!
Peace,
You truly are a sad soul, I see people sitting in pews listening to the "drivel" of some strangely dressed male figure, their dogma and incense choking the air one breaths, and after they all get their god fix, the pass the collection plate, to support their collective habit. On the street corner its the same only the crack dealer get his money first and then delivers his little piece of heaven , either way its the predator and prey of all weak minded ,subjugated sad souls like you. There that better you terd, is that the type of discussion that full fills you, you mindless waste of life, I try and raise the level of awareness and like a good little NAZIS you tell me to burn my books.
Ill pray to everyones "god" for your sad sack of a life.
Peace
I have nothing to say to this. ;D
I have nothing to say to this. ;D
Peace,
You are the equivalent of a cyber terrorist, you waltz into a post ,drop grenades and then smile about it, pitiful is to nice of a word. you are the reason this nation is in the toilet.
May all that is bestow upon thee all that you deserve. ;D ;D ;D
Peace
I give you my beliefs, I either state outright that they are MY BELIEFS, or I back them up with some substance!
I expect everyone to do the same.
I smiled because for all your talking and superior attitude, in the end you display the same school yard tactics as the other people on this board that insist on telling us how and what to think. I loved being here to see it. 8)
I now understand what everyone else here calls a troll,
I try and bring the process of objective productive discussion and you, you alone reduce it to "school yard " antics. You crave attention like a four year old , by any means. I gave you some of your own "drivel" in hope you would see how inane it is.
you must be bi polar or something, one or two of your post seem thought full and productive yet the rest are attacks ,attacks attacks, from what i have read you are the expert on everything. Still you have given no rational argument for any of your blabber, only your conjecture and inflamed sense of self. Pop your meds, get right with god, and do the world a favor........
In one forum you seem to attempt a conversation, so I converse. In another you don't seem to want to converse at all, you want to educate, like you somehow have the authority to educate, I take offense at that.
You act like you are the intellectual superior to others on this forum, you say you don't mean to sound condescending, yet you constantly do. I react to such things.
I haven't claimed to be an expert in anything except my own beliefs, I know my beliefs better than any on this forum. All I have ever claimed them to be are my BELIEFS! I don't know your beliefs, and would not claim to, I also wont come on here claiming that my beliefs are fact, like so many will do.
I don't appreciate being told what to believe by people that have no more hard FACTS on the subject than I do. I wont allow a Christian to say I must believe what he believes. I wont allow an atheist to say I must not believe because he does not believe.
You came on this forum claiming that more intelligent men than you have said what I believe to be utter nonsense. I asked you to show who said it, and how they could come to such a conclusion. I asked you to back up claims you made.
For this you call me a troll. You accuse me of only trying to cause problems by my questions. This is the same tactic the Christians use. I don't know the number of times one of them has accused me of trying to cause trouble, or of being mad at or hating God. It is easier to see me as a troublemaker than to address my questions.
Calling me a trouble maker is just an attempt by you to trivialize my questions, to detract from the real conversation, "The only reason he wont take what I say to be truth, instead of demanding proof, is to cause trouble." It's just more name calling. You call me a troll, I ask you, have I called names? No. That is the last recourse of a losing discussion.
I just asked you to back up what you said, if you can't do it, then you can't do it. If what you said is truth then back it up! If it's not then you lied. Then you are the trouble maker, purposely posting inaccurate, controversial subject matter with the purpose of inflaming the forum.
In one forum you seem to attempt a conversation, so I converse. In another you don't seem to want to converse at all, you want to educate, like you somehow have the authority to educate, I take offense at that.
Peace,
Interpretive , and dismissive, How can I possibly be blamed for your interpretation /impression of my vocabulary?
If my printed word, or expression, causes you introspective disdain, i beg your forgiveness, humbly.
Peace
You act like you are the intellectual superior to others on this forum, you say you don't mean to sound condescending, yet you constantly do. I react to such things.
Peace,
How can one possible act , when typing their words?
If your interpretation of my lexicon and vocabulary, effects in you a self conscious criticism. I beg a million pardons. I use these words, for they are concise.
Peace
I haven't claimed to be an expert in anything except my own beliefs, I know my beliefs better than any on this forum. All I have ever claimed them to be are my BELIEFS! I don't know your beliefs, and would not claim to, I also wont come on here claiming that my beliefs are fact, like so many will do.
I don't appreciate being told what to believe by people that have no more hard FACTS on the subject than I do. I wont allow a Christian to say I must believe what he believes. I wont allow an atheist to say I must not believe because he does not believe.
Peace,
Yes , I understand why one could feel that way. Philosophy Is The Study of "BELIEF" , just not yours or mine, beliefs period, or the discourse will not remain objective.
Peace
I don't appreciate being told what to believe by people that have no more hard FACTS on the subject than I do. I wont allow a Christian to say I must believe what he believes. I wont allow an atheist to say I must not believe because he does not believe.
You came on this forum claiming that more intelligent men than you have said what I believe to be utter nonsense. I asked you to show who said it, and how they could come to such a conclusion. I asked you to back up claims you made.
Peace,
Please re read the first four pages to this post, It is dictionary definition, and philosophical supposition. If you need names ,please feel free to research, "free will and determinism" literature, Richard Taylor, Harry Frankfort or whom ever you choose. THEY ARE NOT MY CLAIMS OR BELIEFS ,it is a discussion about beliefs with article reference, to text book ,published philosophers, past and present.
Peace
For this you call me a troll. You accuse me of only trying to cause problems by my questions. This is the same tactic the Christians use. I don't know the number of times one of them has accused me of trying to cause trouble, or of being mad at or hating God. It is easier to see me as a troublemaker than to address my questions.
Peace,
333,
Thought experiments, bah!
You are talking through your ass from nothing more than a hatred for God! God didn't kill people, people killed people because they have a choice, because they twist his words. I have a problem with organized religion, but to suggest a person is worse off or at least just as bad on God as on drugs is a far reach, a freaking far reach!
I didn't want to fight with what you said, but your game of "it's true and if you want the truth look it up for yourself" made me that way! You back up what you say or you are spouting drivel and can keep your mouth shut!
I assumed as much when I saw you talking to yourself on this forum about educating people about Philosophy, and ignored much of your drivel!
Claim that you believe it, and you'll have a discussion, state ignorant comments like this as researched fact without backing those statements up and you will have a fight, and you can blame someone else all you want!
You know nothing about God, and probably the same about drugs! Put down the books with some other "experts" twisted beliefs, considering they probably know as much about either of these as you, get out into the real world, go to a church and see those people, then go watch the people buying crack from a dealer somewhere, observe the two groups, and draw your own conclusions!
THIS IS WHY I CALL YOU A TROLL ,out my ass, nice talk, look at your own post if you wish to find offensive dialect.
Peace
The only problem I have ever seen with replacing drug use with God is that quite often it isn't enough to keep the person off of drugs. Quite often it's nothing more than a ploy to get something from the Christians willing to give them a hand in their time of trouble, and in these cases they always go back to the drugs, and it causes a lot of headache and heartache for the Christians that just wanted to help.
When a woman deserts her husband and two baby girls for a crack dealer because he will keep her high, when a person is willing to leave their own precious children for a crack pipe, and then willing to do things even more unimaginable than that, things I won't describe here, to get that fix, I don't think anything would be enough. God gives them their choice, and they choose that life.
And anyone that would claim that choosing God over that, is no expert at anything other than hating God!
PEACE
You see the problem, everything out of your mouth is I, I, I, I it is not about you and your beliefs or me and my beliefs , IT IS ABOUT BELIEFS hence philosophy.
PEACE
Calling me a trouble maker is just an attempt by you to trivialize my questions, to detract from the real conversation, "The only reason he wont take what I say to be truth, instead of demanding proof, is to cause trouble." It's just more name calling. You call me a troll, I ask you, have I called names? No. That is the last recourse of a losing discussion.
Peace ,
Your last sentence here is precious, since your foul and abusive words are rampant, whereas I may or may not be guilty of big and intimidating words, you have no problem slinging around little fouls ones.
"You are talking through your ass from nothing more than a hatred for God!" - YOU
"You back up what you say or you are spouting drivel and can keep your mouth shut! " --YOU
Well enough I believe, the point is objectivity is key when discussing beliefs, / philosophy. I displayed poor behavior for your benefit , 3 post out of 300, you win , you dragged my conceited ,egocentric ,narcissistic , self into the gutter with you, shame on me. l At least you understand now that philosophy is objective, where as one's personal philosophy is subjective.
Peace
It's all about me, you are right. I state what I believe based on things I have seen with my own eyes. I have been to church and I have seen the people give their hard earned money just like you claim. They paid the preacher, and the song leader, so that these men could do what the people wanted them to do on a full time basis. They paid for the building that they voted as a group to have built. They paid the electric bill so that they would have lights and a cool place to congregate. They paid a youth minister that babysits their kids at least 2 nights out of the week, singing songs, and having fun without drugs, alcohol, or sex. They give to charity groups to ensure that the homeless, and the hungry are taken care of. They do all this because they want to! They don't wish they could quit church, and just can't kick the habit! they want to be there! They even, regularly, all cook dishes and come together after the service to partake of this meal, because they want to be there, it's a fellowship, that they enjoy. You act like Christians are weak and just follow where they are led, like they don't have any choice in what they believe, the absolute number of different denominations within Christianity is proof that this assessment is wrong. The fact that you can go through a southern town and see not one Baptist Church but several, because even within a denomination there are splits, attests to the same
I have also seen with my own eyes the poor girl addicted to crack, come and try to beg a crack rock off the local dealer. I say beg because he got the last of her money from the sell he made to her earlier. She offers sexual pleasures because he refuses to just give it to her. He isn't interested, what can she do she pleads, she cries, please! Tell you what he says. See my doberman... No, I am not lying, I am not exaggerating, or twisting facts. You'd be totally surprised to see what someone addicted to crack will do to get that next fix. A habit that most wish they could kick, and just can't find the strength. If God can grant that strength and help her out of that gutter where she is disrespected so much and helps her get on a pew in a church where she can find respect for herself then, yes absolutely I believe 100% that this is the best thing for her. I will come right out and say so. I will claim responsibility for my own beliefs, instead of blaming them on an author of some book that will remain unnamed. I will even go so far as to tell you how I came about my beliefs. You won't. So yes, it has been about me.
I state what I know from what I have seen.
I asked you if you were saying God was worse than drugs. You claimed, no, not you, smarter men than you, your opinion doesn't count. So I asked you what smarter men, what did they base this conclusion on.
You still refuse to answer.
You understand that picking apart my posts, only trying to answer what I say, says that you are out of new arguments, it is another of the final stages of an argument, it shows that you are getting desperate, it's a lot like name calling and insults.
At least you haven't challenged me to meet you personally yet. I had someone on another thread offer me their address. "Bring it!", one said! Like, if we fought and they whooped me, that would make them right.
LOL!
Come now, I am finished with this argument, get in your last jabs so that I don't have the last word on it, I am fine with that! Then answer my next question without the hubbub, let's turn this into a decent conversation, like we are having on the other thread.
Do you not at least try to distinguish between physical addiction and mental addiction? You know, You have to have medical help to quit some drugs, because just quitting will kill you.
You still refuse to answer.
You understand that picking apart my posts, only trying to answer what I say, says that you are out of new arguments, it is another of the final stages of an argument, it shows that you are getting desperate, it's a lot like name calling and insults.
At least you haven't challenged me to meet you personally yet. I had someone on another thread offer me their address. "Bring it!", one said! Like, if we fought and they whooped me, that would make them right.[quote]
LOL!
Come now, I am finished with this argument, get in your last jabs so that I don't have the last word on it, I am fine with that! Then answer my next question without the hubbub, let's turn this into a decent conversation, like we are having on the other thread.
Do you not at least try to distinguish between physical addiction and mental addiction? You know, You have to have medical help to quit some drugs, because just quitting will kill you.
peace,
Ok I do not know why the most important note I left yesterday didnt make it on,
I spent my whole adult life"out and about and sometimes destitute in the streets", I have seen many things that would make "normal " people shudder and regurgitate.
The opening supposition, are thought experiments designed by ,accredited philosophers ,with the intention of discerning the "thought" process that takes place in addictive behavior, as well as , the descriptive dissection of "levels" of or "states" of addiction. See Harry Frankfurt, and Richard Taylor, free will and determinism, articles on the "wanton" addict and "addiction".
I did post these yesterday and once before when you requested them. I do not get why post get dropped ,does this happen to you?
Separating your post is not an attempt or last straw in losing debate, I find it a way of dispelling miss communication, addressing points one at a time.
When you re read those articles , I hope you will see that they are still not "my" personal beliefs, they are methods used in discussing addictive behavior. Regardless of the source of addiction.
I use an analogy of the "spectrum" of life, on one end you will find the most "extreme" of behavior in the, let say "bad" sense , on the other end of the "spectrum" the "extreme" good sense. "good and bad" are just our parameters no meaning needs to be applied, left, right, -,+
so............
one may find an addict anywhere on this spectrum, he/she (jane)could be a complete vagrant on the street trading favors of all sorts, degrading themselves to no end, forsaking those they have great concern for them, and all the pain and suffering that follows this choice or lack of choice. we will put this example at the "bad" end of spectrum. Jane makes no "secondary desires or volitions".
Now at the other end it very well maybe your average "joe" who works nine to five, loves his family, full fills his duties and obligations, etc, but the minute he gets his/her down time ,they indulge in the same drugs as the former example, they are addicted just the same, only the illusion created (by joe) denotes "secondary volitions" he/she understand the nature of their addictive behavior, and keeps it in check, an addict all the same.
NOW , my supposition addiction, spiritual/physical was simply this,
The same spectrum of people ,only insert spiritual extremes,
ON one end of spectrum, God hating, humanity detesting, vile anti social socio-path, devoid of spirit. They get their "high" denouncing and degrading all that is, does'nt care who they hurt their sole purpose is to pursue the "high" received from their actions.
On the other end, antique book carrying ,in your face, evangelist ,with absolute certainty, that they and their beliefs are the only path to god. They get their "high" proselytizing and proclaiming. In their fervor over their beliefs they forsake others, and the possibility that they may be inaccurate with their own beliefs never enters their mind.
They both exhibit the same behaviors as addicts, (lack of volitions etc) or ignoring their volitions all together. As well lack of any volitions to the people around them.
In the end, on the spectrum of people and their behavior it can be argued that the qualities (behavior) exhibited by "addicts" is not bound only to the use of drugs as commonly accepted, perspective interpretation , it may be applied to the behavior overall, due to the chemicals the brain releases when one is in that state of mind, i.e. sex addicts, adrenaline addicts,
drug addicts, chocolate addicts, love addicts, hate addicts,scandal addicts, peace addicts, god addicts, devil addicts etc etc. Once again, not my personal beliefs,
just a paradigm of how one may perceive and define this addictive behavior.
To answer your question, I believe it is first ,chemical, mind created, detoxification aside, addiction is in the mind first, physical is just a by product.
Peace
Peace,
I find complete solace in the fact that there is interest in philosophy on this site, although the views far out weigh the posts yet, I will continue to do my best to stimulate solid philosophical understanding so there will be less "drivel" in the world. I am by know means an expert but I refuse to stop pursuing the truth and knowledge. I refuse to accept a world that is the way it is because someone else tells me so. The purpose of doing philosophy is to instill harmony and stimulate free thinking, to resolve conflict not to be a proponent of it. If at time my words come across as "patronizing, condescending, etc," I assure you with my entire spirit this is not the case. The anonymity of this form of communication is extremely American on many levels. I have no need of an ego and the worldly pain it causes, this should be kept in mind when engaging in the "thought experiments" of philosophy and your pursuit of your truth.
Peace
Wow 333, you really took some knocks on this one didn't you!
It has been months but I still feel the "burn".
Philosophy can be funny sometimes because thought and emotion are of course two different things.
You and I will disagree on any number thoughts, but we will not abuse one another with emotion.
Addiction: Drug verses Religion (spiritual)
Well... I think we know where some stand don't we?
But are they really standing upon the foundation they think?
We have a very clear example of why religious addiction is much more dangerous than drug addiction.
Nineteen drug addicts can run Nineteen lives... and Txanne was quick to righfully point out that many more are affected in that destruction.
But we also know that nineteen religious fanatics (addicts) can destroy the lives of thousands... hundreds of thousands... millions in fact!
Oh but emotion enters.
That "bastard" better not be talking about my God... Alah to be sure, but not my God!
Well, "my God" is foundationally Christian.
That does not mean that Christian addicts have not destroyed more lives than chemicals ever could, simply that they did so without my support.
But you see that is where Txannes point comes back.
Addiction is a very personal thing.
It is a burden that can not be born by any higher entity than the individual that bears it.
Yes many are affected perhaps even destroyed but the burden is singular.
Because of this the attempt to compare is negated.
Let's say that a man is suffering the burden of drug addiction.
He has harmed his loved ones and himself.
So he fights that addiction and transfers the wants and desires involved into food.
He struggles just as before but in a different way.
Let's say he turns to his idea of religion.
And he transfers those addictive qualities to that religion that he understands.
Let's say the man's name was Jim Jones.
Do you see the problem?
Jim Jones killed 900 people...
But we are faced with the fact that Jim Jones was a Christian who was definately not a Christian!
His religion was perverted by his addiction... to power to glory to... whatever.
And eventually other Christians are justified in declaring, that is not my Christianity!
But we have come full circle then haven't we?
Ask any Heroin addict if pot is a problem.
Ask any alcoholic if cocaine is too much to handle.
Ask a gambler who is addicted if they have a problem donating to the church.
In the end, yes... any addiction can be transfered.
It is the nature of addiction. It is what it does.
But now we get to where I think you caused anger.
Can one be forced into addiction?
Hmm...
Indoctrination is not the same as addiction.
Bring it on my freind! :)
Bad_Omen
07-12-2007, 11:38 PM
I’ve just spent time reading through this post from start to finish. An interesting and contentious subject to be sure. But it occurs to me that it got hijacked by religious zealots. As wax put it the ‘not my God’ squad. Religion shouldn’t really enter a philosophical debate, but given the subject matter that was never going to happen. To be fair, given the current climate I can understand why Christians are feeling persecuted and feel the need to defend their faith constantly.
However I feel a lot of people missed the point here. It seems to boil down to a couple of fairly simple questions.
1)Can a person be addicted to religion?
2)Is that a bad/harmful thing?
The answer to question 1 is of course yes, as has been pointed out/confessed to by a number of posters. That’s the simple one out of the way.
Number 2 is of course the sticking point here and the one that has aroused so much wailing and gnashing of teeth. I can of course only answer that from my own perspective and my answer would have to be that yes it can be. The important thing to note there is the ‘can be’ part of my answer. Before the Christian version of a fatwa gets issued for my head, let me explain further.
All will no doubt agree, history is full of crimes against humanity committed in the name of God. These crimes have been committed by people addicted to religion and all that they receive from it. Churches are, of course, also full of perfectly good people who want nothing more than to live in peace with those around them and help their fellow man. That is of course a good thing. There is, however, a similarity between the two, they are both addicted to what they get from their religion. They may get very different things and be at polar ends of the good/bad spectrum, but they are no more capable of kicking their habit than the crack addict begging for their next rock. People who claim god cured them of the demon drink are fools at best and down right liars at worst. All they’ve done is replaced one addiction with another. If the bible was proved to be nothing more than a story book tomorrow; they’d be addicted to something else within hours.
So there you have it, yes, a person can be addicted to god, but it’s down to that person whether or not that addiction produces good or bad results, which is actually separate to the question of whether the addiction it’s self is a good or bad thing. But that’s a whole other argument.
As to wax’s parting statement about indoctrination not being the same as addiction. To my mind you’re technically correct, however that doesn’t mean that indoctrination can’t or won’t lead to addiction. Once a person is indoctrinated into a religion they will come to rely on the feelings produced in exactly the same way every other acolyte or crack addict does. This of course doesn’t just apply to religion but to anything along the same lines, socio-political movements, cults, survivalist groups and extremists of all kinds.
WileyCoyote
07-13-2007, 02:01 AM
Thanks, 333.
I definitely relate to what you say. May I take it a step or two further?
In my education and experience, an addictive personality is a personality that needs something that occupies their entire existence. Something to live for - even something in which to invest and indulge and involve their every waking moment. They will fight for it. They will kill for it - or die for it. They will let it swallow their whole life and become a slave to it. It fulfills a deep and desperate need in them - a need to be swept away, swept up (or down), a need to be a part of something larger, stronger, and more drastic than they themselves could ever be. That need can supercede the basic needs of food, water, and shelter. That need can cause them to kill without thought or die without concern for themselves or anyone else.
In those senses and terms, there is little difference between addiction to a substance that alters the perceptions and reactions and an addiction to a religious ecstasy. Both are about the satisfaction of a desperate need. Both are about sacrificing one's "self" to an outside influence that changes them. Both can be destructive to that sacrificial self and to those around them.
It is easier to replace one addiction with another than to thoughtfully and carefully cast off all addictions, and to come to a complete understanding of one's inner self - one's true needs, wants, desires, how to satisfy them without causing injury or insult to anyone around them, and how one relates to both the world at large and the day to day demands of existence.
To make the choice to believe in a god or spiritual being, and to follow its precepts without denying or arguing against others having that right, is the true sign of growth. Passion and emotionalism in any discussion defeats the discussion, the sharing of ideas, the communication of inspiration, and restricts the souls of the discussers to thoughtless retorts and paranoiac perceptions of being attacked where no attack exists.
Bad_Omen
07-13-2007, 02:17 AM
wonderfully put Willey.
WileyCoyote
07-13-2007, 05:05 AM
Thanks, and ditto to you! ;D
Peace,
Thanks folks its nice to read good conversation, rather then always attempting to stimulate one or blather on incessantly. It is very easy to run ones mouth if egoism is ones disposition, but the most rewarding road, for me anyway, is to listen or in this case read.
Certainly this topic ruffled a lot of feathers and caused DWH and I to butt heads but in the end philosophy wins. No burn here Wax, the kitchen and its temperature have never dissuaded me prior and will not hence.
I am inclined to believe that "ALL THAT IS" would rather a human be self reliant, and in balance with ones sense of self, physically, mentally and spiritually, responsible for all his/her thoughts and deeds, then to broker them off to a "higher" power. That is to say its extremely easy to blame or differ to "All That Is" responsibility for the human condition.
Excellent discourse thanks,
333
Wiley- Both are about sacrificing one's "self" to an outside influence that changes them.
Wax- Yes... and it brings up an interesting question.
What is the mechanism of addiction in the human psyche?
What is the nature of the thing?
What is it actually designed to do?
333 pointed out my example of indoctrination verses addiction, he rightfully stated that the first often leads to the second.
But why?
Let me submit one observation so we can address it:
Indoctrination has evolutionary benefit for a pack hunting predator.
If a small proportion of a given population has a natural tendancy to lead and the majority have a tendancy to follow then a pack can remain stable.
But it concerns more than that:
"We will push these bisons in your direction, your job is to stand there and wave this skin".
OK...
You see there must be a mechanism that insures followers will be able to negate fear in such a situation. Something that will overcome fight or flight (because the natural tendancy in such a situation of course is flight!)
And that is where indoctrination comes in.
"We" must become more important than "Me".
"Us" are much more important than "Them".
It doesn't matter whether one is discussing a group of ancient hunters or a modern group of Catholics (or any other organization) because the mechanism for indoctrination is the same.
I happen to be a Christian, but I have seen the zeal in anothers eyes during a service and witnessed automatic response mechanisms (raising of hands, sitting and kneeling on command, tears... yes actual tears during testimony) enough to know that indoctrination in religion often becomes addiction without any realization on the indoctrinants part.
So do you think I am close or not?
WileyCoyote
07-13-2007, 12:07 PM
But then - what influences indoctrination? To use you, wax, as an example, you "have seen the zeal" and the indoctrination in others - but why does it not affect you similarly? Because, you may believe in Christ and the Bible, but will not follow directions from a Jim Jones or a David Koresh, nor even take up snake handling nor throw yourself on the floor, speaking in tongues - why are YOU different? Or, why are THEY?
I honestly believe (again from my own and witnessed experiences) that it takes a deep-seated need to become an addict of any type - a need that is not satisfied by any 'normal' feelings of joy or pain. Those of us with normal needs may want to be happy, or pain free, or joyful, or blissfully unaware - but we also recognize that those states are transient. Addicts do not. They crave more and more, an ever-increasing overload, of that state. Those who attack them, or even try to reason with them, in that state are seen as evil - someone who would take that euphoria away from them, an euphoria that they fought so hard to achieve!
It may be a chemical imbalance of serotonin; but why and how do some addicts quit and become rational and functional again - but others do not, can not?
It is easier to be pain free, it is easier to be happy and mindlessly turn one's life over to an addiction where there are no choices to be made or where the choices do not matter... just as it is easier to turn one's life struggles over to a higher being, or an evangelist, or a politician, than to battle them out alone. But just because it is easier does not make it better, more productive, more growth-inspiring, or more enlightening.
IMHO, anything that makes our struggles here "easier" is born of Evil. I believe we were put here to combat evil, to learn to be brave and fearless, or at least smart and capable, to combat the evils that beset us. Throwing them all on the backs of alcohol, crack, weed, or God defeats our divine purpose, and rescinds our responsibility for what we are to become. I.e., the 'twinkie' or the 'menopause' defense, or 'the crack made me!' or 'God told me to!' - all are excuses for not taking responsibility for our own lives' directions.
I think "God" is far bigger, far more distant, and expects more from us than sitting waiting for the Rapture to Save Us (as well as to be the final "SEE? I told you so!"). But then I'm not too crazy about sitting around on clouds all day with a harp in my hand, either.
Good observations Wiley, I personally suspect that "immunity" to indoctrination is as basic as "need".
At one time I was extremely interested in the paranormal, it was a part of my search for theology and the truth about life after death (I still have interest but for a very different reason).
I started to observe that the mechanism concerning "paranormal investigation" was very similar to theological indoctrination.
The need to believe.
People will actually see and react to what they see in an expected manner.
They see what they are told to expect to see.
That is... a certain percentage of people.
You and I can hear a slight "warble" on a magnetic tape... but if we tell others that it is a ghosts voice saying something like, "I am here." a certain percentage of the people who listen will convince themselves that they hear exactly that.
I have paid good money to attend a number of hypnotic sessions.
My favorite is presentations to large groups because the reality of what is occuring becomes more clear.
All hypnotists will quickly point out that some people can simply not be hypnotized.
I happen to be one of them... oh I will go through the motions just like the rest but I can not be hypnotized.
The easiest explanation for that is the one an associate who studied hypnotism gave: "Only followers can be hypnotized, leaders can not be."
So what does that mean?
A person who can be hypnotized has given over their will to the group. They perform as expected. And they are expected to not realize what they are performing... so... they don't!
Yet it is a performance; a performance of expectation.
Drugs can be strange like that.
I have personally taken just about every illegal drug out there. I have even abused a few... alcohol for a short period of my life and amphetamines when I was younger to overcome the affects of manual labor.
Yet I have never suffered from emotional addiction.
Is that because I do not adhere to expectation that one must?
Any indoctrination is really a performance at heart... and any addiction has at least form of that as well.
* *
WileyCoyote
07-17-2007, 03:48 PM
Yes and what puzzles me is this.
I also have taken every single drug out there with the exception of heroin. Some I used every day recreationally - but when I put it down, I was done. I have been recreation-drug-free for many years now. I never grasped the whole "addiction" thing - although I had many friends who became addicted, some to the point of death.
The 'addiction' that fails my comprehension now is the false addiction. I know several people (but one in particular) who live their entire lives claiming addiction to one drug or another. They go into rehab and come out all clean and shiny - and the next thing you know, they are claiming another addiction to still another drug. I have sat with may addicts when they have come off of drugs, both as a friend and professionally, but this new 'false addiction' puzzles me. These fakes have absolutely none of the signs and symptoms of coming down or off of their current drug of choice - yet are adamant that they are suffering withdrawals.
A few weeks out of rehab and they are crying wolf about some new addiction - and the attention-getting cycle repeats itself over and over, with a new shrink, a new support system, a new set of friends to wear out with their tirades and tears.
I don't grasp this "addiction to addiction" at all. Yes I know it is a deep-seated need for attention, but why? Why bother? Why lose friends who know or eventually learn that you are a phony, why play constantly on other peoples' emotions, why is all of the Sturm und Drang necessary for their existence? Why is all that emotional inconsistency a necessity, even an addiction, for some?
Wiley- Why is all that emotional inconsistency a necessity, even an addiction, for some?
Wax- I would suspect that because at it's base "addiction" fulfills a psychological function.
Declaring addiction insures a supportive environment in a "treatment" location.
This is why that "first step" is an admission of addiction.
But once that step is taken the adherent is promised absolution... because the next step is claiming that you are completely without guilt.
Claiming to be powerless and asking for (blaming?) a higher power, to assist provides an emotional release.
So what happens when one stands and declares an addiction and does not receive that expected emotional support?
Well that would be like dropping acid and not getting high wouldn't it? Obviously a "bummer" and so eventually that acid will be avoided... and so will those who do not support a claim of addiction.
Peace,
I don't grasp this "addiction to addiction" at all. Yes I know it is a deep-seated need for attention, but why? Why bother? Why lose friends who know or eventually learn that you are a phony, why play constantly on other peoples' emotions, why is all of the Sturm und Drang necessary for their existence? Why is all that emotional inconsistency a necessity, even an addiction, for some?
MY .02 A complete and total absence of self reliance/sufficiency.
Claiming to be powerless and asking for (blaming?) a higher power, to assist provides an emotional release.
Of course, exactly, I agree with this statement.
Emotional Release as you state, no different an effect, then a choice "drug". Self released chemical from with in your body, vs induced from with out.
Sincerely wonderful to chat with you folks,
Thanks
333
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.