Do drug addicts lack willpower?

An overwhelming majority of countries today frown upon using drugs. Laws are passed and in some the death penalty is offered. The reason given by politicians and citizens who are against it are that drugs destroy the body and make you addicted.

I have been very skeptical about this. Sure some chemicals will kill you like arsenic. No amount of wishful thinking and positivity will stop arsenic from ceasing cell activity. Even drugs can ravage the body.

But back to the question. How exactly can an extreme rush of joy and happiness guarantee one to be an addict for life? Do drugs mess with the function of the frontal lobe? How is it that some can take it twice and never touch the stuff while others steal just to get money for it?

I would like to hear opinions on this?

What is willpower? Is it some kind of spirit force that your eternal soul uses to control your physical body? Or is it some combination of neurons and brain chemicals determined by genetics and life experiences?

I don’t think so… at least they don’t lack any more or less willpower than say… any other people with an addiction.

Addictive drugs both feel good and reinforce your desire to continue to do them. This circle is what makes people do such irrational things in search of the next hit.

Some drugs literally feel good if you do them and “punish” you if you try to stop. This is pretty much a simplified definition of physical dependency.

Combine the two, and you have a powerful set of mechanisms to make it extremely hard for someone to quit- it’s not really about rational thought at that point.

I may be mildly poisoning the well, but I suspect that for many obese people, food acts in similar ways.

Some people do seem to be unable to stop. Millions of people start college every year, and for the next four year, they drink to excess regularly. Then they graduate, get a real job, and almost all of them are able to adapt to life with a far lower level of alcohol intake. But a few can’t.

It’s not clear what is the deciding factor in this. Some of it could be an aspect of self-medication - the person has an underlying mental illness (e.g., chemical imbalance) or psychological issue (e.g., a history of abuse) - and the drug helps to cover it. For others, it could be a lack of impulse control. For yet others, it could be an addiction to the social aspects of the drugs, covering for shyness or fear of isolation. And some drugs are taken with particular goals in mind, to prompt (perceived) creativity, to stay amped up, to grow muscle, etc. So long as the goal exists, the person will want to continue.

Depending on the drug, there can be mystical components. The evidence would be that a drug like LSD or psilocybin causes you to experience things in accordance with how your imagination happens to work (some see colors, others see aliens, yet others see the face of God). So some end up having experiences that seem like they’re seeing answers to the secrets of reality, and become drawn into this, thinking that it’s important that they do so.

There’s a lot of reasons why a person might become addicted, but it’s going to vary strongly by the individual, as will the strength of the effect. Smoking, for example, is notoriously difficult to stop doing (supposedly). But some regular smokers simply decide to quit smoking, and do so without any particular difficulty, just as many people quit drinking as they come out of college.

But one thing to keep note of is that we’re all prey to our brain. Being “convinced” of something is a mental state. Thinking that something is “worth it” is a mental state. An alien species, with advanced technology, could theoretically program us to believe anything and to be absolutely certain of the correctness of that belief. How do you come back from that? Nothing external can be as convincing as something which is completely axiomatic in your head. Anything which contradicts it is clearly wrong, since the one truth is the measure by which truth is evaluated.

Depending on the individual, there’s some ability for drugs to form that sort of situation. By corrupting the signals and logic in your brain, you can become convinced of things due to spikes of dopamine, images of vastness, etc. and now that’s true, to because it got recorded as “truth” by the induced neural reactions.

But, it’s a random chance whether that occurs. Does the person have a strong need for something in themselves? Does the particular combination of drugs and mental states/images happen to align to produce a perceived answer for that need? If so, then that’s where things can go off the wall. If there’s no need and/or the drugs don’t hit the right spot, then it’s just a trippy but frivolous experience.

The withdrawal symptoms of some drugs can literally kill some addicts. If you have enough willpower to go cold turkey, you might have enough willpower to let yourself die. I don’t call that a positive outcome.

What angers me about drug addiction is getting started. Maybe you can’t control your addiction, but if you never took the drug in the first place that would not have happened. It doesn’t help that a lot of addiction occurs during the teenage years, we hold them to a lower standard. (I am not counting people who became addicted due to doctors prescribing them opioids, or “crack whores” who were deliberately turned into addicts by their pimps.)

I’ve wondered about this. I’ve been on high doses of opiods going on ten years now. Recently I went to a new pain doctor and he tried some epidurals to manage the pain. I went off the opiods cold turkey (the doc said to taper, but I didn’t see the need to) and I want bothered I the least. Unfortunately the epidurals didn’t work so I’m back on the morphine, but I was very surprised that I could just stop the opiods with zero issues (other than the pain returning). Why could I, but not someone else? My willpower isn’t particularly strong.

When you say you had “zero issues”, do you mean you had no withdrawal symptoms of any kind? No cravings? No desire at all to take the opioids (other than for pain management)?

Because, if that’s the case, then clearly that’s not strong willpower on your part. If you felt painful symptoms and almost uncontrollable cravings, but managed to resist them, that would be your willpower at work. But if you felt nothing, whatever else might account for that, it’s not willpower.

And, once we recognise that, then it’s a short step to recognise also that this is not a simple binary. It is not a case that drug-users either experience withdrawal symptoms/cravings or they do not. Those who do experience them may experience them with greater or lesser degrees of intensity. So, if User A manages to resist the need to relapse and User B does not, User A having stronger willpower is one possible explanation, but another is that User B has stronger cravings.

Which drugs? Other than alcohol, that is.

Many countries (more than less) prioritize the allowance of recreational drugs alongside the infinitely more that can be prescribed to a person.
Drugs differ in their effect, but studies prove few to actually be physiologically addictive… (namely heroine and alcohol). All others are strictly psychological.

*Before I continue this response Id like to add that arsenic is technically a poisonous element that is combined with others to make toxic substances as well as non-toxic substances. It is known (in its many forms) to cause cancer.
*
Do not confuse politicians with medical researchers.
The laws needed in regards to the regulation of “street drugs” are so complex that politicians have yet to place any federal allowance. State laws mandate separate laws that cannot override federal law and this will probably remain true as federal laws rarely change. Medical researchers do intricate studies to keep people informed of the different drugs available and the possible effects.

As far as condemnation (“making a user an addict for life”) it is my opinion that depending, greatly, on a person, their situations and collective drug use entirely (quantity and how often a user commits to using), knowledge, and beliefs concerning their usage a person may or may not remain addicted.

Not all addicts are said to be addicted to the “high” only. Some are dependent or “functioning” addicts and by wide range in their active living are considered to need certain drugs for specific functions (i.e. - like ADHD patients who use stimulants to help their focus, impulsive nature, attentiveness and/or a combination of any/all three). The organs affected by drugs differ. I would say alcohol, sedatives and some opiates are mainly (alongside hallucinogenics that have an indirect effect on the frontal lobe) those that effect a persons motor skills.

Addressing your last inquiry (the stealing and those that leave it alone) I have to say that as far as evidence shows there is a wide spectrum of people involved in the “war on drugs” (really the war of drugs I think) and to say that because one person walks away they differ from the person that steals to support their habits or “business” is not accurate. Some people may become aware of things quicker and avoid the lifestyle altogether not because they disliked the drug, but maybe because they liked it too much.

I believe the question becomes this:
'If a country or nation or state regulates the use of recreational drugs is there a chance more people will become addicts and if so what effects would this have on the society in and around such legislation?"

I do not think that it is all about will power you have addictive and none addictive personalities, I come under none addictive, I was a heavy smoker for many years, 20 years ago decided to stop and have not smoked since, did I suffer all the horrendous withdrawal symptoms I had been threatened with no, as a single man I used to drink more than a friend of mine who is an alcoholic, I stopped with no ill effects. I think the difference between my friend and myself is I was in the habit of drinking but not addicted for me it is a case of breaking a habit (easy) but not an addiction (hard)
I think that addiction is the result of allowing a substance to cause a chemical imbalance in the brain and it will take more than willpower to correct the imbalance.
But what do I know I am just an ex-truck driver.

Benzodiazepines can also do that. But yeah, not as common as a lot of people assume.

I’m a happier person and enjoy life more fully when I smoke some cannabis each evening. I’m not “addicted” as far as I can tell. I periodically go a week or more without any (I enjoy the lucid dreams that happen when I quit).

So. What was the question?

:smiley:

Barbiturates.