She read it in a book, therefore it is true.
As you point out in the OP, it already exists, and is perfectly fine. Heck, even if it did decrease quality of life in some ways, but made it better in others, it would be okay.
So much of the problems with drug addicts have to do with criminalization. It’s been shown that food is more addictive than drugs. If food were illegal, you’d better bet people would do all the same things narcotics addicts do.
I mean, I don’t like the idea of being addicted to something. I don’t like the idea of something else controlling me. And, even if the drug doesn’t do anything, it’s still kinda in control, in that you have to make sure you have some. So I guess that’s slightly bad. But not enough to make it illegal.
I’m pretty sure most people who do it regularly are addicted to self-pleasuring, too. People who exercise a lot are probably addicted to exercise. There are too many smaller addictions that don’t cause life problems for addiction itself to be a concern of the state.
To even call a physical dependence on a substance an “addiction”, of any variety, in my opinion is doing a disservice to the understanding of addiction. There is no such thing as a “physical addiction”. A “physical addiction” is dependence. The entire meaning of the concept of addiction is a wholly psychological one.
Well, I did say I didn’t know whether this terminology is/was official. Your objection made me wonder what is “official”; and after a bit of googling I found the following (from a Time magazine article)
That “older perspective” seems to be still around. For example, I found the following (on a site which I do not in any way claim to be authoritative):
I think a lot of people seeing someone go through withdrawal or the DTs would think “addiction” before “dependence.”
Then again, the field has its own entire vocabulary, about which too many people get as snippy as the French Language Police.
Yes, addiction is inherently bad. Even if you want to say “But Grumman, we’re addicted to food, water and oxygen!” we’d still be better off if we could do without those things. Being “addicted” to water is worse than being immune to thirst, after all.
I’m aware of the difference but used addiction for two reasons, and yes I do understand the difference and agree with you.
Number one is that it more well understood, so I wanted people to understand what my thread was about. Also in the endless vaping threads everyone is using addiction in reference to nicotine, and no one is complaining.
Number two I often feel that the use of dependent is a sort of No True Scotsman, I’m dependent, you’re addicted! issue.
Really though I think if you define it this way, most people are dependent whatever the substance including heroin. And addicts would refer mostly to people with personality disorders or who are totally irresponsible, basically the substance would mean nothing it would be the user who had the issue.
I imagine most “addicts” then would be fairly messed up people regardless of the substance, if a guy didn’t have coke he’d probably be letting his kid’s starve so he could afford high price hookers.
And I didn’t really want to open a drug legalization debate, so tried to head that off.
Not to mention that the notion of “character” as used here is also pretty dubious. People don’t knowingly choose to become addicted.
Agreed. Also, being “addicted” to life is worse than death.
Why? Not all addictions involve harm (even social/interpersonal harm) to the individual. I think you can say those are “bad” only in that they may not represent an optimal behavior or use of time and resources, and then you’d have to get into why humans do anything sub-optimally.
I am expanding the notion of “addiction” past chemical use, here. If the discussion is limited to “drug addiction” it becomes essentially self-cancelling.
Can you give me an example of an addiction that doesn’t involve self-harm?
Someone who has been taking narcotic painkillers-for example-long term due to chronic pain issues cannot simply stop taking these medications cold turkey when and if the pain issues are resolved, without experiencing withdrawal symptoms. These withdrawal symptoms the long term pain patient would feel upon sudden cessation of their medication would be exactly the same as the withdrawal symptoms a drug addict who was addicted to the same pain medication that the chronic pain patient was legitimately using would feel when they needed their “fix”. Both were dependent. Only one was addicted.
When they don’t involve self-harm, they are called OCD.
An addiction to sipping water every few minutes. An addiction to eating some small candy at regular intervals. An addiction to briefly exercising every ten minutes.
Not the glam of H or Demon Rum, I admit, but my real point is that discussions that draw a small, tight circle around a term and then argue about it are often self-cancelling.
Habits that don’t rise to the level of having negative effects on a person’s life, despite the compulsion a person has to engage in said habits, I would call “nervous tics”. You are arguing against the very meaning of the word here.
ETA: OCD, I would argue, is something that those who suffer from it might say has had a negative effect on their lives.
Yes, I would say that it’s simply a matter of semantics, not chemistry. In the English language the term ‘addiction’ has an inherent, intrinsic negative connotation.
Supposedly, it causes your body to stress out, which kills you. You become cranky and lose all your friends, your job, have ill health, insomniac, and excrete more water and vitamins, which endangers your health.
Ahhhhhh, I see. That sounds dangerous. Thank you for warning me! Geez. Why don’t they tell us about any of this shit?! WTF. Nobody would drink coffee then. :mad:
As someone with OCD, I can tell you that yes, they can indeed cause self-harm.
It’s possible to drink too much water, so depending on how big a sip they take, and how often, yeah, that can be dangerous. Candy is bad for one’s teeth and it’s fattening. Exercise addiction may not be dangerous, but it’s not always practical, and depends on what form of exercise.