I usually wouldn't post this sort of stuff, as it is a pretty taboo opinion that just gets buried.
But If I don't get any discourse, I can't learn anything or have my opinion changed, anyway here we go...
> If you really understood addiction.
I hear this dismissive retort a lot in the addict community. It's nonsense.
If you can't empirically analyze, measure and explain "what its like", or defend your view-point rationally -
then you've lost.
The attitude of "You just don't get it man! you need to be an addict to understand what its truly like" is complete and utter self-victimization bullshit.
> But, of course, you're not thinking of addiction as a medical issue. You're treating it like a moral failure.
I treat is as both. I guess it depends on your virtues and morals, but in my eyes; logic and rationality comes first. Responsibility lies in the human being behind the labels.
Within the journey of addiction, there are many moral struggles and choices that you'll need to make (avoiding taking action on a difficult choice, is still a choice).
Sure, physical addiction is fucked and withdrawals are fucked. But the second you commit an evil deed to feed your addiction, I lose all sympathy.
I'd rather spend my time helping those that deserve it, than those that need it - I guess that's the crux of my perspective.
Maybe its a little harsh as there are (assumption) a lot of quiet, functioning addicts that just meld into society. I don't have enough information to form a legitimate opinion on that specific subset. My distaste for addicts are purely those that have run the gauntlet and have traded in their morals, decency and humanity in ugly ways to satiate their vice.
I'm not asking you to listen to the pleas of addicts. I'm asking you to accept the medical literature and the opinions of addiction specialists.
Also, you seem inordinately focused on the physical aspects of withdrawal and the moral fortitude required to endure it. I suspect that the professionals would tell you that that's less than 1% of the struggle.
Some people have a genetic predisposition to addiction. Once you get addicted your mind gets warped - that's why it's an illness and not a moral failure.
Would you judge the deeds of a psychotic person as moral failure as well? It's a hyperbole for sure but it's definitely comparable.
But If I don't get any discourse, I can't learn anything or have my opinion changed, anyway here we go...
> If you really understood addiction.
I hear this dismissive retort a lot in the addict community. It's nonsense.
If you can't empirically analyze, measure and explain "what its like", or defend your view-point rationally - then you've lost.
The attitude of "You just don't get it man! you need to be an addict to understand what its truly like" is complete and utter self-victimization bullshit.
> But, of course, you're not thinking of addiction as a medical issue. You're treating it like a moral failure.
I treat is as both. I guess it depends on your virtues and morals, but in my eyes; logic and rationality comes first. Responsibility lies in the human being behind the labels.
Within the journey of addiction, there are many moral struggles and choices that you'll need to make (avoiding taking action on a difficult choice, is still a choice).
Sure, physical addiction is fucked and withdrawals are fucked. But the second you commit an evil deed to feed your addiction, I lose all sympathy.
I'd rather spend my time helping those that deserve it, than those that need it - I guess that's the crux of my perspective.
Maybe its a little harsh as there are (assumption) a lot of quiet, functioning addicts that just meld into society. I don't have enough information to form a legitimate opinion on that specific subset. My distaste for addicts are purely those that have run the gauntlet and have traded in their morals, decency and humanity in ugly ways to satiate their vice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ao8L-0nSYzg