Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-14-2018 5:49 AM
196 online now:
Meddle, PaulK, Pressie (3 members, 193 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 841,910 Year: 16,733/29,783 Month: 721/1,956 Week: 224/331 Day: 2/98 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
56
...
16NextFF
Author Topic:   Addiction By Definition
ringo
Member
Posts: 15567
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 46 of 227 (758667)
05-30-2015 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Phat
05-29-2015 6:07 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
Phat writes:

Its not the length of sobriety so much as it is the total number of days of sobriety overall versus the total number of relapsing(irresponsible,rebellious) days of addiction hat make up the big picture.


I worked with a young fellow who used to quit smoking every week - a day or so of abstention in every seven.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Phat, posted 05-29-2015 6:07 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Phat, posted 12-27-2015 4:32 PM ringo has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3964
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 47 of 227 (758679)
05-30-2015 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
12-11-2014 3:03 PM


Re: The Science and Theory of Addiction
A good yard stick about addiction is to define when the addictive behaviour becomes a problem for the person.

I've known people (myself included) who would smoke weed every day for years and have a job and family and a good life. I know full well that at a time in my life if somebody had asked me to quit weed I would have laughed at them.

My take on things is that if one's behaviour does not affect their quality of life (however that's defined) then even though they may not be able to stop (at that time in their life) then there is not much of a problem: certainly not a treatable problem.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 12-11-2014 3:03 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Phat, posted 12-27-2015 4:25 PM Larni has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 48 of 227 (775088)
12-27-2015 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Larni
05-30-2015 7:02 PM


Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Recently I have been studying the work of Dr.Jeffrey Schwartz one of the world’s leading experts in neuroplasticity.
quote:
. He is the author of almost 100 scientific publications in the fields of neuroscience and psychiatry, and of two popular books, "Brain Lock: Free Yourself From Obseessive-Compulsive Behavior" (1996) and "A Return to Innocence: Philosophical Guidance in an Age of Cynicism" (1998). His major research interest over the past two decades has been brain imaging/functional neuroanatomy and cognitive-behavioral therapy, with a focus on the pathological mechanisms and psychological treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

Last year I studied some of Dr.Patrick Carnes, an addictions expert. Both of these men are leading researchers in the field of addiction and both basically agree on the behavior of the human brain during addiction and how the brain heals from addiction when it becomes an entrenched disorder.

Dr.Carnes says that it takes the brain at least a year to heal, basing his conclusion upon the clinical analysis of hundreds of patients. Schwartz concurs, saying that a patient who seeks relief from obsessive/compulsive disorder can basically change their brain...but...(and this is a BIG but) it takes a lot of time, mindfulness,pain and active participation in retraining or rewiring the neural pathways.

Schwartz has what he calls the Four Step Method.

Four Steps Explained

Step 1: Relabel
Step 2: Reattribute
Step 3: Refocus
Step 4: Revalue

I am currently working on refocus and reattribution of the obsessions and compulsions. Many of you know of my struggles with addictive behaviors, and the evolution of my awareness in this field. Schwartz calls it a medical condition, and i am inclined to agree.(not blaming my problems on an external cause,however....my wanting to change is an all-important first step.

Larni, have you used any of this in your clinical practice?

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Larni, posted 05-30-2015 7:02 PM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Larni, posted 11-03-2016 12:27 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 49 of 227 (775089)
12-27-2015 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by ringo
05-30-2015 12:13 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
I worked with a young fellow who used to quit smoking every week - a day or so of abstention in every seven.
Rational Recovery was my earlier study, and I grasped the concept of personal responsibility in the process. What I failed to understand, however, is what Jack Trimpe (Founder of RR) called the Beast nature of my limbic brain and the failure of my understanding the faulty mixed signals. RR made it sound so easy---just stop! I prefer fantasy over reality, however...and justified my preference by self invoking God to turn fantasy into reality.

Earlier this year I won $5000.00 and found myself in hot water deeper than ever! I became worse. I refused to face the pain of reality and the hard work of actively changing my brains biological "character".

ringo writes:

What about the need to blame somebody besides ourselves? Would that be an addiction too?

Yes and no. The research has quite clearly defined(through brain imaging) that the OCD is a medical condition. The problem is that I cant blame satan nor ask God to fix this condition for me. The responsibility lies with the patient.

There are definite stages to the recovery process.

One patients definition is this:

quote:

The 4 Emotional Stages of Sobriety--
Stage 1 – the joys of the natural high--first couple of months---as far as I have gotten.
Stage 2 – boredom and why me?---this stage has so far stopped me.
Stage 3 – resolute but bitter..facing the damn feelings!
Stage 4 – understanding (and accepting) a life without the addiction.

The final stage is the best. Over the last couple of years I have worked through many emotions and feelings of regret, sadness, anger, bitterness, sorrow, remorse, jealousy and fear. After a good year and a half, the negativity became noticeably reduced; as my self-esteem grew and my appreciation of the world and everything in it was heightened due to the clarity that comes from not poisoning your body with alcohol on an almost daily basis, it was as though the bad thoughts were mopped up one by one by my new found positivism and optimistic take on life. (...)It would have been perhaps easier to jump straight from Stage 1 to Stage 4, but the journey has allowed me to learn so much about who I really am, minus the veneer of alcohol, and I wouldn’t have missed it out even if I could have. I had no idea that when I stopped drinking it would be necessary to undergo such emotional turbulence; to feel as though my old self has been through a seriously intense re-calibration before being reinstalled with a new lease of life, eventually leaving a turbocharged version of me back in the driving seat of my future. I didn’t expect any of that, but I am 100% happy that it happened.


Note how long it took for the full healing process to take place. Carnes states that the brain begins to reset itself after 150 days. Schwartz calls it neoplasticity yet does not mention a specific time frame. My best guess is that the brain changes between the 5th and the 18th months.

I have never been able to remain sober from my addiction longer than 60+ days. Carnes says that it takes six months to even heal enough to bring back the negative feelings that lie repressed.

Edited by Phat, : edit

Edited by Phat, : clarification

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ringo, posted 05-30-2015 12:13 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by ringo, posted 12-30-2015 2:57 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15567
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 50 of 227 (775255)
12-30-2015 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Phat
12-27-2015 4:32 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
Phat writes:

Stage 4 – understanding (and accepting) a life without the addiction.


I have to say that gambling is an addiction that I can not understand. I don't find gambling the least bit appealing. I'm horrified at the prospect of losing, not thrilled at the prospect of winning.

I can understand the appeal of alcohol. I can also understand a life without alcohol but I don't know how you can go from one understanding to the other.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Phat, posted 12-27-2015 4:32 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Phat, posted 12-30-2015 3:11 PM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 51 of 227 (775257)
12-30-2015 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by ringo
12-30-2015 2:57 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
The point is that you can understand what appeals you.(or to you) Knowledge is power.

At this point I am no expert.

God grant me the strength to face the necessary pain that precludes healing. All bets are off on whether or not I will succeed.

I used to believe that one needed to hate their sin (addiction) before being able to master it.

Currently I am of the opinion that it is quite all right to acknowledge that I really like my addiction. Or at least I think I do. The brain may, however, be sending false signals.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by ringo, posted 12-30-2015 2:57 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 12-30-2015 3:24 PM Phat has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15567
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 52 of 227 (775259)
12-30-2015 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Phat
12-30-2015 3:11 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
Phat writes:

The point is that you can understand what appeals you.


My point is that I can understand what appeals to me and I can also understand that it isn't good for me - I can hold both understandings in my mind at once, even though they're contradictory. The question is, how do I change my behaviour to coincide with one understanding and not the other?

Phat writes:

The brain may, however, be sending false signals.


The brain is sending conflicting signals. How do we choose which are "false"?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Phat, posted 12-30-2015 3:11 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Phat, posted 01-01-2016 3:02 PM ringo has responded
 Message 55 by Phat, posted 01-03-2016 8:14 AM ringo has responded
 Message 188 by Phat, posted 06-13-2017 8:37 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 53 of 227 (775421)
01-01-2016 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by ringo
12-30-2015 3:24 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
I'll explain this better as I progress in my own recovery. It is one thing to be able to explain a process and theory logically--anyone can read the research of others. It is only after having tested their theory--personally---that one can truly explain it.

One question: How do you personally know the difference between your understandings? Can you identify a distinct difference in how you feel about each one, and do you intuitively know which understanding is the better of the two?


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 12-30-2015 3:24 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by ringo, posted 01-02-2016 10:44 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 15567
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 54 of 227 (775504)
01-02-2016 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Phat
01-01-2016 3:02 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
Phat writes:

How do you personally know the difference between your understandings?


What appeals to me is intuitive. I can't explain to you why I like pickled herring or why I don't like cashews but it isn't something I have to think about. What's "good for me" has more to do with outside influences - what other people tell me. I "know" that sugar is bad for me but I don't feel it.

Phat writes:

... do you intuitively know which understanding is the better of the two?


Well, I intuit one and I know the other.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Phat, posted 01-01-2016 3:02 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11403
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 55 of 227 (775615)
01-03-2016 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by ringo
12-30-2015 3:24 PM


Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
The brain is sending conflicting signals. How do we choose which are "false"?

For me, it all boils down to what I want out of life.

Who was it who wisely said "all things in moderation"?

Some things can be safely done in moderation--such as eating chocolate cake.
Some of us can have just one or two drinks--no problem.

Others start drinking, knowing that they will stop when the bar closes.

The Rational Recovery folks say that there is an addictive voice within all of us.

The only time that a conflict really occurs is when we want to stop--or slow down--and find ourselves actually unable to do so.

As long as we allow our inner Beast everything it craves, nothing will ever change.

So then the question---how do you know which inner voice is the Beast and which is your conscience?

Several keys:

  • The Beast lives largely in the present moment. The future consequences are never considered.
  • The Beast does not care about our health. It only cares about our present desires and happiness.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 52 by ringo, posted 12-30-2015 3:24 PM ringo has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 56 by ringo, posted 01-04-2016 11:01 AM Phat has responded
     Message 58 by xongsmith, posted 01-07-2016 3:17 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
  • ringo
    Member
    Posts: 15567
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 1.6


    Message 56 of 227 (775711)
    01-04-2016 11:01 AM
    Reply to: Message 55 by Phat
    01-03-2016 8:14 AM


    Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
    Phat writes:

    •The Beast lives largely in the present moment. The future consequences are never considered.

    • The Beast does not care about our health. It only cares about our present desires and happiness.


    Of course the Beast isn't only a problem with addictive behaviour. We need to control our impulses to punch people or to skip work, etc.

    As you say, the real problem is in recognizing the Beast.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 55 by Phat, posted 01-03-2016 8:14 AM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 57 by Phat, posted 01-07-2016 2:09 AM ringo has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 11403
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.2


    Message 57 of 227 (775948)
    01-07-2016 2:09 AM
    Reply to: Message 56 by ringo
    01-04-2016 11:01 AM


    Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
    The consensus among scientists now is that OCD is a medical disorder rather than simply an impulse control disorder.

    Once the characteristics of this beast are relabeled and re attributed to a broken feedback loop in the brain, work can begin on refocus and revalue.

    It takes patience and tenacity. First and foremost, however, is a willingness to let go and use logic and reason. Experts say that the healing really starts after 150 days sobriety. i have never made it past 72 days in my life.

    Mentally and logically, I see the big picture. Emotionally, however, i am taking baby steps.


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 56 by ringo, posted 01-04-2016 11:01 AM ringo has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 59 by ringo, posted 01-07-2016 10:49 AM Phat has responded
     Message 85 by Phat, posted 10-30-2016 7:53 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    xongsmith
    Member
    Posts: 1860
    From: massachusetts US
    Joined: 01-01-2009


    Message 58 of 227 (775951)
    01-07-2016 3:17 AM
    Reply to: Message 55 by Phat
    01-03-2016 8:14 AM


    Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
    Phat inquires:

    Who was it who wisely said "all things in moderation"?

    If memory serves me well, this was written above the gateway into the Oracle at Delphi from the times of ancient Greece.


    - xongsmith, 5.7d

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 55 by Phat, posted 01-03-2016 8:14 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

        
    ringo
    Member
    Posts: 15567
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005
    Member Rating: 1.6


    Message 59 of 227 (775969)
    01-07-2016 10:49 AM
    Reply to: Message 57 by Phat
    01-07-2016 2:09 AM


    Re: Rational Recovery Philosophy Examined
    Phat writes:

    The consensus among scientists now is that OCD is a medical disorder rather than simply an impulse control disorder.


    I don't doubt that there's a medical component but that's not an excuse for behaviour.

    Phat writes:

    First and foremost, however, is a willingness to let go and use logic and reason.


    This is what seems contradictory to me. It's a medical disorder, so we use logic and reason to cure it? We can (hypothetically) use logic and reason to control our behaviour in spite of the medical disorder - but that doesn't seem to be working reliably.
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 57 by Phat, posted 01-07-2016 2:09 AM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 60 by Phat, posted 01-07-2016 8:42 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 11403
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.2


    Message 60 of 227 (776036)
    01-07-2016 8:42 PM
    Reply to: Message 59 by ringo
    01-07-2016 10:49 AM


    OCD and Biochemical Changes
    It's a medical disorder, so we use logic and reason to cure it?
    The Four Step Program can be used with or without a therapist and evidence shows that by understanding what is happening medically, one can literally change their brain biochemically over time. There are MRI images that confirmed this. We can (hypothetically) use logic and reason to control our behavior in spite of the medical disorder - but that doesn't seem to be working reliably. Before, when I merely relabeled the dysfunction as "The Beast" it was never enough for me---perhaps because it never made logical sense. I knew that the beast arose from the Limbic Brain but I never was able to vilify my own beast enough.

    Understanding that it is a medical condition basically gives me no excuses---apart from suicidal tendencies--to keep being obsessive and compulsive. One key is what jar used to always say to me---that I preferred fantasy over reality. I have met the enemy and he is I.


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 59 by ringo, posted 01-07-2016 10:49 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

    Replies to this message:
     Message 61 by Phat, posted 01-24-2016 2:02 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    Prev123
    4
    56
    ...
    16NextFF
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018