Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,784 Year: 4,041/9,624 Month: 912/974 Week: 239/286 Day: 46/109 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Addiction By Definition
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8551
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 234 of 331 (849798)
03-21-2019 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Phat
03-21-2019 2:54 PM


Re: The Science and Theory of Addiction
Again, there is nothing rational about being driven by emotions and hunger if they, in fact, are bad for you.
Rational or not we are all driven by emotions, hunger, etc. Look at your ape evolution. The "rational" part comes in when trying to control what is irrevocably already there ... the animal. The "rational" part comes in channeling and enjoying the animal, good and bad.
Some of whom you keep out in the yard, while others you let into the house.
Choose your addictions wisely.
We got some smart apes around here.
Nice image, too. Very good, Phat.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Phat, posted 03-21-2019 2:54 PM Phat has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8551
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 280 of 331 (850313)
04-06-2019 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Porkncheese
04-05-2019 6:52 PM


A tentative position would be agnostic as we don't have all the info/evidence available.
If someone told you there was no other life in the universe what is the most logical position to take pending more evidence? Given the data that chemistry and astronomy has revealed you would be foolish to agree even though we have not directly detected other life. The processes are very well known and the numbers involved are staggeringly huge. An agnostic position on this question is an absurdity.
If someone told you that there was a giant polka dotted snail smoking a hookah floating gently 2 feet off the ground on an iridescent lotus blossom in your closet what is the most logical position to take pending more evidence? Given that such organisms have never been seen and that no known mechanisms are known to exist that could produce such an organism together with the fact that the existence of such a thing would violate several well established theories in biology and physics should lead to a hard rejection of such a report pending more data. An agnostic position on this question is an absurdity as well.
Your god falls into this second scenario.
Eg. I have a beard. Do u believe me?
Now this we should be agnostic on. Given genetics and heritage it is not unreasonable nor unknown for a little waif of a girl to sport a beard so it is not outside the realm of human experience to consider the probability.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Porkncheese, posted 04-05-2019 6:52 PM Porkncheese has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024