I still don't get why you prefer the tautology that it's only an addiction when it causes life problems? How does that help?
Because we don't treat people for chewing sugarless gum for example?
Maybe we should!
Well,
treatment is a strong word, but we should at least be willing to help instead of pretending it's a non-issue.
The other advantage, particularly when we are talking about alcohol or drug abuse is that patterns of destructive behavior are a lot more concrete a point than we get from comparing usage patterns, and a lot less deniable. In short, the harm causing aspect of addictions is an easily recognizable idea, and even someone who has a lower level of imbibing can be classified.
So, because it is easier and the alternative is difficult? That's lame and unconvincing.
Look this is not my definition. For example, here is a definition of alcoholism from an article in JAMA from 1992.
I don't care who invented it, you are the one who is pushing it. Really though, I'm talking about a more-encompassing definition for addiction and you are referencing a 25 year old definition of one particular addiction.
Are you just arguing to arguing the definition of a word? Let me know, I'll drop it if that's the case.
Some folks throughout each week but manage to cut themselves off at a level that allows them to live with others in their house without abusing them and to go to work the next morning. Other folks cannot.
I could argue that the functional addict is even
more addicted. So much that their sick mind realizes that it needs to maintain itself in order to keep the addiction, and is unwilling to allow "life problems" to interrupt that. These people need help just like the ones with life problems, and to pretend like its not really an addiction because there's no apparent harm is a serious disservice to many folks.
Some else already quoted a similar definition regarding drug dependency earlier in this thread.
I guess I'll go fish, then? How about a little quid pro quo? I gave you links.
I'm totally addicted to nicotine and it's not causing any problems in my life, see Message 20.
We've been through this. I pointed out that tobacco does have health effects. To which you responded something like, "Oh I did not know you meant that." Of course, I did mean exactly that. I understand that you may be vaping now. I don't know if that has health effects.
Right, but we've been
passed that. "Having health effects" is not the same as "causing life problems". What if you found out that gum chewing was loosening people's teeth over the years and having health effects? Would you suddenly start classifying that as an addiction to treat?
In any event, my preferred definition is not circular.
"It's only an addiction when it causes life problems", whether circular or not, is not a good working definition.
As I understand it, my definition is pretty much yours with an additional requirement that there be some harmful life consequence.
Right, and I think that sucks. It's like if we didn't teach children how to cross the street until after they've been hit by a car.
Why wait until people start harming themselves before you start trying to help them? Because it's easier? Pssh.
My definition may be very open-ended, but it is not circular. I'd appreciate it if you could point out the circle in my definition.
Maybe its not the definition, itself, but instead like you said it is the argument for the definition. "It's not an addiction unless it causes life problems. Oh, that "addiction" isn't causing you life problems; well, then it's not really an addiction."
Approaching whether or not something is an addiction by determining if it is harming the person leaves out a bunch of addictions that people could use help with. Now, regarding treatment, perhaps there are limited resources that would be better spent on harmful addictions. But that's not what we're doing here. And if people want help with their unharmful addictions, telling them that its not a True Addiction
TM is a terrible thing to say to them - and a serious disservice. It's immoral.
Here's my definition of an addiction: a compulsion to act that manifests a false need. You have the urge to do something because your mind has been tricked into thinking that you need to do it when you really don't.
Even when that is unharmful and/or doesn't cause life problems, it is still something we can address and help people with. Also, knowing more about unharmful addictions can only help us better understand the harmful ones. Waiting until people start harming themselves is a terrible approach. We don't wait to teach kids about the dangers of playing with fire until they start burning themselves. And we shouldn't delay helping adults understand addiction until it becomes a problem in their life.
I can run about two miles and I just bought myself a new bicycle 
™ Version 4.2
(1)