Does anyone here dare be honest and say they struggle with addiction?
Q: Do you suffer from addiction? A: No. I enjoy it.
Does anyone think that addiction is not a definite societal problem and that one mans sin is another mans leisure?
I've heard addiction defined as a behaviour that effects every area of your life - work, home, etc. If you can hold a job and maintain reasonably peaceful interpersonal relationships, I don't much care what bad habits you have.
Re: Addictions and Demons and Things That Go Bump In The Night
As far as not caring, the first model of the Stages Of Change is pre-contemplation.
I think we should be in a state of pre-contemplation all the time. The unexamined life is not worth living, as Socrates said. The first line of defense against addiction is awareness.
When I said I don't care I meant that I don't care if something I do can technically be called an addiction. The actual effects on myself and those around me are all that matters, not a match with a definition in a book.
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.
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?
The brain may, however, be sending false signals.
The brain is sending conflicting signals. How do we choose which are "false"?
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.
... do you intuitively know which understanding is the better of the two?
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.
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.
When I see people making bad decisions I wonder if they ask themselves, "Is this going to improve my life?" Of course we all make decisions based on a combination of logic and feelings, so being "in touch with your feelings" isn't an end in itself.