I wasn't just trying to be smart. It was a comment on my understanding of jim's post. The last line, about everyone I know being a raging alkie, was a bit sarcastic but otherwise the post was pretty straightforward.
When it comes down to it I don't know that there's an actual functional definition of "alcoholic."
Someone who drinks too much: Who hasn't?
Someone whose drinking causes some sort of problem in their life: Whether it's getting yelled at by your boss for being hungover at work once in a while or chronic issues with your loved ones, alcohol causes all sorts of little nuisance issues and major problems.
Someone who loses control: already discussed.
The list goes on but you get the point.
This is one of the main reasons I refuse to go to counseling for my alcohol/drug problems or anything else (a lot of which greatly contributed to my use). I absolutely hate the way psychologists babble on about words they have never defined. Every person is different so there's no set definition, or the definition has so many qualifiers and loopholes it is useless. The entire pseudo-science of psychology really can't offer much because they can't even agree on what they are discussing.
JMO.
(I will now crawl back into my lab and study natural sciences, where we can all look at a rock and agree that it is, in fact, gneiss. Blessedly unambiguous. We can argue lots of things about that rock, but at least we know what it is.)