Originally Posted by
PiratePrentice 
...if you study addiction long enough and examine a specific case long enough, there is logic.
With this statement, it certainly has run its course.
You've stretched the meaning and the applicability of the word 'logic' so as to make its use meaningless.
All we need to do is study addictions or a specific case long enough, and then we can deem the process of addiction logical. Never gonna happen. I've studied addictions and have coordinated large-scale, federally-funded studies on addictions for many years, including the Collaborative Study of the Genetics of Alcoholism, a multi-site study across the States, that continues on for the past twenty seven years. We
in the scientific community remain stumped by the sheer irrationality of the condition itself and the near-total absence of contributions provided by science.
Naltrexone is not a remedy for addictions; it only reduces or mutes the positive feelings associated with drinking. CBT is a form of psychotherapy that has been adjusted for the use of treatment for addictions. Beyond your two examples, nothing else remains in terms of logical and scientific contributions to the treatment of addictions.
"There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Philosophy meaning "science." -- Hamlet, by William Shakespeare