DriGuy

It's just normal I suppose when we realized our drinking was out of control. If it's out of control, the logical response is to control it. We then go off on a mission, repeating the same mistake until we come to realize there is a flaw in the plan.

The plan looks flawless written down on paper. It's simple and what scientists and mathematicians sometimes refer to as"elegant":

THE PLAN
Drinking is out of control
Get drinking under control
Problem solved

Scientifically inclined or not, all of us can recognize the straightforward simplicity and elegance of the theory, and we automatically adopt it, first consciously, and later we commit it to our subconscious. Then we proceed by executing the plan. The first time it fails, no problem. Not even rocket scientists get it right on the first try, and we just try it again and watch it fail a second and third time.

A reasonably intelligent person should begin to suspect there may be a flaw in the plan after the third failure, and I suspect some actually do. But some of us don't. We decide to make a small adjustment in our strategy, because we have a vague realization of what causes the failure.

Enter the universal rationalization of drinkers, dieters, smokers, all sorts of habituated and frustrated lost souls as we make the adjustment: "Just one one won't hurt!" On paper this thinking is also flawless. Eureka! We can now proceed with the plan in confidence, only to fail again.

I won't insult the forum by explaining where the hidden flaw in this plan is. You all spotted it when I presented the plan in formalized writing. Having said that, I'm not sure why I felt compelled to present that which has been addressed hundreds of times in the forum already. OK, in my defense, I wrote it because many lost souls out there are still working the plan with meaningless tweaks that produce no results.

I did appreciate the comment in the Big Book (or did I just hear this in a meeting): “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”. At one time I credited Bill Wilson for this observation, but later was told it's a quote from Albert Einstein. In truth, the true author is unknown. It's a cliche', although a brilliant one when applied to alcoholic behavior.

August252015

Good thoughts.

For me, the simplest "counter" to the plan you're rightly saying many think is intuitive...is that addiction is insane. It doesn't follow the equation or analogy of any type of control.

The only control is....giving up control. And figuring out how to live in recovery. Once you get that freedom, it is so much simpler, clearer and ultimately easier.

WaterOx

I don't know of many people who "plan" to have "just one". If anything, that is what any plan is supposed to prevent.

DriGuy

What?!! My plan doesn't work? Well, OK. It was flawed. Fatally flawed. So how about this fix: "Two won't hurt?"

Your plan is admittedly better.

DriGuy

Intuition is often flawed. Personal bias is one flaw as in:

Normies can control their drinking.
I am a normie.
I can control my drinking.

The second statement can be a bias. It's something we might want to be true, but may not be. This is a mistake I made in my early attempts to control. I saw alcoholism as a horrible weakness stemming from lack of character. That perception was wrong on so many levels. Weakness? Yeah OK, maybe semantically speaking, but whatever it was, my alcoholism was undeniable. In reality, I'm not a normie.

In fact, I "proved" to myself that I was a normie on a few of occasions by not drinking one night, sometimes by not drinking for two nights. This helped reassure me that I was a normie after all. But in the bigger context of of my life, I never really solved my problem with alcohol or found any control until I quit for good.

I added [trying to] to your comment about control, because that fit me better personally. Once I replaced trying to control with total abstinence, I was home free after a brief period of withdrawal, and then it was clearer and ultimately easier, dramatically so.

Figuring out how to live is a life long pursuit, common to both recovering alcoholics and normies, as all of us deal with aspects of life. I actually see dealing with life as separate from recovery. I think the twelve steps combine both issues. But I deal with the two issues separately. For me, recovery was just a step that opened up an array of alternatives and opportunity, none of which required alcohol in my diet.

I think we are talking about the same thing with slightly different perspectives. Both can be enormously satisfying.

August252015

I think abstinence is selling ourselves short of what can be had if we choose recovery - which is so much different.

DriGuy

Agreed. If all we wanted out of life was abstinence, we WOULD be selling ourselves short, but abstinence is just a step. It only puts us in a position to reach greater potential. How each of us does that and where we end up may be different. That's why I separate recovery (which I call personal growth) from abstinence.

The 12 steps addresses both abstinence and personal growth, because abstinence by itself seems rather pointless. By adding suggestions to achieve personal growth, it makes the whole more meaningful, and each supports the other. They are suggestions as Bill Wilson notes, leaving the way open to other alternatives toward recovery.

At least that is the way I make sense out of it.