MickeyAnMeisce

A little from column A and a little from column B.

I am somewhat confused as to how one can state that they have complete control of one's alcohol consumption while simultaneously declaring that the only way for one to manage one's alcohol consumption is to abstain absolutely and in perpetuity. In my thinking, if one can completely control their drinking, one ought to be able to drink moderately.

No motives. Just trying to understand the argument for the "drinking is a choice" model.

Terminally Unique

Drinking in the first place is under one's voluntary control. Once you get a few drinks in you, though, your self-control will be obliterated, and you will have a lot more. If you don't start drinking in the first place, you will never drink to excess, either. Where is the contradiction?

What is so difficult to understand? If your drinking causes you problems - in other words, you cannot reliably "control" how much you drink once you start so as to not have problems - then you can choose not to drink at all.

Problem solved. Very simple.

MickeyAnMeisce

I was thinking more along the lines of "drinking as moral choice" model in which those who fail to stay abstinent are somehow corrupt. But I also think that this is leading down a different path than is really pertinent to the thread.

That is my fault for not thinking more linearly.

ElvisInASkirt

The thing is I don't want to drink any alcohol whatsoever. If there is still desire to drink then the addiction is very much alive.

I can't think of a single benefit to drinking.

Constantly trying to negotiate grounds for a drink is a surefire sign that alcohol holds too much weight in someone's life.

I'd rather drink soda and be myself.

lilotto

Ttal914, as you can see from the various replies to your post. For each of us it is like a glass bowl full of unique colored rocks each different in its own yet similar to all the others. They are all inside the glass bowl. As for being an addict or not it would be wise to explore the fuller meaning. Don't settle for being labeled one way or another seek out the truth for yourself. You might surprise yourself at the conclusion you reach. You might want to start with the first three steps of the twelve steps. Another good place to start looking for answers is You Tube. There are many good videos discussing the theories behind addiction. I will see if I can find some links for you to check out.

In the mean time to thy own self be true.

Boleo

That's my experience as well. That is why I call myself "Recovered". I am liberated from ALL thoughts of drinking - good and bad. I do not manage my abstinence in way shape or form. I do not choose sobriety ODAAT. I do not fear relapse. I do not go to meetings to stay motivated or reminded of what will happen if I go back out (I go to meetings to help others).

Today I spend more time thinking about toilet bowl cleaner than about alcohol (I need to clean the toilet bowl weekly). I do not think about drinking the cleaner nor do I have to choose not to drink it. "I can't think of a single benefit to drinking" it.

soberlicious

I do have control over my consumption. I don't consume. I have absolutely no desire to consume. I never said (nor do I recall any other poster saying) that they can successfully moderate alcohol consumption. I don't have to believe I have a disease to know that abstinence from alcohol is the cure for my addiction.

I suppose it is difficult to understand because you are coming from a different paradigm. "Free your mind, and the rest will follow"

soberlicious

Not the enemy...each and every one of us is a vital part of any discussion. I don't want to speak for TU, but I think his reference was to another discussion we had on the Addictive Voice. I think this discussion has been civil and I, for one, appreciate everyone's posts. They have all helped me.

My .02 to the OP, no I don't think once an addict always an addict, as long as we're not talking about shoes here LOL

MickeyAnMeisce

Despite my participation in AA, I still disagree that I am powerless over alcohol, as I can complete abstain sol;ely on my own volition.

It is, however, my experience with other thought disorders (or, dare I say psychiatric conditions?) that leads me to believe that one can be in complete possession of their logical faculties but still be compelled to perform actions that they don't want to. For instance, on of the diagnostic criteria for obsessive compulsive disorder is that the patient realize that his/her obssesions and compulsions are irrational but still feel powerless to not perform his/her compulsive behavior.

Suffering, as I do, from OCD, I know what it is like first hand to check if a door is locked and then, through some unfathomable feat of immagination, think that door has suddenly become unlocked. Simply not performing the compulsive behavior does not mean that one is cured of OCD, because the anxiety that precedes the behavior is not allayed.

soberlicious

I agree. I understand and empathize with your OCD issues. Have some of my own that have been quite debilitating. I do believe though, only because it has been my personal experience, that those issues can be addressed with a cognitive approach and be "cured" if you want to use that word. Changing a belief can, and did for me, result in stopping the anxiety that preceded the problematic behavior, thus stopping the problematic behavior. Only speaking for myself here.

fuster

You fail to understand that in the time of Galileo, empiricism was not an accepted method of acquisition of knowledge, whereas today it is the crux of it. So trying to argue against overwhelming empirical study and data is putting yourself in the shoes of those who thought Galileo was nuts. So your argument is illogical. But go ahead, you can do your own research for the rest of us. I appreciate it. Let me know what you find out in about 20 years.

ElvisInASkirt

Wishing anyone 20 years of hardship with alcohol isn't really something to make light of or be cynical about..

Anyway.

If you believe that alcoholism is a disease then it follows that you believe that it can be arrested and contained through life long abstinence.

If you believe to the contrary then you believe that you are no longer an addict as long as you practice life long abstinence.

Life long abstinence is all that should matter regardless of your views on addiction.

soberlicious

.
LOL, thanks for setting me straight, fuster. When I grow up I wanna be just like you!

freshstart57

Fuster, I am new around here, member at SR for only a month or so. I think that anyone who argues against overwhelming empirical evidence and data is nuts, including Galileo's detractors. Like you, I don't follow groupthink ideas either, without looking at factual evidence supported by reliable, traceable data.

So, where can I find this data? I'd like to see it so that I can make my own decision about it. Thanks.

soberlicious

Fuster, I would be interested in seeing the data as well.

Threshold

coming in late to this discussion, but it seems my take on my situation is a bit different from others here, so I thought I'd share it, in case it resonates with anyone reading this very interesting thread.

I am an addict. I have been an addict as far back as I can recall. Substances are not my problem, the fact that I use substances, behaviors, bizarre rationalization to hide from life IS my problem. Take away booze and I'll use drugs, take away drugs, and I'll use sex, take away sex and I'll eat myself sick, take away binge eating and I self mutilate.

Taking any one substance or behavior out of my life doesn't address the fact that I am an addict. I am not an alcoholic, foodaholic, sexaholic, cutaholic, I am an addict.

The only way for me to truly improve my life is for me to address ME, my compulsion to put anything and everything between me and reality.

Is that a disease? I feel it falls more into the category of a disorder, my thinking, feeling and behavior is disordered.

There are people here who decided to stop drinking and never wanted a drink again, and their lives returned to "normal". I never was normal to begin with. I've stopped drinking for years, and didn't miss it, but I was acting out in all other sorts of disordered ways. Because drinking isn't my problem, the disordered thinking is.

I have no qualms about referring to myself as an addict, because it is true. I can't tell you if I will always be one or not, no clue.

I do know that many don't feel as I do, they had an issue with a particular substance, I have an issue with me.

I don't use the fact that I am an addict as a justification or excuse for bad behavior, or the reason I relapse. I relapse because I get tired and discouraged about life and decide to use disordered behavior to blot out my fear.

I personally feel that I won't be "cured" but I can learn to manage my disorder so my life is more orderly.

onlythetruth

For me, the essence of true recovery is that I no longer feel any sort of connection to my former addiction--no desire to engage in the behavior, no need to identify myself in relation to it.

vinepest

Your argument is basically an appeal to authority. While authorities tend to have a higher rate of success than laity (or so it seems in my experience), they are still quite often mistaken. For instance many psychologists seem to operate under two completely false assumptions: that (1) materialism is true; and that (2) failing to assume (1) constitutes something of a scientific handicap. So what else might they be wrong about? In the case of alcoholism, if psychologists recommend AA (and it's not clear to me that they usually do) then anyone familiar enough with AA to recognize that it's [self-censored to abide by forum rules] has reason to doubt the psychologists' assessment. Now, maybe the psychologists know something (relevant) that we laypersons do not. But although the force of their authority might shake our confidence, we still have to use our own judgment. Until we actually can assess for ourselves the evidence which has persuaded these psychologists, all we have is their word for it. And while that counts for something, it's not always enough to overturn what we can plainly see for ourselves when we look at AA, the so-called disease concept, habits of "addicts," etc.

Boleo

Thus spoke Boleo's signature.

freshstart57

I think we agree here, Vinepest.