> [Original Message] > From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 1/16/2006 3:28:02 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: a million little pieces > > It's curious to me that if one exhibits several > symptomatic factors of an addiction (in the > "disease" parlance) they are said to be diseased. > If however, after extensive interviews, they > display to their 'aide' that they can stop and the > do in fact stop, then the aide falls back on the > circular argument that "oh, well then you aren't > really addicted in the first place." > > ____ > > Q: What is an alcoholic? > A: Someone who drinks more than their doctor. > > Twelve-step AA people have their own circular > arguments. You have a disease against which you > are powerless, according to those folk. When you > "hit bottom," you go to the AA rooms and seek help > to stay sober. You follow their program and its > ideology, etc., not to cure disease but to place > it in remission, sort of. Thus if you decide to > stop drinking by yourself, reject the AA ideology, > you still have the disease, but you are what they > call a "dry drunk," which is like an accident > waiting to happen. > > What doesn't change is the diagnosis: disease. > Everything else can change. > > _Infinite Jest_ by David Foster Wallace has a good > presentation of this ideology, probably as a > result of Wallace's experience in rehab. Wallace > also advances his own notion of the connection > between "entertainment" and addiction. > > The Greek word translated as "lust" in the New > Testament essentially means "excessive love for a > good thing." The difference between love and excessive love is like the difference between water and excessive water. Water is great, but if you had a foot of it in your living room, that's a problem. You like Bombay Negronis too much and > that cocktail becomes a false idol, causing you to > violate the First Commandment. And so on. > > I don't know what to make of any of these notions > of addiction. Twelve step supposedly helps a lot > of people, but it sounds cultish and fascist. Or accepting and guiding, depending on one's perspective. The > disease model of addiction seems a betrayal of the > human will. Wallace's notion is interesting but is > it useful? And the biblical lust model pins every > love on an absolute which is by definition unknowable. > > Will is not even useful for new year's resolutions. With addiction it's useless. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html