Wrong forum to expect any type of support or understanding.Originally Posted by juice780
Wrong forum to expect any type of support or understanding.
PERFECT answer.
He didn't ask for support or understanding... He wanted an opinion... Dan
The older I get the more I am convinced that we are someday going to discover that psychology is the biggest joke we have ever played on ourselves. It’s about chemical imbalance. Get the biological chemical right and psychological problems go away. Drugs are someone’s attempt to do that. But, since they don’t know what they are doing, they can’t get it right. Just my opinion.
The almighty has spoken. Just shut the thread down now it's over.
I have to go fishing, I can’t stop......it’s all I want to do. So, am I just weak, or do I have a mental disorder?
OK, here's a serious answer. I team taught a drugs and society class for 2 years with our campus drug counselor. Here's how I would answer the question:
Some people do appear to be able to repeatedly use illicit drugs in a social setting without becoming abusers or addicts, just like those we call social alcohol drinkers. However, there are also those people who are less able to use illicit substances in a social manner and instead become abusers or physical or psychological addicts, although the period of time it takes for them to move from being a social user to becoming an abuser/addict varies.
So, it may be that there is a biological component to addiction, with some being more biologically predisposed to becoming an abuser/addict. On the other hand, logic suggests that there would also be those people who are less prone to becoming an abuser/addict. Nevertheless, even those who may be less biologically prone to addiction might become abusers/addicts with repeated and heavy use. In short, because of biologically based differences, some users may become abusers or addicts quickly, while others have to "work" much harder to become addicted. However, in the end, both types arrive at the same destination. In terms of treating abusers and addicts, any biological basis for abuse/addiction would have to be taken into account and may play an important role in how effective a particular method of rehabilitation is with certain users. Since addiction changes the physiological manner in which the brain functions, both those more prone and those less prone to addiction likely have some or many commonalities in brain function once addicted. However, there may be some significant differences between those groups such that those who operate treatment facilities may have to use different methods to treat those people who are more biologically prone to abuse/addiction than those who are less biologically prone to abuse/addiction.
What bearing, if any, should any biological predisposition have on our society's view of illicit substances and laws regulating those substances? For me, the existence of any biological basis for addiction has no bearing on how law enforcement or society should views or deals with illicit substance users, abusers, or addicts. The laws that make the possession and consumption of certain substances illegal is not based on medical evidence and instead is a result of culture conflict and power differences within society. Some groups define the use of such substances as unacceptable and have sufficient power to have those views represented in the making, enforcement, and administration of criminal law. Others who do not share those values, have significantly less power, and use those substances become objects of disdain and targets or law enforcement not because of the use of those substances but because they lacked the power to prevent criminal laws that made those substances illicit for being enacted, enforce, or administered. Joseph Gusfield's writings on prohibition illustrate this process very well and provide a descriptive model for how other substance moved from legal to illicit. See Gusfield, The Symbolic Crusade (1967).
As stated by Edwin Sutherland; Crime and the Conflict Process (1929):
•“A certain group of people feel that one of their values in endangered by the behavior of others. If the group is politically influential, the value important, and the danger serious, the members of the group secure the enactment of a law and thus win the cooperation of the State in the effort to protect their value.”
•“The law is a device of one party in conflict with another party.”
•“Those in the other group do not appreciate so highly this value, which the law was designed to protect and do the thing which before was not a crime, but which has been made a crime by the cooperation of the State.”
•“This is a continuation of the conflict which the law was designed to eliminate, but the conflict has become larger in one respect, in that the State is now involved.”
•“Punishment is another step in the same conflict. This is also a device used by the first group through the agency of the State in conflict with the second group.”
Much the same process that Sutherland and Gusfield describe underlies the current conflicts over gun control, gay rights, abortion, tobacco use, and the legalization/decriminalization of drugs.
Last edited by Jeff Hahn; 03-06-2019 at 09:54 PM.
"The man of system is apt to be very wise in his own conceit; and is often so enamored with the supposed beauty of his own ideal plan of government that he cannot suffer the smallest deviation from any part of it…He seems to imagine that he can arrange the different members of a great society with as much ease as the hand arranges the different pieces upon a chessboard.” Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments
If it's a biological predisposition then we need to treat you different than other people because you have a problem that is not your fault and we feel for you we really do.
All my psychologist friends that I taught school with were and are crazy!
People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
Kill 'em all and let God sort them out.
My grandsons father is a heroin addict. He decided that my daughter and his son were too much for him and that heroin is the answer. If he dropped dead tomorrow, it would be a blessing.
Like any other question of this nature, it is worded so that it is inferred that you agree to it rather than offering you a fifty-fifty chance of agreeing / disagreeing with it. Much like today's polling, it doesn't offer you much of a choice unless you are willing to completely buck the trend and go against the inference that was laid out originally. It's sad to think that an honest opinion is frowned upon, except in the name of an agenda.
Sigh.People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
I used to not like okra, then I tried it fried.People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
Jim, you can believe all you want that people are born gay, but it’s a choice. Something in their life has created a decision to go that route.People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
2008 BULLET 21XD 2007 Merc 300xs
We don’t pick our likes and dislikes? Wtf?People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
So you believe that all human behavior is innate? Oh and my Dad's twin brother is gay but was once married to a woman, I guess the gay gene skipped my Dad in the womb and landed on my Uncle.People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
Nature vs Nurture folks.. it's an old argument. Identical Twins are often the subject matter to see just what is most important. Nature or Nurture. Multiple pairs of Identical twins who were separated at birth and did not know one another were tested for their likes and dislikes. They are Extremely similar. So much so that it's difficult to assign that to Nurture.
So their likes and dislikes were born with in them.
This isn't to say that ALL likes and dislikes are inborn or that we have no choice about our likes and dislikes.
That's a different discussion.
I remember seeing that Three Stooges episode, it was funny.
If you are born that way, it would mean it's biological and predisposed. So my question to you is why are identical twins different. One is gay and one is not, just like one is addicted to drugs and one is not?People are born gay or lesbian or with a dislike for blue cheese or even predisposed to addiction.
You can wish it away, but it's still true. We don't pick our likes and dislikes, they aren't behaviors.
When something of this nature hits your own family, be sure to act a bit differently please.
All sheep are eventually led to slaughter
Reply With Quote