Re: Drug Addiction

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:35 PM, hibbsa <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would like to better understand the position coming out of the
> philosophy on this matter. Something that puzzles me is this. Let's say
> there is one camp that believes drug addiction is very real - perhaps we
> could call this the mainstream camp. Then there is the Popper/Deutsch
> camp that argue the whole concept of addiction is in error...that it's
> about preferences, ideas, and so on.
> Now, assuming that something both sides could agree on, is that there is
> a phenomenon of, scare quotes "addiction" in society.  For example,
> there are people who say they are addicted to something, who report that
> they 'don't want' to take the drug but can't stop, as well as various
> other self-reported or observed behaviors. Then on top of that, there
> are the statistics that associate crime with drug "addiction".
> Prostitutes report they are only selling their body to pay for their
> habit,

Right. So they like selling their bodies and doing the drugs.


> burglars that they are trying to feed a habit and so on.

They like doing drugs and stealing.


> The above are just examples that come to mind. But all I'm depending on
> here, is that there is *some* agreement on *some* features of, scare
> quotes "addiction".
> Or that, for example, someone who is "addicted" to crack, is more
> frequently in a disordered life, cannot hold a job down, looks awful,
> experiences social isolation. Or whatever. Not requiring any of that to
> be agreed on, only that there would be some agreement around some list
> of lifestyle impacts.

You're saying two observations correlate with each other and claiming
that there is causation between them.

Let A be the observation that a person does drugs.

Let B be the observation that that person has a disordered life,
cannot hold a job, looks awful, experiences social isolation.

And then you want to say that A causes B. But what about C or D?

Let C be the observation that that person was heavily coerced as a
child. That led to great irresponsibility. That lead to lots of other
bad things, including great suffering because his life sucks. To feel
better, he does drugs.

So which one caused B? Was it A or C?

Now lets add one more complication. That person *believes* that there
is such a thing as addiction, and that he is addicted. He believes
that some people are genetically more prone to addiction. And he's
convinced that he is of this group. Lets call this factor D.


> So here's my question: What difference does it make to the phenomenon of
> "addiction" and its consequences, who is right about what "addiction"
> really is? I mean, would not that phenomenon still be there?

As long as C and D exist, how could A be solved? Well somebody could
submit themselves to a rehab place giving all the responsibility to
them.


> One obvious answer is that with good philosophy, drug taking would be
> legalized, not stigmatized, and much more cheaply available. That's fair
> enough.  OK sure, but then what about the life-style impacts of, say,
> crack addiction

I think crack was invented because cocaine was expensive. Crack has
worse physical effects than cocaine. So if cocaine is made legal, then
crack won't be made.


> such as not being able to hold down a job. If that was
> happening now, it would still be happening if drugs were legalized,
> surely?

No. Because people would do cocaine instead of crack.


> So yeah...what would be different on the ground if Popperians are right?

The idea that addiction is a choice is from Thomas Szasz, not Popper.
But it is consistent with Popper.

One camp believes addiction is partly caused by (1) genetics, (2)
physiological acclimation, and (3) choice. Agreed?

The Popperian camp believes that addiction is caused by choice alone.
Now some people greatly value the feeling that drugs give them while
others value better things like being clear-headed. I expect that for
the people that value the drug feeling, they will choose drugs over no
drugs. But, why would a person value the drug feeling? Its because
they are solving a problem. What problem? Suffering. Why do people
suffer? Because they live irresponsible lives. Why do people do that?
Because of coercion -- the coercion keeps a person from taking
responsibility for his life.

-- Rami Rustom
http://ramirustom.blogspot.com