Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
A friend was once addicted to collecting thimbles - now this seems like a humble painless addiction and yet it wasn't. The hunt for rare expensive ones consumed her life. She is now working for an addiction charity - having gone through intense therapy. Anything that is addictive (not necessarily drugs or alcohol) can be damaging. She lost her job and her husband - she's ok now
.However, I think you make the mistake of assuming that something that is so obvious to you will be obvious for everyone else. That simply isn't the case
Of course, it's well-known to those that study these things - even cursorily - it's been known for decades, but that's something quite different to having public knowledge and acceptance. The "revelation" here is having such knowledge applied in our social systems which create the needed change. That is surely the point, along with the fact that addiction can extend to virtually anything as Butterfly mentions. That has had huge repercussions for the state of society.
I've also worked with addicts on a voluntary basis and I agree that he underplayed the physical hook or hit which does exist.
But even then, the strength of the hook can be related to the purity of the drug in question and the type of personality who is addicted. Bound up with that is the same overriding principle of having a sense of meaning in ones life and a stronger community framework where such use can be cut drastically - and if applied in law then huge changes can occur, as the study in Portugal showed. And this was surely the "revelation" that needs to be shared so that it can become enshrined.
Of course drug-taking has a horrible, "grittier" side and it's not just about loving an addict but establishing a foundation of connection - which applies to many other avenues too. Rather than rushing out to find an addict to love and hug the real issue is highlighting the root causes that give rise to those circular problems and it's relationship to the law. Once the laws are changed then a more inclusive mode of treating addiction can be allowed to displace such horrors associated with criminalized drug use.
The title of this talk is 'everything you thought you knew about addiction is wrong' so I think he is mistakenly assuming a great deal about what he thinks other people know.
Surely one only has to give it 30 seconds thought for it to be obvious, these aren't complicated concepts. Surely to goodness a child can figure out that drug users are trying to escape from something. Although addictions can also happen due to social factors. I practised smoking so I could hold my place with the big girls behind the bike sheds at school Smoking years ago was a sort of 'coming of age' activity more than a means to stifle angst.
It cannot be extended to anything as there is such a thing as physical dependency which involves neurotransmitters in the brain and hooks and wotnot.
There is no way I would look at thimble dependency in the same way as crack cocaine ! Thimble dependency won't generally leave you lying dead in a gutter and also if you run out of thimble money then what ? Are you going to rob, mug, murder steal for thimbles ? What about 'cold turkey' ? Not quite the same for heroin as for thimbles I think.
Anyway I think it's been public knowledge since at least the 60s.
I thought he underplayed it to the point of irresponsibility actually. Withdrawal from drugs is no easy thing. Also at the beginning he asked why those who had used morphine etc for medical purposes didn't get addicted....BUT THEY DO, IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM. People are getting accidentally addicted pain killers all the time. What is more they can have very happy connected lives so they don't get addicted because they need to bond with something but because the medication is a physical hook and a dangerous one. Addiction can happen without intention because of the strength of that hook. To underestimate this the way he did is unrealistic and somewhat woolly headed.
I felt he was using addiction to bang home his opinions about society with that slight snobbishness about online community as if it detracted from real community. The internet has actually done the opposite of isolate people in many cases and strengthens community rather than weakens it, for example local community websites helping people connect up etc etc Also the internet is great for being able to connect however weird you are. Take us Yingers
I'm not sure about decriminalising drugs. I only just realised cannabis use is more or less no longer a criminal offence in the UK, the police don't bother with it. Well it always was a waste of time targeting pot heads
And that's exactly what you're doing in assuming everybody knows what you know!
To reveal that addicts are trying to escape from their demons wasn't the point. The principle he was sharing was that punishing addicts which is what we do now is ridiculous and we need to completely re-think the idea of criminalization via restablishing connection i.e. greater expansion of the concept of community which can indeed be extended in infinite ways. This idea of connection as opposed to punishment is what's needed. And it is intimately linked to how society is currently structured.
You're describing the bio-chemical and neuroscience of addiction - the "hit," which of course is true but such biological responses involved with neurotransmitters and clusters of neuropetides do not operate in isolation. The point of the principle of connection and support is one of value and meaning in terms of emotional connection and attention/activity as focuser and director away from the habit and allowing a natural recovery. This has a direct influence on the subsequent potential for alleviation and amelioration of such an addictive pattern of behaviour. And it's a natural recovery that does occur in the overwhelming number of cases according to Bruce Alexander's studies. Punishment and ostracization doesn't work which is presently the dominant factor in law. It is this that determines recidivism not the intrinsic, biochemical nature of the addictive pattern itself.
Butterfly's thimble example is stretching it, but she was illustrating how addiction can manifest in very diverse forms. Bruce Alexander's book on The Globalisation of Addiction is extraordinarily lucid on this point. And it shows that no, it is not all hot air and obvious to anyone as the parameters are significantly extended. If it causes serious issues and pain in life it doesn't matter at all what the addiction is. We are merely measuring the relative level of pain and chaos it causes whether that is cocaine abuse or porn addiction leading to marriage break-up family fragmentation or the like. The various effects can be either dramatic or cumulative - but each can cause enormous harm. The principle is exactly the same and stems from the same source: a lack of meaning, a disconnected society, crazy laws and a lack of community and sense of individual meaning. It's common denominator is cultural ill health and seriously dysfunctional social systems.
Well, yes and no. Social networks have undoubtedly brought people together and have offered many obvious benefits but they have also caused harmful addictions and mental illness. Facebook especially. (Forums are slightly different animals). Studies are legion on the effects social media is having on teens and below. Mostly not good. It's the deep spiritual emptiness and lack of belonging that society induces in its present form that largely leads to most forms of addiction which is why Hari was reminding us about the idea of connection and by extension the development of REAL community. And it's the development of flesh and blood community that I am concerned with not online social networks.
Yes my point was exactly that. You said I was making mistaken assumptions yet he is making massive ones so I was trying to point out to you that what you accused me of he does a hundred fold yet you don't say he is making mistaken assumptions ? That's why I said it to show you that what you said I was doing he was doing a much greater extent.
I know that wasn't his main point and I know what he was saying but it really isn't so new.
There are drugs projects across the country who work towards that very non punitive aim for example. I'm really not so sure how much addicts are punished.
For example I once had to work for a day as a 'carer' for an alcoholic paranoid schizophrenic. How 'punished' was she for being an alcoholic ? Well she had a very nice social housing flat with 24 hour 'carers' who she shouted abuse at and frightened to death. It was cold but she would not let me have the fire on. She made me take her to the chip shop and the off license in a wheel chair though she could walk. She shouted at me for stumbling on the kerb because I found it hard to push her up it. She was given money by the state to buy alcohol and cigarettes each day, extra money for alcohol like it medicine. It was horrific for me and I would never work there again... Yes I know this is anecdotal but I could come up with similar stories for any number of addicts/alcoholics I've had dealings with. I know some who make other tenants lives hell because they have no notion of day or night so play loud music all the time but the council will not evict them because they are 'vulnerable'.
You know from where I am I don't see a whole lot of ostrasizing and punishing I see the people living around and with the addicts being punished. You can see why I find this guy's approach at times somewhat idealised. You know blame it all on 'social structures' is a pretty academic approach and I don't wholly trust it.
Well no of course the hit aspect doesn't operate in isolation. What you are saying roughly translated is simple. People need relationships, care and meaningful activity to get better from addiction. As for ostracization well anyone who has lived near drug dealers will know it can get pretty tough because addicts are prone to anti social behaviour, they ostracize themselves as much as anything. As for punishment and ostracization being the main factor in on going addiction without recovery yes to some extent...er but in my experience what I saw that determined recividism was not punishment or ostrasization by external agencies at all but stressors in domestic situations, violence, difficulties with access to their children often seemed to trigger people. That is events in their personal lives played a huge role and I don't think people's personal lives are totally manufactured by social structures.
I shall never look at a thimble in quite the same way again.
It's a nice idea that cultural ill health is responsible for addiction but in the end what does that really mean ? There is no perfectly well culture and you cannot 'design' one. Generations have tried and failed. I keep thinking of Orwell's 'Animal Farm'...well I thought of it when in another thread you said you thought a whole other society could be made. Yes we can try, must try it's the only way forward and it is exciting IMO but let's not be naïve that we can design some kind of perfectly well society where there are no addicts. I'm not disagreeing with you about any of this fundamentally of course, I pretty much agree with you in principle
Hmmm I get a bit weary of the likes of Hari preaching how bad social media is as if before social media we all lived jolly happy fulfilled lives in jolly happy communities. We didn't ! What mythical time is he harking after ?
As for 'deep spiritual emptiness' I think that is a part of the human condition, as old as time, and has absolutely nothing to do with social media.
It's the same old story. When cinema came out people were saying it would ruin relationships....and it didn't.
When TV came out people were warned about it's detrimental effects on social relationships....but in fact people bonded over TV just like they bonded over cinema, just like they bond over social media. I wouldn't go near facebook personally and I do see a lot of hate and harassment via the internet but actually that is quite small compared to the positives. I mean facebook groups have accomplished some great things for charities and so on.
There never has been a culturally 'well' time has there, there never was a time when people happily lived in nice little communities and everything was perfect. There is always a dark side because people are people. Animal Farm.....or perhaps 'Lord of the Flies' ? It is quite possible to be part of a real community and use social media.
Well that's a roundabout ride! But it doesn't wash for me I'm afraid for the simple reason I think he's largely correct and you're incorrect in your "assumptions." Sorry. We can go around again if you like ...
However, I think you make the mistake of assuming that something that is so obvious to you will be obvious for everyone else. That simply isn't the case .
The title of this talk is 'everything you thought you knew about addiction is wrong' so I think he is mistakenly assuming a great deal about what he thinks other people know.
There is surely room to improve our collective situation? ..
Yes we can try, must try it's the only way forward and it is exciting IMO
Geeze have I written that much? What a waste of energy...I have to get back to work...Sorry I get carried away sometimes.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).