When is addiction addiction? | INFJ Forum

When is addiction addiction?

Eventhorizon

Permanently relocated
Banned
May 19, 2013
16,534
10,379
2,187
MBTI
INTJ
When is addiction addiction and when is addiction a problem?

Addiction in relationship to anything. Can we say that if you try something new and choose to do it a second time, the instant you chose to do it a second time it is an addiction at that point? Is eating an addiction? Breathing, drinking water?

Eating is needed to sustain life, therefor if it is an addiction, a needed one. However those that use heroin for any length of time also need the drug in some instances to stay alive because an instant withdrawal would kill them.
 
When is addiction addiction and when is addiction a problem?

Addiction in relationship to anything. Can we say that if you try something new and choose to do it a second time, the instant you chose to do it a second time it is an addiction at that point? Is eating an addiction? Breathing, drinking water?

Eating is needed to sustain life, therefor if it is an addiction, a needed one. However those that use heroin for any length of time also need the drug in some instances to stay alive because an instant withdrawal would kill them.

Breathing, drinking water, and normal eating are life sustaining acts to keep our body running.
When you do any act for sheer pleasure, and that becomes a habit that interrupts your normal life or is put in front of your responsibilities then it becomes an addiction.
There is physical addiction, where you body can adjust to the drugs or alcohol and when stopped it goes through physical cravings and pain. Btw, heroin is not the withdrawal you have to worry about, we used to drop them out of their clouds in the back of the ambulance when they OD'd with Narcan to counteract the drug, they wouldn't die but they would wish they were it hurt so bad. Alcohol is the really dangerous one, going cold turkey if you are an alcoholic is NOT recommended...that shit will kill you dead. Delirium tremens anyone?
Then there is mental addiction, where your addiction overrules or otherwise convinces your rational mind telling you you shouldn't do this or that.
WIth addicts of drugs or alcohol it is usually a combination of the two (mental and physical) that keep them addicted.
That is why there is such a huge relapse when addicts try to quit....while going through a physical and mental hell of pain and suffering they can make it all stop instantly with just one call to their dealer (who would be happy to oblige) or a trip to the liquor store and viola.
 
interrupts your normal life or is put in front of your responsibilities then it becomes an addiction.

What is a normal life? Again lets use a new experience as an example. One day you read the book, decide reading is good so the next day you pick up another book then another etc... One day you find all your time is being used up by reading. This could then be called an addiction but is it a bad addiction? Are all addictions bad?

If not, when is an addiction bad and when is it not?
If so.... well Ill leave that alone for now.
 
Simple answer from a simple person: addictions are bad when they destroy you, make you forget who you are and what you value, or cause you to do harm to others or neglect responsibilities or people you've committed to in some way.

When they don't do these things, they're not so bad.

P.S. Oh, yeah -- if they allow someone else to completely control and own your sorry ass, then they might be a problem...

P.P.S. Not your sorry ass, anyone's
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal
What is a normal life? Again lets use a new experience as an example. One day you read the book, decide reading is good so the next day you pick up another book then another etc... One day you find all your time is being used up by reading. This could then be called an addiction but is it a bad addiction? Are all addictions bad?

If not, when is an addiction bad and when is it not?
If so.... well Ill leave that alone for now.
Let me just add something I forgot to write in my last post...in reference to alcoholics possibly dying from NOT having alcohol it then has crossed from not just being an addiction but it is also a medical condition which gives it a whole new meaning.

Okay your new post.
If you start to skip work to stay home and read, then you could say that it is well on it's way to being an addiction...if it's once or twice then I wouldn't say so...but if it becomes habitual to the point to where you lose your job, or other areas of your life become neglected or negatively influenced by your behavior then I would say yes it has become an addiction.
There are good habits...but no good addictions.
A good habit would be running or exercising even morning.
An addict would take the kids late to school because they wanted to run one more mile.
 
And if you can fully define a "normal" life, let me know.
Wouldn't it be the "average" life a person leads?
 
Simple answer from a simple person: addictions are bad when they destroy you, make you forget who you are and what you value, or cause you to do harm to others or neglect responsibilities or people you've committed to in some way.

When they don't do these things, they're not so bad.

P.S. Oh, yeah -- if they allow someone else to completely control and own your sorry ass, then they might be a problem...

P.P.S. Not your sorry ass, anyone's
images

Now there's a sorry ass.
 
And if you can fully define a "normal" life, let me know.
Wouldn't it be the "average" life a person leads?

Tally up the lives of all the people on the planet. I wonder what would be the average life...?
 
Tally up the lives of all the people on the planet. I wonder what would be the average life...?

This explains somewhat.
Biodemography is a new branch of human (classical) demography concerned with understanding the complementary biological and demographic determinants of and interactions between the birth and death processes that shape individuals, cohorts and populations. The biological component brings human demography under the unifying theoretical umbrella ofevolution, and the demographic component provides an analytical foundation for many of the principles upon which evolutionary theory rests including fitness, selection, structure, and change. Whereas biodemographers are concerned with birth and death processes as they relate to populations in general and to humans in particular, population biologists specializing in life history theory are interested in these processes only insofar as they relate to fitness and evolution.
For example, evolutionary biologists seldom focus on older, post-reproductives because these individuals (it is typically argued) do not contribute to fitness. In contrast, biodemographers embrace research programs expressly designed to study individuals at ages beyond their reproductive years because information on these age classes will shed important light on longevity and aging. The biological and demographic components of biodemography are not hierarchical but reciprocal in that both are primary windows on the world and are thus synergistic, complementary and mutually informing.
Biodemography is unique in two respects. First, it is one of a small number of key subdisciplines arising from the social sciences that has embraced biology such as evolutionary psychology and neuroeconomics. However, unlike the others which focus more narrowly on biological sub-areas (neurology) or concepts (evolution), biodemography has no explicit biological boundaries. As a consequence, it is a more all-encompassing interdisciplinary concept, but maintains deep biological roots. Second, the hierarchical organizations that are inherent to both biology (cell, organ, individual) and demography (individual cohort, population) form a chain in which the individual serves as the link between the lower mechanistic levels, and the higher functional levels.
Biodemography is therefore ideally suited – serving as a “looking glass” - to complement, engage and inform research on human aging through theory building using mathematical andstatistical modeling, hypothesis testing using experimental methods, and coherence-seeking using genetics and evolutionary concepts.
 
This explains somewhat.
Biodemography is a new branch of human (classical) demography concerned with understanding the complementary biological and demographic determinants of and interactions between the birth and death processes that shape individuals, cohorts and populations. The biological component brings human demography under the unifying theoretical umbrella ofevolution, and the demographic component provides an analytical foundation for many of the principles upon which evolutionary theory rests including fitness, selection, structure, and change. Whereas biodemographers are concerned with birth and death processes as they relate to populations in general and to humans in particular, population biologists specializing in life history theory are interested in these processes only insofar as they relate to fitness and evolution.
For example, evolutionary biologists seldom focus on older, post-reproductives because these individuals (it is typically argued) do not contribute to fitness. In contrast, biodemographers embrace research programs expressly designed to study individuals at ages beyond their reproductive years because information on these age classes will shed important light on longevity and aging. The biological and demographic components of biodemography are not hierarchical but reciprocal in that both are primary windows on the world and are thus synergistic, complementary and mutually informing.
Biodemography is unique in two respects. First, it is one of a small number of key subdisciplines arising from the social sciences that has embraced biology such as evolutionary psychology and neuroeconomics. However, unlike the others which focus more narrowly on biological sub-areas (neurology) or concepts (evolution), biodemography has no explicit biological boundaries. As a consequence, it is a more all-encompassing interdisciplinary concept, but maintains deep biological roots. Second, the hierarchical organizations that are inherent to both biology (cell, organ, individual) and demography (individual cohort, population) form a chain in which the individual serves as the link between the lower mechanistic levels, and the higher functional levels.
Biodemography is therefore ideally suited – serving as a “looking glass” - to complement, engage and inform research on human aging through theory building using mathematical andstatistical modeling, hypothesis testing using experimental methods, and coherence-seeking using genetics and evolutionary concepts.

Seems like this might be more specific to perhaps an average physical life. Which would make it one piece of the puzzle. No matter, my question was nothing more than a passing thought at the time. I think I have heard that Americans who have never been outside their borders do not know how lucky they are. However I suspect some in Detroit may not see it that way though... :)
 
Seems like this might be more specific to perhaps an average physical life. Which would make it one piece of the puzzle. No matter, my question was nothing more than a passing thought at the time. I think I have heard that Americans who have never been outside their borders do not know how lucky they are. However I suspect some in Detroit may not see it that way though... :)
I'm sure the statistics are out there....I couldn't find them...but I didn't look that hard really....lol.
It would be interesting to see what the averages across the world are...number of kids, income, life-span, working hours, etc. etc.
And yes...having traveled to Russia on three separate occasions I can tell you first hand that we have it better...they were quite amazing experiences nonetheless.
I've been to France twice and a couple of short stays other places in Europe and I would venture to say that THEY have it better than we do in many respects.
I suppose it's all in your perception of what is important to you.
Never been to Detroit and it isn't on my list...lol.
 
When you realize that it negatively influences you, but you can't stop doing it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal
An addiction is an addiction when you have to ask yourself if it is an addiction.
 
]Is eating an addiction? Breathing, drinking water?

Eating is needed to sustain life, therefor if it is an addiction, a needed one.

No, eating itself is not an addiction. Over-eating is an addiction. Addiction is a negative behavior. Eating to normally sustain your body is not addiction.


Your body becoming dependent on abnormal substances/amounts is addiction.
 
Last edited:
[video=youtube;XcATvu5f9vE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcATvu5f9vE[/video] I think mental and physical changes show something in the form of an addiction.
 
When is addiction addiction and when is addiction a problem?

Addiction in relationship to anything. Can we say that if you try something new and choose to do it a second time, the instant you chose to do it a second time it is an addiction at that point? Is eating an addiction? Breathing, drinking water?

Eating is needed to sustain life, therefor if it is an addiction, a needed one. However those that use heroin for any length of time also need the drug in some instances to stay alive because an instant withdrawal would kill them.

Maybe an addiction is when you feel like you must do something, similar to breathing and eating, only it's not a real necessity, and your mind got wired to believe it is?
 
Maybe an addiction is when you feel like you must do something, similar to breathing and eating, only it's not a real necessity, and your mind got wired to believe it is?

Well the brain gets wired. The mind may or may not follow. One can know that something is not necessary and probably even dangerous but find it impossible to resist anyway.

The brain and the mind are different - the mind being an abstraction. Just like a software is not a computer but they are intertwined because the software is a configured state of the computer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThisIsWhoIAm
Well the brain gets wired. The mind may or may not follow. One can know that something is not necessary and probably even dangerous but find it impossible to resist anyway.

The brain and the mind are different - the mind being an abstraction. Just like a software is not a computer but they are intertwined because the software is a configured state of the computer.

I agree, thanks for the fix :)
 
An addiction is an addiction when you have to ask yourself if it is an addiction.

I disagree. I don't think questioning your impulses has anything to do with addiction.

To me, addiction is when you are physically and mentally unable to stop doing something. It's when the substance controls you.