Our actions: "Free Will" or "Determined?"

[blahblah18]

well i kinda meant ot be offensive, but not in the way tass is to EVERYONE
Tass i stil think your'e awesome, even if you are a cruel person, but again, i don't find that a problem

I love using runon sentences

Tass, don't make it soudns like I was putting down VA Tech, cuz I"m not... I"m just putting down Aedak, no offense VA Techers, ok?

[Aedak]

Robo, don't worry about it. They always start attacking me personally when I prove them wrong. If they want to believe addiction is a disease, let them. It's their weak-minded way of coping with the choices that they have made. Seems they are too stubborn to realize the truth here, and completely ignore everything I say.

Blah: Yes, I like the controversy. I know what I'm talking about, and apparently everyone is still living in the dark ages.

Conscious decision making = a choice, a behavior.
Regardless of the physiological effects, it is still a choice. You cannot choose to learn and unlearn a real disease. Addiction is a choice and a behavior. Alcoholism, and drug addictions, can be unlearned.

How can you argue that a conscious choice like going to a bar, paying for alcohol, and drinking tha alcohol... is a disease??? That's ignorance! Excuses and ignorance. I'm sure a friend of mine with cancer would love to hear about this. There's someone with a real disease, who does not have a choice of whether or not she has cancer. She can't just say, well I decided I wanted to quit having cancer now (and proceed to do so).

As for as attacking my school? That's an even more cheap shot than I would expect Tassel. I'm dissappointed. You can attempt to insult my education all you want. It will not get you anywhere. I also think you should do your research on schools before you make an ignorant comment such as "VA Tech isn't exactly your ivy league school." Before you start jumping to conclusions of why I chose to go to one school or another is really none of your business. But if you really need to know that badly? Sure.

VA Tech was the the only school I did apply to. No, it is not easy to get into VA Tech. No, it is not an "ivy league school." Yes, it is ranked in the top 100 universities. So maybe it's not ranked as high as UVA? What's your point? I'm sorry but... I pay for my own tuition, rent, bills, everything! I don't need someone like you telling me which school I should be going to, thanks. You don't know my goals, my dreams, or my career options; so before you start making yourself look like an ignorant, arrogant prick, know all the facts about someone before you make un-based claims and judgements.

Case in point: My posts are not wrong, yours are. Insulting me and my school personally isn't going to make you any less wrong.

[stretchypanda]

It's been said that addictions are not genetic. What about the thousands of children born each year with cocaine or methamphetamine dependencies? Addiction to a drug is passed from mother to fetus, and if the fetus survives gestation, it is born needing high amounts of whatever drug the mother was using. It's not the same as growing up with an alcoholic, and later becoming an alcoholic. It's inherited.

As for the psychological aspect, it is impossible to overcome a disease such as cancer without the willpower to do so. The same applies to addictions. You can want to kick a habit or you can want to remain addicted, just as you can want to be well or you can give up and let cancer take you.

With this in mind, I don't see how you can consider addiction anything less than a disease. Even if you want to call it purely psychological, people have psychological diseases.

And taking shots at colleges = lame. My college sucks, but I do all right.

[Tasselfoot]

aedak = mwerp incarnate... except mwerp is better at arguing. just like mwerp, aedak likes to argue sides where he is the only one on that side. he also believes that despite the fact that everyone agrees he is wrong, he refuses to believe it. it really is ok to be wrong. we've all been wrong. people like mwerp aren't going to be successful in life because they can't admit someone else may be right or that someone else may be smarter than them. i've been wrong before and i'm usually quick to admit i'm wrong when proven as such.

aedak... i want you to do something for me. go shoot up with heroin or smoke crack. then tell me your argument is still correct. the initial choice to do something is a choice, but once you've started and become addicted.... it is almost impossible to stop without someone else helping. people kill others because of their drug addictions, because they need money to pay for it. if someone like that isn't sick, then sickness doesn't exist.


this is the dictionary definition of an addiction:

Habitual psychological and physiological dependence on a substance or practice beyond one's voluntary control.


you see the ending of that? beyond one's voluntary control. aka... NOT A CHOICE.


hypothetical situation for you... say your girlfriend starts using drugs. how would you help her? would you have her arrested for possession of an illegal narcotic? would you force her to a rehabilitation clinic to treat her? no... based on your posts... you'd tell her that she has a choice to stop being an addict. that she should just put the needle down. that she should come over to you and give you a hummer instead of blazing. i'm sure that would go over real well.

ps - i still say that post you made in response to mine on the 2nd page was C&Ped from another website. that what they teach at Tech?

[Aedak]

It's been said that addictions are not genetic. What about the thousands of children born each year with cocaine or methamphetamine dependencies? Addiction to a drug is passed from mother to fetus, and if the fetus survives gestation, it is born needing high amounts of whatever drug the mother was using. It's not the same as growing up with an alcoholic, and later becoming an alcoholic. It's inherited.

This is a dependency that is passed on to another living being after the child has already been conceived. This isn't a genetics issue.

As for the psychological aspect, it is impossible to overcome a disease such as cancer without the willpower to do so. The same applies to addictions. You can want to kick a habit or you can want to remain addicted, just as you can want to be well or you can give up and let cancer take you.

Not true. Withdrawal may occur, but withdrawal is a sign of substance dependency. This is the physiological and psychological aspect. There is no such withdrawal in cancer, as there is no addiction or behavior to withdraw from. "Wanting to quit smoking" and "wanting to get rid of cancer" are two totally different things. They are not even comparable. Anyone who wants to quit smoking can do so. Someone who has cancer cannot. I don't understand how you can compare these two.

With this in mind, I don't see how you can consider addiction anything less than a disease. Even if you want to call it purely psychological, people have psychological diseases.

The dependency is a psychological problem. When you label something a disease you imply that the person affected is helpless. Someone with schizophrenia has a real disease and is helpless to it. This is not the case with addictions.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

aedak... i want you to do something for me. go shoot up with heroin or smoke crack. then tell me your argument is still correct. the initial choice to do something is a choice, but once you've started and become addicted.... it is almost impossible to stop without someone else helping. people kill others because of their drug addictions, because they need money to pay for it. if someone like that isn't sick, then sickness doesn't exist.

I thought you at least somewhat intelligent. Now, you have really proven me wrong.

this is the dictionary definition of an addiction:

Habitual psychological and physiological dependence on a substance or practice beyond one's voluntary control.


you see the ending of that? beyond one's voluntary control. aka... NOT A CHOICE.

You obviously don't understand the terms you are reading; because if you did, you would understand that the physical dependency is the issue that is not a choice. The ability to choose is never involuntary. Are you going to say you are helpless and cannot physically stop yourself from snorting up heroin or drinking that glass of wine? If you are, then you're the one who needs psychological treatment. There are instances where the physical dependency is so great, that it is incredibly hard to quit using a substance; but again, saying you are helpless is an EXCUSE.

hypothetical situation for you... say your girlfriend starts using drugs. how would you help her? would you have her arrested for possession of an illegal narcotic? would you force her to a rehabilitation clinic to treat her? no... based on your posts... you'd tell her that she has a choice to stop being an addict. that she should just put the needle down. that she should come over to you and give you a hummer instead of blazing. i'm sure that would go over real well.

Thank you for bringing this up. I had a friend who died in highschool due to a drug OD. I have also had a long-time friend who had a severe alcohol and cocaine addiction. How do I help her you ask? I kept reassuring her that it is up to HER to get off the drugs. And you know what? Today, she is grateful for me helping her through her tough times and is no longer an addict.

ps - i still say that post you made in response to mine on the 2nd page was C&Ped from another website. that what they teach at Tech?

Stop trying to make up for your lack of intelligence by insulting others please, it's not an attractive quality.

No, I did not copy and paste anything except possibly a definition.

[Tasselfoot]

aedak... i want you to do something for me. go shoot up with heroin or smoke crack. then tell me your argument is still correct. the initial choice to do something is a choice, but once you've started and become addicted.... it is almost impossible to stop without someone else helping. people kill others because of their drug addictions, because they need money to pay for it. if someone like that isn't sick, then sickness doesn't exist.

I thought you at least somewhat intelligent. Now, you have really proven me wrong.

see, you completely ignored my statement and tried to divert attention away from it by insulting me. i'll bring you to this sentence... "THE INITIAL CHOICE TO DO SOMETHING IS A CHOICE, BUT ONCE YOU'VE STARTED AND BECOME ADDICTED, IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO STOP WITHOUT SOMEONE ELSE HELPING"

how about this... AIDS is a disease. Herpes is a disease. you have a CHOICE whether or not to sleep with the skank-ho who has all the VDs or not. so, getting AIDS and Herpes is a choice. so, they aren't diseases based on your definition.

the majority of people in the us over the age of 21 drink. what seperates those who drink in moderation from those that can't control themselves?

and, as far as genetics... here is my case for that. i have an uncle who was addicted to drugs in the 70s, i have a father who is addicted to gambling, and i had a grandfather who was addicted to smoking. 3 people in direct ancestory from me had/have proven cases of addiction. and then i come along and ALSO fall into an addiction. is this a big coincidence? that isn't just it. my addiction was only the 1 MAJOR addiction i've had. but i get addicted to lots of things. i spend 10+ hours here on the forums everyday. is that an addiction? i used to play SM for 4-6 hours a day, is that an addiction? when i decide i like something, i go all out. in middle school, i had the most magic cards. in elementary school, i had the most pogs. freshman year of college, i dropped $3000 on CDs and DVDs from ebay/half in 6 weeks. don't worry... there are more instances. i'll list them later if you really care. but, these are enough to show my issues with addiction. and, yea... all my addictions have been money based.


ps - you still haven't said yes or no....
colleges:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php

VTech is 74th.

my major:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/business/bizspec02_brief.php

#2 in the country.

[stretchypanda]

"Wanting to quit smoking" and "wanting to get rid of cancer" are two totally different things. They are not even comparable. Anyone who wants to quit smoking can do so. Someone who has cancer cannot. I don't understand how you can compare these two.

You miss my point.

You CANNOT beat cancer without the willpower to do so. I realize that even willpower is sometimes not enough, and that people do lose the fight with cancer. Cancer recently took my grandmother. She was 85. What's crazy about her is she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 5 years before and she kicked its ass. Breast cancer is what finally took her down, and until about 2 weeks before she died, she lived by herself (had lived alone for seven years), took care of herself, got around fine. You're giving me the impression that you find cancer patients helpless to the disease. Only people who assume there is nothing to be done are helpless, and THAT is a choice. I realize that you don't CHOOSE cancer, but you choose to beat it. All the medical technology our world has to offer cannot save someone who doesn't want it.

That said, it is easy to compare a smoker to a cancer patient. You must decide to kick the habit before you can do it. It takes an incredible amount of willpower to stop smoking, just as it takes an incredible amount of willpower to endure cancer treatment. Sometimes you lose your fight, and you start smoking again. Sometimes you give up.

And by the way, just because a child is not born with an addicted-to-coke gene does not mean he is not addicted. It is still a part of his chemical makeup.

EDIT: OMG POGS. Bring those back, werd.

[Aedak]

aedak... i want you to do something for me. go shoot up with heroin or smoke crack. then tell me your argument is still correct. the initial choice to do something is a choice, but once you've started and become addicted.... it is almost impossible to stop without someone else helping. people kill others because of their drug addictions, because they need money to pay for it. if someone like that isn't sick, then sickness doesn't exist.

I thought you at least somewhat intelligent. Now, you have really proven me wrong.

see, you completely ignored my statement and tried to divert attention away from it by insulting me. i'll bring you to this sentence... "THE INITIAL CHOICE TO DO SOMETHING IS A CHOICE, BUT ONCE YOU'VE STARTED AND BECOME ADDICTED, IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO STOP WITHOUT SOMEONE ELSE HELPING"

No, I didn't ignore it. I disregarded it because it's wrong. The initial decision to do something is a choice. The decision to continue doing something time after time is also a choice. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

how about this... AIDS is a disease. Herpes is a disease. you have a CHOICE whether or not to sleep with the skank-ho who has all the VDs or not. so, getting AIDS and Herpes is a choice. so, they aren't diseases based on your definition.

It's not about the initial choice. You're completely missing the point Tasselfoot. It's about the option to quit - being a voluntary choice. You cannot choose to get rid of cancer, but you can choose to get rid of an addiction. Saying you are physically dependant isn't a good enough excuse. Someone said they were addicted to caffeine. This is a choice, stop drinking caffiene for 6 months and you will no longer crave it or feel like you require it. This is an example of a minor addictions, but the lesson learned is the same.

the majority of people in the us over the age of 21 drink. what seperates those who drink in moderation from those that can't control themselves?

Those who drink in moderation choose to drink, let's say only at social events, are choosing only to drink then. If they have an urge to drink more they are suppressing it. If not, then there is no addiction. Someone who says they cannot control themself is lying to you. There is always control unless someone is physically forcing you to drink.

and, as far as genetics... here is my case for that. i have an uncle who was addicted to drugs in the 70s, i have a father who is addicted to gambling, and i had a grandfather who was addicted to smoking. 3 people in direct ancestory from me had/have proven cases of addiction. and then i come along and ALSO fall into an addiction. is this a big coincidence? that isn't just it. my addiction was only the 1 MAJOR addiction i've had. but i get addicted to lots of things. i spend 10+ hours here on the forums everyday. is that an addiction? i used to play SM for 4-6 hours a day, is that an addiction? when i decide i like something, i go all out. in middle school, i had the most magic cards. in elementary school, i had the most pogs. freshman year of college, i dropped $3000 on CDs and DVDs from ebay/half in 6 weeks. don't worry... there are more instances. i'll list them later if you really care. but, these are enough to show my issues with addiction. and, yea... all my addictions have been money based.

Addictions in the family have falsly been linked to genetics in the past. However, the truth is that the social environment and upbringing are social problems, not genetic dysfunction. People are bound to have an addiction of some sort. If your family has had numerous reports of addiction, that is not due to heredity or genetics. It has to do with the social environment those specific people were brought up in. If you grow up watching your father exhume alcohol regularly, you are more likely to do the same thing. That is a psychological issue, not genetics.

ps - you still haven't said yes or no....

I said no.

colleges:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php

VTech is 74th.

my major:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/business/bizspec02_brief.php

#2 in the country.

Your point? There is none. i think it's amusing that you think someone who goes to a college with a higher ranking means that person is somehow better.

[Tasselfoot]

i'm done. i'm sick of trying to argue with brick walls. first mwerp, now you. panda and q... gl to both of you. aedak, i feel sorry for you, but hope you start using heroin.

don't try and take this as "oh, you give up... i win!" i give up because you are hopeless and too self-righteous to ever concede an argument, so this would continue ad nausium, just like debates with mwerp did.

lastly aedak... you said, more or less, that since you support yourself completely you were forced to go to a lesser school because it is cheaper. that my friend, is an EXCUSE there are plenty of options for poor people to go through to get support to pay for a better education. you CHOSE the easy way out by going to an easier and cheaper school. i've survived for 3 years at one of the most expensive schools in the country. tuition + room & board = around $42,000 a year. -$8000 in school given scholarships per year = 34,000 a year is paid.

[Aedak]

i'm done. i'm sick of trying to argue with brick walls. first mwerp, now you. panda and q... gl to both of you. aedak, i feel sorry for you, but hope you start using heroin.

Aww I almost feel like you care now.

lastly aedak... you said, more or less, that since you support yourself completely you were forced to go to a lesser school because it is cheaper. that my friend, is an EXCUSE there are plenty of options for poor people to go through to get support to pay for a better education. you CHOSE the easy way out by going to an easier and cheaper school. i've survived for 3 years at one of the most expensive schools in the country. tuition + room & board = around $42,000 a year. -$8000 in school given scholarships per year = 34,000 a year is paid.

No, I did not choose to go to an easier school and it is not an excuse. I chose to attend my school of preference based on financial, logical, and personal reasons that would be the best for me and my future. Never did I say I was "forced to go to a lesser school." Who are you to say what a lesser school is anyway?

Again you are now just personally bashing others. I'm happy for you. You survived at an expensive school. So what? This isn't about who is paying more money. I simply stated one of my reasons for not attending another school. You're the one who brought up schools in the first place, so don't blame me for continuing the debate. Lastly, good luck to you too! I hope your excuses and misconceptions serve you well in life.

[blahblah18]

weak , I"m ranked 13th and I turned down 4th 9th and 11th.... oh well
The difference between mwerp's args and aedak's is that mwerp at least argued a side, he just refused to ever listen to anotehr side...
Aedak argues whatever he can find to argue for the sake of arguing.,.. if I could I would lock this threak so quick and be like
"lock'd biotches, take it out back if you want to fight"

[stretchypanda]

I think I give up, also, but I have a few last words..

First: You don't just choose to get rid of cancer. YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE TO GET RID OF CANCER, OR IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Once again, I realize that making that conscious choice does not always yield positive results, but a conscious choice MUST be made before anything can be done. You either choose to seek treatment, or you choose to give up.

Second: People with diseases are NOT helpless. Whether it be physical or psychological, there is some form of relief for every illness out there. While there may not be surefire CURES, there are treatments. There is medication, support groups, counseling, you name it. Addiction is a mental illness, in that it affects a person's psychological wellbeing, whether from the action the addiction causes, or from withdrawal effects.

BUT, Aedak, if you feel that diseased means helpless, I can only say that I hope you never get cancer.

[GuidoHunter]

aedak = mwerp incarnate

HAHA! It's funny because it's so true!

So many ridiculous points, so many holes in logic, so many digressions from point to point, so many disregarded points... I could make a huge post, but why should I? He'd just ignore it. Plus, I'd rather let this thread die and not encourage him. Everyone else has some shred of reason. I especially like how he calls himself right when the only person he could ever convince is himself.

Oh, and I just wanted to say that that college business got way out of hand. It was just a simple comment, nothing more...

--Guido

[The_Q]

Wow, a flame war. Isn't that another warning?

Now, let's see things from your perspective, which I missed once more. For that, I feel stupid. I must say, you do have a very good point. It's almost like trying to explain why burning dollars is wrong. There's something that you feel wrong about, but the rest of it seems just right.

I think I'll start by analyzing your thoughts on behavior. Incentives matter: it's the first rule of economics and it applies to this as well. Yes, beginning the habit of substance abuse is a choice. Continuing to feed the addiction is a choice. Treating the addiction is a choice. I agree with you that for the most part, this is a behavior. I wouldn't say it's very fair to claim it's all choice, though. A huge incentive is involved. The incentive of withdrawl symptoms. I'm sure that anyone who has tried to break an addiction knows the power of this incentive, I myself feel it. It's horrid. The ill effects on any sort of attempted quitter are astounding. Sometimes they can leave the abuser temporarily crippled. Avoiding conditions like this is a huge incentive to continue the abuse. I'm sure there are many more involved, but this is the largest obstacle I can see in my own addiction.

That's really the one huge flaw in your arguement. That and the whole physiological problem part. Other than that, it makes lots of sense.

Q

[Aedak]

Q

I think I give up, also, but I have a few last words..

First: You don't just choose to get rid of cancer. YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE TO GET RID OF CANCER, OR IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Once again, I realize that making that conscious choice does not always yield positive results, but a conscious choice MUST be made before anything can be done. You either choose to seek treatment, or you choose to give up.

This will be my last reply here, promise.. =\

First of all, this debate is not about cancer. We are not talking about treatment of cancer; just as we are not talking about choosing not to have cancer. You are completely misunderstanding the whole argument here panda. This is about choosing to stop feeding an addiction, to quit. Cancer is not an addiction, as I said before... you cannot compare the two in this sense. The only reason I brought up cancer, was to give an example of a disease that you cannot get rid of with will power. Ok? I hope that settles it.

Second: People with diseases are NOT helpless. Whether it be physical or psychological, there is some form of relief for every illness out there. While there may not be surefire CURES, there are treatments. There is medication, support groups, counseling, you name it. Addiction is a mental illness, in that it affects a person's psychological wellbeing, whether from the action the addiction causes, or from withdrawal effects.

Again, they are helpless in the sense that they cannot will away their disease. You can use your will to stop feeding an addiction.

To everyone: I'm sorry you are all getting bent out of shape because you can't understand (except The_Q).

Guido: no offense, but I answer all points thoroughly and make long posts to clarify every topic. There are no ridiculous points or holes in logic, only you not understanding, plain and simple.

The_Q: I appreciate you not joining in on the immature bashing that Tassel and the others are so good at doing.