RE: ADDICTS

RE: ADDICTS (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Kirata -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:21:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML So then, you think mind can be separated from biology? That is the definition of 'ghost in the machine.' Yes, and it's your ghost, the helpless observer of the brain's decisions, in for the ride of its life whether it likes it or not. Free will does not require separating mind and body. Free will requires that they be aspects of a dynamic interactive unity in which each produces effects in the other. K.

TheHeretic -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:43:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Disagreement is always welcome in discourse, Rich. Just a pity to see you get so angry. Don't confuse anger with my allergy to shitheads.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:44:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML So then, you think mind can be separated from biology? That is the definition of 'ghost in the machine.' Yes, and it's your ghost, the helpless observer of the brain's decisions, in for the ride of its life whether it likes it or not. Free will does not require "separating" mind and body, as you continually allege. Free will requires that they be aspects of a dynamic and interactive unity in which each produces effects in the other. K. You deny then that subconscious activity is involved in decision making? If each produces effects upon the other, if the body influences the mind how then is the will free? In the theological sense free will requires a soul, or spirit, or mind that can triumph over the 'weaknesses' of the flesh. There is no ghost that observes the brain's decisions. It is the brain self-aware. Aware of its own decisions and aware of the emotions and needs that arise from encounters with the physical world without and the physical world within. Free will can be demonstrated if someone can without coersion commit an act that is absolutely vile and abhorrent to his own morality and personality. When you are able to do that then talk to me about free will. Otherwise you are harboring an illusion. Btw, I do not deny that the mind has effects upon the body. It is quite probable that some chronic illnesses are the result of mental stress. So, the body is not free either.

TheHeretic -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:44:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Yes, and it's your ghost, the helpless observer of the brain's decisions, in for the ride of its life whether it likes it or not. Free will does not require separating mind and body. Free will requires that they be aspects of a dynamic interactive unity in which each produces effects in the other. K. But, but, but... Dr. Mate didn't say anything about that part!

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:45:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Disagreement is always welcome in discourse, Rich. Just a pity to see you get so angry. Don't confuse anger with my allergy to shitheads. Love the sinner, despise the sin.

TheHeretic -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:47:15 PM)
Don't neglect the taint

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 2:48:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Yes, and it's your ghost, the helpless observer of the brain's decisions, in for the ride of its life whether it likes it or not. Free will does not require separating mind and body. Free will requires that they be aspects of a dynamic interactive unity in which each produces effects in the other. K. But, but, but... Dr. Mate didn't say anything about that part! Quite the contrary. He talked about the need for compassion in therapy to help the patient stay on his track for recovery. The current model which despises the patient and reaffirms his feelings of worthlessness is a failure.

TheHeretic -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:03:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The current model which despises the patient and reaffirms his feelings of worthlessness is a failure. Which current model is that, Vince? Some methodology you dreamed up in ignorance, assigned political ideologies to the practioners of, and assumed is the way it is done because you are just that darn brilliant? I keep telling you, the basic info your guru is spouting is seriously dated. They don't do it that way.

Kirata -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:18:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML You deny then that subconscious activity is involved in decision making? .... If you want to debate yourself, that's fine. But it gets confusing when you use a reply to me to do it. Trying dealing with what I'm actually saying. You cannot address the mind-body problem by abstracting the mind from the brain. The brain is part of the body. K.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:22:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The current model which despises the patient and reaffirms his feelings of worthlessness is a failure. Which current model is that, Vince? Some methodology you dreamed up in ignorance, assigned political ideologies to the practioners of, and assumed is the way it is done because you are just that darn brilliant? I keep telling you, the basic info your guru is spouting is seriously dated. They don't do it that way. The current model of anger and social condemnation, Rich. The smug 'shithead' model. In 2007, more than 20 million drug addicts over the age of 12 received no treatment at all. A typical year. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/treatment-approaches-drug-addiction

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:24:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML You deny then that subconscious activity is involved in decision making? .... If you want to debate yourself, that's fine. But it gets confusing when you use a reply to me to do it. Trying dealing with what I'm actually saying. You cannot address the mind-body problem by abstracting the mind from the brain. The brain is part of the body. K. Well Damn, K. I never said it wasn't. FFS.

completesadist -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:30:19 PM)
[:'(]

TheHeretic -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 3:43:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The current model of anger and social condemnation, Rich. The smug 'shithead' model. In 2007, more than 20 million drug addicts over the age of 12 received no treatment at all. A typical year. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/treatment-approaches-drug-addiction Sourced to NIDA... Well there is the problem. You found a source of even more shit information than you started with. This is a good topic, but I'm afraid your constant interruptions are really fucking up the potential flow of the thread.

Kirata -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 4:16:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If you want to debate yourself, that's fine. But it gets confusing when you use a reply to me to do it. Trying dealing with what I'm actually saying. You cannot address the mind-body problem by abstracting the mind from the brain. The brain is part of the body. Well Damn, K. I never said it wasn't. FFS. The brain can't be the "mind" of the mind-body problem because the brain is part of the body, get it now? K.

tweakabelle -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 4:30:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle can we all agree that there is no single explanation or element in recovery that will work for all people? No, we can't. There is one element of recovery that must be present in every single case, for every individual, regardless of any contributing circumstance - that person must want it to happen. I took an addict's commitment to their recovery as a given. My bad if that isn't clear in the post. I had in mind those who assert that addiction is a personal or moral flaw in an addict's character and that recovery is itself depend upon addressing the alleged shortcoming or 'character flaw'/personal responsibility/moral failure etc. While this perspective might prove useful in individual cases, to assert that it is a universal, that it is the critical element in all cases of addiction and recovery is as false as asserting it is totally irrelevant. It is one variable among many.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 5:08:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML The current model of anger and social condemnation, Rich. The smug 'shithead' model. In 2007, more than 20 million drug addicts over the age of 12 received no treatment at all. A typical year. http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/treatment-approaches-drug-addiction Sourced to NIDA... Well there is the problem. You found a source of even more shit information than you started with. This is a good topic, but I'm afraid your constant interruptions are really fucking up the potential flow of the thread. Ah, well good then. You have better information. More up to date perhaps? Please do share.

GotSteel -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 5:15:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML It is the same whether we are talking about heroin addicts or obese food addicts. It is an illogic that leads to a blame the victim mode of thought. But we don't say that about cancer survivors vs cancer victims. Bull, I call bad analogy. Cancer survivors aren't snorting lines of breast cancer or asking for their leukemia to be supersized. Drug and lard addicts aren't mindless robots. Cocaine doesn't snort itself. Drug addicts are consciously, continually performing actions to put more poison in their bodies. That's not something that can be said about many with cancer.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 5:15:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata If you want to debate yourself, that's fine. But it gets confusing when you use a reply to me to do it. Trying dealing with what I'm actually saying. You cannot address the mind-body problem by abstracting the mind from the brain. The brain is part of the body. Well Damn, K. I never said it wasn't. FFS. The brain can't be the "mind" of the mind-body problem because the brain is part of the body, get it now? K. It is only problem for those who think the mind is independent of the brain. Your problem then; not mine. Get that now?

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 5:18:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle can we all agree that there is no single explanation or element in recovery that will work for all people? No, we can't. There is one element of recovery that must be present in every single case, for every individual, regardless of any contributing circumstance - that person must want it to happen. I took an addict's commitment to their recovery as a given. My bad if that isn't clear in the post. I had in mind those who assert that addiction is a personal or moral flaw in an addict's character and that recovery is itself depend upon addressing the alleged shortcoming or 'character flaw'/personal responsibility/moral failure etc. While this perspective might prove useful in individual cases, to assert that it is a universal, that it is the critical element in all cases of addiction and recovery is as false as asserting it is totally irrelevant. It is one variable among many. Oh, do you mean like people who refer to addicts as 'shitheads?'

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (11/29/2013 5:23:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML It is the same whether we are talking about heroin addicts or obese food addicts. It is an illogic that leads to a blame the victim mode of thought. But we don't say that about cancer survivors vs cancer victims. Bull, I call bad analogy. Cancer survivors aren't snorting lines of breast cancer or asking for their leukemia to be supersized. Drug and lard addicts aren't mindless robots. Cocaine doesn't snort itself. Drug addicts are consciously, continually performing actions to put more poison in their bodies. That's not something that can be said about many with cancer. So, you know the causes of cancer and other chronic illnesses? Brilliant! Can't possibly be life related activities like say . . . smoking cigs, eh? Or leading lives of unremitting stress and anger?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875