4 ms·

> Alcoholism has a definition, which revolves around dependence. Not... really. The problem here is that the term "alcoholism" is a colloquialism, not a techn

> Alcoholism has a definition, which revolves around dependence. Not... really. The problem here is that the term "alcoholism" is a colloquialism, not a technical term. Neither the DSM nor ICD uses it. So I suppose it can mean whatever you want, but it would be good for the common usage of the term to be useful in some way, and indeed it is in this case. In everyday language, the term alcoholism overwhelmingly connotes problem drinking. I'm quite steeped in the culture for personal reasons, and I've never in my entire life heard anyone use the word "alcoholism" to refer to completely harmless and controlled consumption. > contrary to your own "they're the same" from two posts earlier No, I asserted that alcoholism, in its everyday colloquial sense, connotes abuse. I definitely do not assert the same regarding the notion of "dependence", which does have a widely used technical definition. If it's dependence that we're debating, I'll argue that mere dependence on alcohol should not qualify it for the "alcoholism" label in the common pejorative sense. If you disagree, then I really am curious why you would not likewise label daily coffee drinkers with "caffeinism"? In the other direction, I assert that any regular, pathological pattern of consumption indicates a degree of dependence, but I recognize that there's some semantic debate there. > You're using "pathology" in a very idiosyncratic way, almost opposite to its real meaning. To a clinician, social effects are not pathology. We're not talking about oncology here. Alcoholism is not diagnosed, treated, studied, or managed quite like a medical condition such as cancer or diabetes. Outside the world of medical doctors, the term "pathology" is usually truer to its greek root "pathos". "Pathologic behaviour", "pathological gambling", etc. For what it's worth, the DSM and ICD largely classify mental disorders based on behavioural evidence. This is certainly true for alcohol dependence and abuse (DSM-IV) and alcohol use disorder (DSM-V).

notacoward 6y ago
> No, I asserted that In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 you used the exact words "meant the same". Don't retcon. > Alcoholism is not diagnosed, treated, studied, or managed quite like a medical condition Don't throw around terms like "pathology" then. If you have moral opinions about other people's drinking, just say so. > DSM and ICD largely classify mental disorders based on behavioural evidence "Behavioral" does not mean only effect on others. The distinction you're trying to make keeps shifting around, but AFAICT it hasn't at any point matched any common one.
- nate_meurer 6y ago
  > In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 you used the exact words "meant the same". That's right. I assert that the term "alcoholism" is most widely and commonly used to denote "alcohol abuse". That's what I said before and that's what I'm saying now. I'll say it again if you'd like :) And again, I have never in my life heard a pattern of harmless and controlled consumption of alcohol referred to as "alcoholism". Regarding the notion of dependence, I assert that (1) there is such a thing as alcohol dependency that does not result in or qualify as alcohol abuse, and (2) that in practice all alcohol abuse involves some degree of chemical or psychological dependence. I understand there is semantic debate about this, especially among cognitive scientists, and I'm comfortable taking a side. In DSM-IV, dependence and abuse are diagnosed by completely separate criteria. In DSM-V the criteria are merged under the diagnosis of "Alcohol Use Disorder". Regarding binge drinking, I'll argue that all regular binge drinking should be considered disordered or abusive. Both DSM-IV and DSM-V guidelines appear to allow some amount of binge drinking to escape a clinical diagnosis, but in my experience regular binge drinking is always abusive in the ways that matter. I bet you every addiction counsellor you'll ever meet will agree with me on that. > Don't throw around terms like "pathology" then. Like I said, the word pathology is widely used with a broader meaning outside of hospitals and doctor's offices. But if you're really intent on policing that particular word, I invite you to take up the debate up with a clinical psychologist. Tell them that they're using that word all wrong, and they should use it only the way MD's do. Let me know how that goes. > If you have moral opinions about other people's drinking, just say so. No, I have no problem with alcohol, and I'm regularly around quite a bit of drinking. I have no problem making a run to the liquor store for dinner or a party, and I'm always glad to be the designated driver. My experience leads me to believe that addiction is a disease, not a moral failure. I have the disease of alcoholism, a disease that is diagnosed clinically on the basis of my behavior. Not on my genes or brain structure, but on my behavior. I will never be "cured" of this disease. The best I can hope for is remission, and that's why I can never touch alcohol again, not even a single drink. But that's just my approach. I know there are others, and I don't judge them.

notacoward 6y ago

> No, I asserted that In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 you used the exact words "meant the same". Don't retcon. > Alcoholism is not diagnosed, treated, studied, or managed quite like a medical condition Don't throw around terms like "pathology" then. If you have moral opinions about other people's drinking, just say so. > DSM and ICD largely classify mental disorders based on behavioural evidence "Behavioral" does not mean only effect on others. The distinction you're trying to make keeps shifting around, but AFAICT it hasn't at any point matched any common one.

nate_meurer 6y ago
> In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26763944 you used the exact words "meant the same". That's right. I assert that the term "alcoholism" is most widely and commonly used to denote "alcohol abuse". That's what I said before and that's what I'm saying now. I'll say it again if you'd like :) And again, I have never in my life heard a pattern of harmless and controlled consumption of alcohol referred to as "alcoholism". Regarding the notion of dependence, I assert that (1) there is such a thing as alcohol dependency that does not result in or qualify as alcohol abuse, and (2) that in practice all alcohol abuse involves some degree of chemical or psychological dependence. I understand there is semantic debate about this, especially among cognitive scientists, and I'm comfortable taking a side. In DSM-IV, dependence and abuse are diagnosed by completely separate criteria. In DSM-V the criteria are merged under the diagnosis of "Alcohol Use Disorder". Regarding binge drinking, I'll argue that all regular binge drinking should be considered disordered or abusive. Both DSM-IV and DSM-V guidelines appear to allow some amount of binge drinking to escape a clinical diagnosis, but in my experience regular binge drinking is always abusive in the ways that matter. I bet you every addiction counsellor you'll ever meet will agree with me on that. > Don't throw around terms like "pathology" then. Like I said, the word pathology is widely used with a broader meaning outside of hospitals and doctor's offices. But if you're really intent on policing that particular word, I invite you to take up the debate up with a clinical psychologist. Tell them that they're using that word all wrong, and they should use it only the way MD's do. Let me know how that goes. > If you have moral opinions about other people's drinking, just say so. No, I have no problem with alcohol, and I'm regularly around quite a bit of drinking. I have no problem making a run to the liquor store for dinner or a party, and I'm always glad to be the designated driver. My experience leads me to believe that addiction is a disease, not a moral failure. I have the disease of alcoholism, a disease that is diagnosed clinically on the basis of my behavior. Not on my genes or brain structure, but on my behavior. I will never be "cured" of this disease. The best I can hope for is remission, and that's why I can never touch alcohol again, not even a single drink. But that's just my approach. I know there are others, and I don't judge them.