5 ms·

> Self-control is like a muscle: exercise it frequently, and it gets stronger. It also gets tired and needs rest, and it atrophies with disuse. Addiction is no

> Self-control is like a muscle: exercise it frequently, and it gets stronger. It also gets tired and needs rest, and it atrophies with disuse. Addiction is not a matter of self-control.

deelowe 2y ago
Few things are. The world would be a better place if people would try to help each other more.
- try_the_bass 2y ago
  Wanting people to understand that they can improve their own self-control is trying to help them. With more self-control comes more agency and more control over one's own outcomes. How is that being spun as a bad thing? I don't understand how we've reached a point that it's considered more "helpful" to teach people they have no control over their actions, rather than helping them gain more control over those actions?
wubrr 2y ago
It's 100% a matter of self-control.
- fragmede 2y ago
  No it's not. That's a lazy way of thinking. Addiction isn't that simple, and deluding yourself into thinking it's that simple does yourself a disservice. It's not a moral failing, it's a disease.
  - wubrr 2y ago
    Self control is not 'simple', nor did I say anything about a 'moral failing'. 'Deluding yourself' by arguing against a position you imagined does yourself a disservice and just seems like a simple straw-man.
  - try_the_bass 2y ago
    And it's not lazy or delusional to claim addiction is as simple as being a disease? If anything, that's a more lazy approach than saying it's a failing of self-control, which is itself a complicated and complex issue (hence my paragraphs and qualifications and whatnot above). Writing it off as "a disease" removes all agency from the individual involved, whose lack of self-control is probably why they're addicted in the first place. That's true regardless of whether or not the addiction itself is a disease or a lack of self-control. Saying "it's a disease" is also hugely insulting to the many people who have broken addictions by improving their self control. Even if you consider it a "disease", every person who has accomplished this has proven that the cure sometimes really is "improve your self-control". And if that works in some cases, how can you prove whether or not it will work in another case without trying it first?
- filleduchaos 2y ago
  Addiction is a psychological disorder - it is not at all a matter of self-control. Just as being sad is not the same thing as being clinically depressed, and worrying about a review is not the same thing as having an anxiety disorder, people need to stop equating really liking something and being addicted to said thing.
  - wubrr 2y ago
    > Addiction is a psychological disorder - it is not at all a matter of self-control. And self-control is not psychological? > people need to stop equating really liking something and being addicted to said thing. Self control is precisely the difference between really linking something and consuming a reasonable/healthy amount of it vs being addicted to it and overconsuming.
    - filleduchaos 2y ago
      > And self-control is not psychological? The disorder that you dropped from "psychological" is actually semantically important, you know. > Self control is precisely the difference between really linking something and consuming a reasonable/healthy amount of it vs being addicted to it and overconsuming. If you were unable to get the hint from the other examples I gave, I'll be plain: you are terribly mistaken, addiction is a disorder of the brain. What moral failing do you assume people with mood or anxiety disorders have?
      - wubrr 2y ago
        > The disorder that you dropped from "psychological" is actually semantically important, you know. Lack of self control can be described as a 'psychological disorder'. Also you completely avoided the actual question :) - maybe try answering it instead of playing semantics? > I'll be plain: you are terribly mistaken, addiction is a disorder of the brain. So you replaced 'phsycological disorder' with 'disorder of the brain'? That's supposed to make your point less pointless? > What moral failing do you assume people with mood or anxiety disorders have? Again, nowhere did I mention the word 'moral'. Try to address what I actually said instead of imagining strawmen in every comment. > If you were unable to get the hint from the other examples I gave No, I didn't get any 'hint' from your pointless examples. You see, I try to read what you said directly and respond directly, without any imagined 'hints', strawmen, or meaningless semantic games around vague and ambiguous terms.
- teekert 2y ago
  Whatever addiction, you’ll only get past it by assuming and believing it is under your control, paradoxically. Playing victim is, as very often in life, the opposite of empowering.
try_the_bass 2y ago
It absolutely is. Most people become addicted to something because they lacked the self-control to say "no" the first time... And the second time... And so on until it became an addiction. Also, by saying this you're insulting every person who has broken an addiction by way of exercising their self-control until it's strong enough to overcome the addiction. Some of us don't appreciate that.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

> Self-control is like a muscle: exercise it frequently, and it gets stronger. It also gets tired and needs rest, and it atrophies with disuse. Addiction is not a matter of self-control.

deelowe 2y ago

Few things are. The world would be a better place if people would try to help each other more.

try_the_bass 2y ago
Wanting people to understand that they can improve their own self-control is trying to help them. With more self-control comes more agency and more control over one's own outcomes. How is that being spun as a bad thing? I don't understand how we've reached a point that it's considered more "helpful" to teach people they have no control over their actions, rather than helping them gain more control over those actions?

wubrr 2y ago

It's 100% a matter of self-control.

fragmede 2y ago
No it's not. That's a lazy way of thinking. Addiction isn't that simple, and deluding yourself into thinking it's that simple does yourself a disservice. It's not a moral failing, it's a disease.
- wubrr 2y ago
  Self control is not 'simple', nor did I say anything about a 'moral failing'. 'Deluding yourself' by arguing against a position you imagined does yourself a disservice and just seems like a simple straw-man.
- try_the_bass 2y ago
  And it's not lazy or delusional to claim addiction is as simple as being a disease? If anything, that's a more lazy approach than saying it's a failing of self-control, which is itself a complicated and complex issue (hence my paragraphs and qualifications and whatnot above). Writing it off as "a disease" removes all agency from the individual involved, whose lack of self-control is probably why they're addicted in the first place. That's true regardless of whether or not the addiction itself is a disease or a lack of self-control. Saying "it's a disease" is also hugely insulting to the many people who have broken addictions by improving their self control. Even if you consider it a "disease", every person who has accomplished this has proven that the cure sometimes really is "improve your self-control". And if that works in some cases, how can you prove whether or not it will work in another case without trying it first?
filleduchaos 2y ago
Addiction is a psychological disorder - it is not at all a matter of self-control. Just as being sad is not the same thing as being clinically depressed, and worrying about a review is not the same thing as having an anxiety disorder, people need to stop equating really liking something and being addicted to said thing.
- wubrr 2y ago
  > Addiction is a psychological disorder - it is not at all a matter of self-control. And self-control is not psychological? > people need to stop equating really liking something and being addicted to said thing. Self control is precisely the difference between really linking something and consuming a reasonable/healthy amount of it vs being addicted to it and overconsuming.
  - filleduchaos 2y ago
    > And self-control is not psychological? The disorder that you dropped from "psychological" is actually semantically important, you know. > Self control is precisely the difference between really linking something and consuming a reasonable/healthy amount of it vs being addicted to it and overconsuming. If you were unable to get the hint from the other examples I gave, I'll be plain: you are terribly mistaken, addiction is a disorder of the brain. What moral failing do you assume people with mood or anxiety disorders have?
    - wubrr 2y ago
      > The disorder that you dropped from "psychological" is actually semantically important, you know. Lack of self control can be described as a 'psychological disorder'. Also you completely avoided the actual question :) - maybe try answering it instead of playing semantics? > I'll be plain: you are terribly mistaken, addiction is a disorder of the brain. So you replaced 'phsycological disorder' with 'disorder of the brain'? That's supposed to make your point less pointless? > What moral failing do you assume people with mood or anxiety disorders have? Again, nowhere did I mention the word 'moral'. Try to address what I actually said instead of imagining strawmen in every comment. > If you were unable to get the hint from the other examples I gave No, I didn't get any 'hint' from your pointless examples. You see, I try to read what you said directly and respond directly, without any imagined 'hints', strawmen, or meaningless semantic games around vague and ambiguous terms.
teekert 2y ago
Whatever addiction, you’ll only get past it by assuming and believing it is under your control, paradoxically. Playing victim is, as very often in life, the opposite of empowering.

try_the_bass 2y ago

It absolutely is. Most people become addicted to something because they lacked the self-control to say "no" the first time... And the second time... And so on until it became an addiction. Also, by saying this you're insulting every person who has broken an addiction by way of exercising their self-control until it's strong enough to overcome the addiction. Some of us don't appreciate that.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]