Feb 21, 2008 15:55
I'm trying to really understand addictions. I mean, on one level it's really easy to say that we're completely against this group of behaviors and objects that were taught to us as "Bad Things", but that's not a very insightful point of view to have. There are all sorts of addictions out there -- addictions to substances like cigarettes and more illegal things, psychological addictions to things like gambling and sex, and even simple habitual addictions like going to the bathroom first thing in the morning.
Webster's defines addiction as "to devote or surrender (oneself) to something habitually or obsessively". I mean, using that definition, I'm addicted to Kate. I've gotta think that's okay. The idea of being addicted to something, though, rankles us. We don't want to be dependent on anything. If you're totally devoted to constantly removing the influence of things on you, though, doesn't that make you addicted to non-addiction?
How do we decide what's an addiction and what's not? If it's as pervasive as it seems here, how do we decide which addictions are "tolerable" and which ones aren't? If I really can't function well if I can't go to the bathroom in the morning, how much better am I than someone that gets irritable without cigarettes? Or someone that gets extremely moody if they can't gamble/have sex/use Substance X on a regular basis?
Thoughts are welcome.