Why I don't drink
I am appreciative of the opportunity afforded by this forum to submit a topic for discussion. The following constitutes my first post on thephilosophyforum.
I am asked why I don't drink any more. Following is my argument for not doing so. I would appreciate a critique of the same.
To appreciate my point of view on alcohol consumption, consider the situation involving 'pain'.
Pain is caused by, say, some thing hitting you; drunkenness is caused by the consumption of alcohol. The act of some thing hitting you causes nerve signals to travel to the brain; likewise, I suppose, the act of consuming alcohol causes certain neurotransmitters to be released by the brain causing a temporary relaxation of its logical center.
Something more occurs in both cases: pain causes one to cry or scream; alcohol initiates in many a sense of euphoria. Alternatively, someone may endure pain stoically, without any outward expression; someone else, similarly, might endure alcohol in a way that renders them sick. Nevertheless, in case of alcohol, it is this euphoric state that one pursues socially on weekends.
The crux of my argument is this:we have no compunction about accepting that someone may cry or scream without actually being hurt & in pain; however, it isn't equally convincing to the social drinker that the pursuit of the euphoric state associated with drunkenness may accrue without the actual act of drinking alcohol!
So, I investigated four of the primary reasons social drinkers proferr:
1) "I am less inhibited when I drink": To that I suggest that one should strive to be uninhibited and open to new ideas & learnings as a matter of course.
2) "I am more open-hearted when I drink": To that, too, I counter that one ought to be considerate & open-hearted all the time.
3) "I am less risk-averse and more adventurous when I drink": I say one should seek adventure, meaning, and higher purpose in life each & every day.
4) "I am more at peace when I drink": There are alternatives like deep breathing, meditation, sitting quietly, and others that can trigger peacefulness.
Each of the above four are noble pursuits, I concur.
So, I submit that, having myself been a consumer of alcohol and well-versed with the associated euphoric state, I inhabit the euphoric state simply by pursuing all that the state of euphoria is constituted of: by being an uninhibited, open-hearted, clean, honest, and loving individual, I become that which is grasped momentarily by the alcohol consumer.
If alcohol consumption gives one a glimpse of higher, nobler ways of being, one ought to strive to attaining them without aid; and to not continue to keep knock, knock, knockin' on Heaven's Door every weekend, but to have the intelligence, will, & courage to walk through it.
I am asked why I don't drink any more. Following is my argument for not doing so. I would appreciate a critique of the same.
To appreciate my point of view on alcohol consumption, consider the situation involving 'pain'.
Pain is caused by, say, some thing hitting you; drunkenness is caused by the consumption of alcohol. The act of some thing hitting you causes nerve signals to travel to the brain; likewise, I suppose, the act of consuming alcohol causes certain neurotransmitters to be released by the brain causing a temporary relaxation of its logical center.
Something more occurs in both cases: pain causes one to cry or scream; alcohol initiates in many a sense of euphoria. Alternatively, someone may endure pain stoically, without any outward expression; someone else, similarly, might endure alcohol in a way that renders them sick. Nevertheless, in case of alcohol, it is this euphoric state that one pursues socially on weekends.
The crux of my argument is this:we have no compunction about accepting that someone may cry or scream without actually being hurt & in pain; however, it isn't equally convincing to the social drinker that the pursuit of the euphoric state associated with drunkenness may accrue without the actual act of drinking alcohol!
So, I investigated four of the primary reasons social drinkers proferr:
1) "I am less inhibited when I drink": To that I suggest that one should strive to be uninhibited and open to new ideas & learnings as a matter of course.
2) "I am more open-hearted when I drink": To that, too, I counter that one ought to be considerate & open-hearted all the time.
3) "I am less risk-averse and more adventurous when I drink": I say one should seek adventure, meaning, and higher purpose in life each & every day.
4) "I am more at peace when I drink": There are alternatives like deep breathing, meditation, sitting quietly, and others that can trigger peacefulness.
Each of the above four are noble pursuits, I concur.
So, I submit that, having myself been a consumer of alcohol and well-versed with the associated euphoric state, I inhabit the euphoric state simply by pursuing all that the state of euphoria is constituted of: by being an uninhibited, open-hearted, clean, honest, and loving individual, I become that which is grasped momentarily by the alcohol consumer.
If alcohol consumption gives one a glimpse of higher, nobler ways of being, one ought to strive to attaining them without aid; and to not continue to keep knock, knock, knockin' on Heaven's Door every weekend, but to have the intelligence, will, & courage to walk through it.
Comments (47)
Why on earth would anyone wait until the weekend to knock knock knock on Heaven's Door when glory can be had with a few bottles of beer or a few ounces of gin RIGHT NOW?
Man, I've had religious ecstasy, and I've had transcendental peace. These are both high-end gold-wrapped candy which are dandy, but philosophers know that liquor is quicker. And more certain as well. Right now I have in my hand a glass of tonic, New Amsterdam gin, and ice cubes and already I am experiencing the divine tranquilization of the spirit world that I have come to know and love. It works, and it's quite affordable.
Skol!
My body's reaction made it really easy for me to make a decision where to draw the line with drinking and fortunately it is hereditary and it appears at least one of my children have the same reaction as me.
Quoting Barry Etheridge
With the brandy it was the sugar mixed with the alcohol that put me in the ER but they didn't say I was allergic to sugar but rather alcohol.
Quoting Barry Etheridge
I did just say that and will again if you wish. My son does appreciate the fact that he can openly dismiss offers of something that makes him feel ill.
Is there something wrong with someone who does not drink?
Vodka is an uncolored alcohol product. It's relatively simple. Consider brandy, whiskey, bourbon, cordials... These products are aged in oak barrels--some of them charred, are distilled from wines (brandy), or have all sorts of flavorings (cordials). There is a very long list of compounds which could trigger an allergic reaction. Gin is good, but some people are annoyed by juniper berries.
Beer, especially the micro-brewed or nano-brewed products consist of yeast, grain, water, and hops. Within the yeast and hops there are quite a few possible allergens. Celeriac cases probably can't drink beer made from wheat (as opposed to barley).
So your allergy to many types of alcoholic mixes is quite plausible. Plutonium hexafluoride has a delicious strawberry flavor, but gives many people problems when guzzled in large quantities. They tend to just keel over, shrivel up, and glow in the dark.
Most people seem to be able to drink alcohol safely, once they have learned how they react to it (unfortunately, quite a few people die in the process, because their first encounter with a lot of alcohol can result in stupor). I could easily have died from my first encounter with a lot of alcohol (a bottle of cheap wine). We got drunk on the Wisconsin side of the Mississippi (where we were old enough to buy the crappy slop we guzzled down) then crossed a railroad bridge back to Minnesota (by which point we were totally drunk). It's just luck that I-we didn't fall off the bridge into the water and drown.
Where I live, using the phone is involved in more fatal accidents than alcohol. The statistic for alcohol is far less than 80%.
Is this supposed to be why you don't drink, or an argument why no one should drink? You know, what works for one doesn't necessarily work for everyone.
Where do you live, at the Samsung Galaxy S7 store?
To say X is one method to achieve Y yet there are other methods to achieve Y, isn't actually an argument against X.
Also to say X is one method to achieve Y for a specific period of time yet we should strive to achieve Y at all times, also isn't an argument against X.
Neither of these are arguments against eatin pasta.
Eating pasta is one way to satisfy hunger yet there are other ways.
Eating pasta satisfies hunger, yet we should strive to satisfy hunger as a matter of course.
Still no actual reasons to avoid pasta or alcohol.
Hippies like to argue that if you must do recreational drugs its better to do ones that don't tend to make you do stupid things, aren't addictive, are not associated with violence, and don't ruin your body. Some twenty percent of the people in prison in the US are potheads that even most cops say are not hardened criminals and shouldn't be there. Its really just culture wars along the same lines as blacks being incarcerated at eight times the rates of whites.
Quoting adrien
You may spend the money to your heart’s content to buy livestock, flocks, wine, strong drink, and whatever you desire. You and your household may eat there and rejoice in the presence of the Lord your God.”
If God is for it, why should anyone be against it--other than those in AA?
You were off by 200x with the number you provided of 20%. It would be extremely uncommon to find a simple marijuana user in prison, considering simple possession is a misdemeanor in most jurisdictions and prison is reserved for felons. The percentage in county jails is .7%, 25x less than the number you provided.
Anyway, the US has other problems than drugs but they are exemplified in this area. The US spends a ludicrous amount on the war on drugs without obvious effectiveness and Latinos and Blacks make up 89% of the prison population in there for drug crimes (possession and distribution), whereas that's rather evenly distributed among white folk as well.
I tend to drink whiskey, for example, or wine, because I enjoy doing so. "Well" you may say "You can enjoy yourself without drinking whiskey or wine, without their aid." Yes, and I do. What of it?
Trust the medical profession to play with numbers in a "nonpartisan" manner.
https://www.aclu.org/gallery/marijuana-arrests-numbers
"According to the ACLU’s original analysis, marijuana arrests now account for over half of all drug arrests in the United States. Of the 8.2 million marijuana arrests between 2001 and 2010, 88% were for simply having marijuana. Nationwide, the arrest data revealed one consistent trend: significant racial bias. Despite roughly equal usage rates, Blacks are 3.73 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana."
They are using marijuana as an excuse to bust people and then trump up charges. We had one cop in Norfolk VA who was caught and the city had to review over 430 busts he made. They are PIGS who the billionaire mayor of NYC had arrest 26 reporters in one day. That's why just yesterday there were four cases across the country of people executing cops in broad daylight without provocation. When there is no justice in or out of court cops are just mafia hired thugs and judges are merely the dons. In fact, that's how the mafia was first established in Italy, when their judicial system became so corrupt inventing their own brand of justice became more attractive.
The trend for many years has been toward decriminalization and outright legalization of marijuana. Most large cities have been issuing citations instead of even arresting simple possession users.
http://norml.org/news/2015/11/12/report-one-in-eight-federal-drug-prisoners-serving-time-for-marijuana-offenses
The war on drugs has not reduced the consumption of drugs, yet the war goes on with the US creating the largest prison population in the history of planet.
Huffington Post did another article on the issue that shows how drugs are the single largest reason for incarceration, while white collar crimes go virtually unpunished. The poor and working class know damned well what is going on which is why as the war on drugs has escalated people are now executing cops and rioting in the streets knowing there is no justice in or out of court, while the middle class merely shakes their heads wondering "Why can't we all just get along?" and vote with their wallets like good little drones.
I don't buy the notion that what's causing the disproportionate rates of drug arrests between blacks and whites is simply racist cops. There's many other more plausible explanations. Black people are far over represented in nearly all categories of crime. So if black people are commiting more crime (a lot more) on average than white people, this means there's a far higher chance for a black person to be arrested on an unrelated matter, or to have dealings with police.
Let's say the rates for marijuana possession for both black and white people is 5/10. Half of all people are walking around with cannabis on their person. But, the rate for say theft is 3/10 for black people but only 1/10 for whites. So we'll say monthly, 3/10 blacks commit theft, but only 1/10 whites do. Let's say that the odds of getting caught stealing are 1/2. This means that per month, 1.5/10 black people get arrested, while only .5/10 whites do. Because half of both blacks and whites are carrying cannabis, and all arrestees are searched, this would mean that per month .75/10 black people are charged with cannabis possession, while only .25/10 white people are. Even though blacks and whites posess cannabis at the exact same rates.
There could be other reasons as well, such as black people being more likely to behave ways that causes them to be arrested for possession more often. This could be say, smoking cannabis in public places more often than whites, dealing cannabis in open air markets at a higher rate, driving high more often, not hiding heir cannabis well enough.
There's plenty if explanations other than just "white people are racist and use drug laws to 'punish' blacks for being inferior."
The cops are not necessarily racist, they are simply doing their job which, unfortunately, today means racial profiling. They are deliberately targeting blacks because cops get promoted according to how many successful busts and convictions and courts are more likely to convict a black man. Nor is it illegal for them to do so and it doesn't mean that the courts are overwhelmingly racist, it means they are racially biased and they are promoting racist policies and racist policing.
Its money doing all the driving because the lights are on, but nobody is home. Blacks rioting in the streets and executing cops is the only viable way they have of making the war too expensive to continue. They already tried the peaceful approach and look what's happened as a result.
Haha! Oh man what a great post, transcendental peace & religious ecstasy from ethanol intoxication? When pigs fly! :D haha
Don't really have to.
Again, I said they were harmless potheads, not that they were imprisoned for pot possession. Most were convictions for trafficking. Tommy Chong, of Cheech and Chong fame, was given nine months for selling pipes. Its a culture war where the rich get richer and poor poorer, while alcohol is involved in the vast majority of violent crimes, is addictive, and has serious health hazards, yet, is sold legally on any street corner. Those with money want everyone else violent and divided which is why we now have riots in the streets and people executing cops.
Because black people commit more crimes. You seem to think courts just let white people off because they're white and punish the blacks for the same crime, which explains the disparate conviction rates.
This is simply untrue. Blacks get convicted of crimes more often because they commit crimes more often. A cop gets called to a murder scene and sees both a white and a black person fleeing the scene. He's better off chasing the black guy because statistically the black man is far more likely to have pulled the trigger. Racially profiling doesn't just happen because cops deliberately are targeting blacks for no reason.
Quoting wuliheron
Or they could just stop being criminals? Wtf man? Executing cops because you're getting arrested for breaking the law is never viable. What do you even mean "the peaceful approach"? Black people should be allowed to commit crimes and face no concequences? And if this doesn't happen the viable response is to murder cops?
Looks like you've swallowed the BLM kool-aid.
My own family is Irish Catholic and knows what the score is. When we immigrated to this country we became gang members and crooked cops. When Lincoln freed the slaves the Irish Catholic hung a few in NYC and rioted because they didn't need the competition for the lowest paying jobs. My family is all too familiar with want adds in the paper saying ICNNA which is Irish Catholics Need Not Apply. Bigotry runs deep and the US has just elected a bigot as president in response to Obama. Its war and this one is just getting started. You get the justice you can either afford or what can be taken at the end of a gun.
My great grandmother was a half breed and when she was conceived her mother and father both moved out west to get away from bigotry. They settled outside a town and a few months later the white boys came around and said he could stay, he could keep his squaw, but the kid had to go. When they moved to the reservation a few months later the local boys told them the same. In Vietnam countless half breed children where never claimed by either side. Complain all you like, but you can kill a man economically just as easily as shooting him in the head and the poor are fighting back.
If you or I did the things Trump and Hillary did we would be in jail. The moral high ground doesn't cut it when money does all the driving and even your constitutional rights have been suspended indefinitely. Something the IRA took to heart and won serious concessions for, while Germany needed their Hitler to pound home the error of their evil ways.
Just reading thru Wikipedia it certainly does sound right. You are one smart cookie! 8-)
When one looks at alcohol free social groups, they're notable for having very strict marriage and mating rituals, which I'd argue is necessary to accommodate the sizable number of men and women who are socially unable to intimately interact without being chemically altered.
In other words, plying the ladies with alcohol is not just some neat trick teenagers have stumbled upon, but it's actually an evolutionary tool in place for human survival. When a society removes it (often because of its other deleterious effects), it must offer a replacement for it.
Not 7 years, but this guy got life without parole.