A Final Piece on Addiction. Intuitive Recovery

A Final Piece on Addiction. Intuitive Recovery

No personality disorders to correct
No disease to call your very own
No madness to separate you from common man
No childhood trauma to fuel your enigmatic lost stare
No genetic predisposition that absolves your responsibility
No family history or hereditary expectation
No blood sugar imbalance
No pain to call your own
No guilt to enrol you in bad club
No Freudian derelict mansion of the mind
No dark corridors
No abandoned child's bedrooms
No broken dolls nor rocking horses
No projected shield of misunderstanding
No silence to speak volumes
No betrayals nor abuse
No victimhood
No glorious failure
Nothing to separate you from anyone
Just greed and a love of intoxication

The addiction industry is booming in a climate of fragile economic stability, a struggling, cut to ribbons health system, a culture where depression is the cause of more lost working days than any other condition. In our struggle to understand addiction, theories abound. I have written frequently on the subject. Having put my own self destructive habits to bed I submit my final piece on the subject in the hope that the techniques I used to escape can be of help to others. I recently spent time on a course run by Intuitive Recovery. Though past my own personal problems I found the courses philosophy mirrored my own though in a far more concise and well thought out manner. Much of this piece echoes the ides of IR, much the best system of addiction recovery I have encountered. The first time I realised my use had become problematic I spoke to narcotics anonymous devotees. I was told my problem was not an intellectual one that could be understood but a spiritual problem that was beyond my personal control. Depending on ones beliefs and cultural conditioning different systems make more sense. I do not believe in an interventionist God. One who answers prayers. This is no choice. At many times in my life I have wanted to believe and hold no disrespect for those who do. I believe in higher powers but to me they seem impartial to my personal life. I am aware of the sun and sea but doubt they know of me. Consequently, the most successful abstinence system wasn't available for me. I required something I had faith in. Something that wasn't supernatural, and some system whereby I could regain control. They were right in as much as my problem was not intellectual. It was the product of a working bodily system. The animal hunger for drugs had overtaken my reason. Simply put, a very bad habit.


Firstly, physiological dependence occurs to anybody who takes certain drugs everyday for a sufficient duration. This is not addiction. Most withdraw and never go near again. Some repeat the process time and time again despite the pain. You can, of course, be physiologically dependent on, and addicted to a drug. But physiological dependence is a separable issue. Gambling involves no substance at all yet can be powerfully addictive.
It should be noted that many people can use drugs, enjoy them then put them down. I, myself, can place a bet on a boxing match, enjoy my flutter and not bother again for years. Gambling has no addictive attraction for me personally though clearly can be overwhelming for many people. Addiction has nothing to do with the amount you bet, drink or smoke or inject. Some enjoy getting out of their face each and every day but aren't addicts. At least their behaviour is of no problem or obstacle to their personal contentment.
Addiction, in this problematic definition, I aim to provide an escape system from is characterised by ambivalence. When in search of the drink or drug of choice the addict will stop at nothing to obtain what they want. In equal and opposite determination they will commit to never using again. Addiction is this chatter. The angel on one shoulder, the devil on the other. Addiction is the battle between the two voices. Through an understanding of the roots of the contradictory voices it is possible to acquire sufficient self realisation to implement free will in to the equation.
The mid brain, often called the animal brain links to the brain stem and central nervous system. It controls all involuntary bodily actions. Those that happen without conscious thought. Breathing, heart beating, digestion, wound healing, sweating. Within the mid brain is an almond shaped organ called the amygdala. This records pleasure able sensations. When we are cold our parents wrap us in warm blankets and the return to steady temperature feels good, this is recorded. When we are hungry and eat this pleasure is noted so as we repeat the process. The mid brain works the same in all animals, marking essential survival needs as pleasureable and dangerous hazards as unpleasant so we learn to avoid dangers.
The neo cortex is the thinking part of the brain. In humans this is much larger than in most animals. The neo cortex is what controls our conscious bodily movements. The mid brain can not do this. The mid brain says "I am hungry, hey! Neo cortex! Can you make the body walk to the fridge and grab some food?" The neo cortex asses the situation, if all is safe it steers the hand to the fridge.
When a drug is taken some peoples mid brain finds the pleasure immense. The amygdala records this and seeks to repeat the process. But it must convince the neo cortex to steer the body to find the substance. For those people not prone to addiction, the neo cortex over rides the impulse to use or re use drugs. In others the drive to go find a drink or drug is the desire to use at all costs. The neo cortex is the part saying, stop! This is dangerous. This is the argument in the addicts head. This is the ambivalence. This is the ongoing daily debate. The animal mid brain in constant pestering of the neo cortex to do its bidding. This duality of desire. The ever hungry and never satisfied mid brain providing an urge. It uses pain, despair, sweating, heart beats, cold and hot flushes, every trick it has to trigger the neo cortex. Once the neo cortex so much as considers the possibility, the debate begins, the mid brain will always win. Any justification conjured up to rationalise the use of drugs will be used. The smarter the individual, the better the arguments to use. One must learn to decisively ignore the impulse negating any discussion.
If a dog is rewarded with a treat each time it shits in the house it will continue to do so. Only an idiot would train a dog to do this. Yet a similar process takes place in humans, our brains are not so different. To overcome addiction one must retrain oneself, ignoring and over riding the impulse to use. It takes time but ultimately, if unfed the impulses whither away.
Clearly, regarding the animal mid brain as 'it', the devil on your shoulder, something other than 'I' and 'I' as the neo cortex is a metaphorical model. All parts of the body are you, every part of the brain. But a basic understanding of why we have these contradictory impulses enables us to recognise the origins of their separation and use this understanding to reaffirm lost control.
There is only one way to stop the cycle and it is very simple. Take the decision to never use again. Once this decision is made all the pressure is gone. There will be a very angry mid brain spitting out its dummy but if the decision is genuine all psychosomatic symptoms dissolve. There will be a lot of discomfort. Often serious illness. But few drugs kill through instant withdrawal and these only in rare situations of extreme use and fragile bodies.
Whatever the causes of addiction in an individual, overcoming the condition must take precedence. The many and varied psychological problems most addicts have can be seperated from their substance use. There is little point in either linking the two together or trying to address personal issues whilst addicted. Once the habit is gone, these can then be addressed. Most models of recovery employ psychoanalysis, group discussion and public shaming. Digging up buried trauma frequently increases the desire to use. Here, the concept of 'self medication' permits medical terminology and the following semantics to reinforce the 'disease' model providing both an escape from responsibility and a fatalism to what is not a disease but a frame of mind. It has served everyone well to treat addiction as a disease. Studies of the body including the brain have so far found no evidence of any biological component to classify this state of mind as a disease. The language of disease has infected virtually all approaches to treatment. Through semantics the terminology of addiction creates a category error that serves to perpetuate the condition. Relapse, another misused medical term implies a return to something beyond personal control. It absolves personal responsibility.
Group discussion, whilst for many can provide an alternative peer group to existing drug using friendship networks it offers little to the addict who isn't susceptible to peer pressure. My own drug use was often solitary and needed no group justification or approval. The thought of discussing past mistakes indefinitely at meetings with fellow ex users seems to be nostalgically hanging on. A way to continue to explore the drug experience without using. Reliving a love affair not yet over. The counting of days since last use perpetuates the relationship enabling it to continue but in the negative. An advent calendar of reluctantly lost pleasure. It can ensure one never fully moves on but continues to define oneself through habits that ought to be lost.
Whilst self realisation and full acceptance of the effects of ones drug use on others is usually necessary to provide the impetus to move on, not all addicts cause others harm. Some are driven to crime, lies and deceit but not all. It's really nobody else's business so long as the user is self sufficient and has no dependants. I would argue drug use is a human right so long as no harm is caused to others. Nevertheless, the ambivalence usually forms from having let oneself and others down. This is when and only when an addict qualifies for the definition of the term I am using. It is also the point at which they are likely to want to stop. All drug use is in one sense, self centred. Any spare cash could feed the poor. Self deception sneaks through the door unnoticed. Firstly in that most of us are loved by someone and your health, even death could cause deep hurt. We are also all walking adverts. Whether we like it or not, younger people will look up to you to see how an adult should conduct themselves. If a single person looks to you and thinks, 'if he does it, then it must be okay,' then that is on you. Setting a bad example to younger or less controlled individuals who may not see the subtleties and studied care that enables you to negotiate dangerous paths can lead to their death. Drugs are dangerous and not everyone will observe the strict rigour required to safely steer their hazardous territory.
Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous has helped many people but through their perception of addiction as a disease beyond an addicts control, a virtual consensus in the nature of addiction has followed. The need for a higher power excludes all who find no evidence of the existence of an interventionist God. Indoctrinating individuals into thinking they are of a special minority with no free will regarding their behaviour imprisons many. The counting of days implies a holiday from something they will inevitably return. The concept of endless recovery and the primacy of meetings with other addicts means people who in some cases gave up drinking or drug using decades ago, still defining themselves through the habits they had years ago. A life sentence. Rehabs pluck an individual from their environment, place them in a cushioned bubble. A false reality. Here people are brainwashed. This usually dissolves once they return to their previous setting. I see many faults to conventional systems of the addiction industry. The drug workers have a vested interest in maintaining there are a steady flow of addicts to work with. If all could overcome their problems unaided, the drug workers would be out of work. By developing a quasi medical framework using supportive semantics they are able to project a professional superior knowledge. Through this lens of disease beyond the free control of the individual, addicts are absolved of responsibility. Both parties benefit by maintaining the status quo.

An additional point here can be illustrated by a television programme I once saw. Two British doctors, twins were sent into the Amazonian rain forest to meet with tribal peoples to compare and illustrate the superiority of western medicine over the presumed superstitious practices of shamanic medicine men. They came to a tribe who had a woman nursing a dying child with, what looked like, to my western eyes, a serious pustulous infection. The local shaman had failed in curing the boy so the twins attempted a cure using the limited provisions they had brought. As their anti biotics failed to deliver much help the local shaman had gone to a neighbouring tribe and returned with a more knowledgable shaman. The twins explained that were they in a hospital with intravenous drips and other tackle they could crack the problem easily. They understood the 'science' of what was wrong but couldn't implement it.
Soon the more experienced shaman arrived and knew exactly what to do. Through steaming the boys face with a boiling potion of a couple of herbs alongside the exorcism of the malevolent spirit that was the root cause through the destruction of a nearby nest of a specific species of leaf cutter ant he was able to cure the boy. The locals clearly saw the falability and failure of western medicine. Truth is subjective. Medicine either works or not.
The reason I bring this up is I tried, through the study of various theories of addiction to find a resolution. Like any science where theories change and improve before the over riding paradigm can no longer contain the contradictory evidence. From here a new paradigm must be found with fresh a priori assumptions. This new paradigm exists as 'truth' until evidence triggers a further paradigm shift.
It matters not what addiction really is. In my piece above I offer a system by which one can overcome addiction. I recognise that AA provide a system of equal strength for some people but I argue it offers only the possibility of achieving abstinence from addictions that remain unresolved. However one tricks oneself out of their problematic condition will require an element of faith or self deception. Each to their own. AA never worked for me but good luck to everyone it helps. For some resolution only occurs through a belief the problem is beyond their personal control. Psychologically I needed to accept personal responsibility, to believe I was in control. The brain science is over simplified and the close skeptical reader will find other questionable points. But my objective was to provide a logical structural system of practical use, the same system employed by Intuitive Recovery. It may not stand up to total scrutiny as a description of the problem of addiction but none do. I suspect none will ever. Such is the nature of science. But this system, just like the Amazonian shamans 'medicine' works. Questioning further is of no comfort to the mother if the boy dies, so too more advanced theories of addiction are of no comfort if they can not help individuals overcome their problems.


So there you have it. It is really that simple. It is far from easy, but it is simple. Decide to stop. Make this a final decision without loopholes of 'now and again', 'special occasions', because they are all special occasions. On bad days it'll be a justified comfort, on good days a well earned reward. Justifications are endless and will cover every occasion if you engage in the debate within your head. Seperate the two conflicting voices, recognise 'it', the desire to use is the mid brains impulse and that 'I', the rational voice saying stay clean is the neo cortex, you. 'You' can over ride 'it'. You are in control. For the readers bored by all my writing on addiction you will be glad to know that this is the final piece on the subject. It has been a hell of a journey for me personally. One I have negotiated through writing down my thoughts on the subject. It should come as no shock that the taking of an addictive substance leads to addiction. It was curiosity that caught me up. I wanted to explore the possibilities of consciousness. But I also fall in to the category of person some psychologists have termed 'addictive personalities'. Whether such a thing exists has little empirical evidence. But this too can be said about falling in love. As yet even advanced neuroscience struggles to find any truth in the existence of the condition of being in love, yet still, most of us will have little doubt of the conditions existence. So too with addiction. As yet no empirical evidence of its existence has been found but few would argue that it isn't a huge societal problem. But categorising oneself as an addictive type of person opens a window of excuse. And an addict will use any excuse. The journey has been costly. It is a journey I am happy to say, for me personally, that is over. I hope that this system can be of help to others. It can be applied to other aspects of life characterised by ambivalence. Weight for some is as troubling a personal problem as any addiction. Over eating bares all the same hallmarks and can be addressed in the same way.


Sent from my iPad