the varieties of addictive experience

I’m stealing this title from The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) by William James. And yes, the comparison between ‘religious’ and ‘addictive’ is purposeful. Suffice it to say that it is not incidental that liquor stores advertise “wine and spirits,” and that both religion and addictive (intoxicating) behaviors are ‘places’ people go to for comfort, solace and transcendence of the ordinary.

But I’ll leave that investigation for another time.

In this moment, I’m thinking about the concept (rather than the experience) of addiction, and I’m doing so from the perspective of being an NYC therapist whose life’s work revolves around helping people to overcome and grow beyond self-defeating patterns of thinking and behavior.

a short history of the human tendency to lose control

As we endeavor to wrap our heads around the concept of “addiction,” it is valuable to remind ourselves that we human beings have been failing miserably in our attempts to control ourselves for the past—oh, let’s say—3000 years or so:

• In ancient Greek lore, Ulysses (the main character of Homer’s Odyssey) decides to tie himself to the mast of his ship because without that external constraint he knows that he will succumb to the temptations of the sirens—those seductive creatures who were well known to lead many a man toward his demise.
• In the Bible, Romans 7:15 (New International translation), St. Paul says, “I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do—but what I hate, I do.”
• During medieval times, religious institutions served as the primary arbiters of what was good (healthy) and bad (unhealthy)—and thus the reigning narrative about compulsive/obsessive/self-destructive behaviors seemed to revolve around the idea that “the devil made me do it.”
• Over the course of the enlightenment period and into the industrial revolution era, human behavior that was obsessive/compulsive/self-destructive—particularly related to alcohol and narcotics use—increasingly began to be addressed by the medical community under the umbrella of the medical model.

I am being flippant of course when I say that we humans have “failed miserably” in our attempts to control ourselves, etc. The real story is much more complex, and I see it on a daily basis in my work as a therapist in NYC. We human beings can obviously control ourselves, but inevitably there are times when we don’t, when we go against our own commitments and promises to ourselves (and others).

Who hasn’t had the experience of getting caught up in patterns of thinking and behavior that lead to deep regret and shame? Such experiences often hurt loved ones as well as self, and certainly exacerbate depression, anxiety, hopelessness and emotional isolation. Whether I work on these issues with people in couples therapy or individual therapy—the healing process always needs to be based on an honest recognition that things have gotten out of control.

being out of control is getting out of control

The modern concept of addiction (as a bio-psycho-social-spiritual condition) came into existence specifically in relation to the abuse of (and dependence on) alcohol and narcotics over the past 200 years, approximately. During the past 50 years or so, however, the word “addiction” has increasingly been used to describe our obsessive/compulsive/self-defeating behaviors in relation to a wide range of other things including: gambling, debt, sex, clutter, food, cigarettes, love, video games, under-earning, work, anger, codependency, sugar, pornography, social media, shopping and more. Some even refer to our country as being “addicted to oil” from the Middle East.

Given the explosion in the number of addictions that are said to be afflicting so many people, one might be unable to resist (pun intended) speculating that we, as a culture, are addicted to creating new addictions.

How shall we understand this?

language is contextual & ever-changing, not universal & absolute

To understand how the concept of addiction is currently being used in our society, we must remind ourselves that ALL concepts are complex social phenomena that serve a variety of functions and are multi-faceted in their meanings. This is as true for the concept of addiction as it is for other concepts that inform our lives, including love, marriage, universe, god, energy, depression, knowledge, justice, etc. If we look at the historical development of these concepts, we find that they too have been (and to continue to be) used to denote different ‘things’ over time.

Let’s take “marriage,” for instance. It used to mean the legal union between a man and a woman, but now it (thankfully!) means, in many states (and soon to be in all states), the legal union of two consenting adults. “Justice” used to include the idea that one should treat slaves with respect and that only white/male/landowners could vote. Over time the concept of justice came to mean (in part) the eradication of slavery and that (almost) all adults have the right to vote. And let’s not forget that the earliest conception of “the universe” (with the earth at the center and the planets orbiting it in perfect circular motion) bears no resemblance to what we understand today as the universe.

Actually, perhaps the example that most drives this point home for me comes from a few years back when the astronomical community came together to decide that Pluto was no longer going to be considered a planet!

Huh?

Yes, even the concept of “planet” is subject to revision, as current doctrine excludes Pluto and says that there are 8 major planets, rather than the 9 we all learned about in school.

Strange indeed…but such is the nature of how concepts function in human life.

labels can help, but real help transcends labels

So—back to our discussion about addiction. Now that we have normalized the ever-changing nature of concepts—where does that leave us with respect to getting help for ourselves and loved ones, or giving help to people we work with?

Two thoughts on this:

1. There is value to the philosophical analysis of language as I’ve done in this blog entry, but it is a completely different activity from actually sitting with a suffering person and providing help, guidance and support—as I do on a daily basis in my work as a therapist in NYC. Philosophical analysis often has a detached and overly intellectualized quality, but genuinely helping someone in pain is completely different. It is authentic, down to earth and personal.
2. There are many wonderful addiction therapists in NYC that I’ve collaborated with over the years, and we’ve all worked with people who hate the word “addiction” because to them it sounds/feels like an unhelpful “label.” If you’re one of these people, you need to know that hating labels is totally fine; you can still get lots of help. To keep it simple—if you feel that things in your life have gotten a bit (or a lot) out of control, then go talk to an NYC addiction therapist, or attend a meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous, Debtors Anonymous, Overeaters Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous, Codependents Anonymous—or any 12-Step group that pertains to what you’re struggling with. It’s just a group of normal people coming together to help and support each other. Labels are completely optional.

*A first draft of this article was published on 11/3/12, at wearetherealdeal.com