Hacker News Reader

It’s not the cues that get you. That is an idea promoted largely by treatment centers and the rehab industry, who need to be able to plausibly claim they are teaching their customers how to avoid relapse. I’m a recovered alcoholic and I can assure you, my “cue” for drinking was being alive and awake at the same time.

Your reaction is a sane and normal one: you remember a good time, and you have some inkling to recreate it. Certainly. And to most people that makes sense. But alcoholics are different from most people, and their understanding that is an essential first step to recovery.

That makes sense! I didn't mean to sweep the experience into a few pithy words. I'm past the edit window, but I"m glad you're pointing this out.

Totally understand. With any luck, you and I have played two sides of a dialogue that’ll be read by someone else, for whom it might be quite useful. For that I thank you.

Most folks aren't alcoholics. Maybe they did some beer shotgunning in college, but stopped. Heck, I've known folks that came out of combat, hooked on opiates, and quit.

If you are one, though, there's nothing gonna keep you from the drink, except total abstinence, and some kind of structure (AA, NA, Church, Martial Arts, etc.).

I'm a recovering addict (over 45 years), and participate in Fellowship. Gives me tremendous socialization.

>some kind of structure

Don't you just mean social activities? You don't need to accept metaphysical dogmas or engage in scheduled physical combat with other people to socialize.

Hey, thanks for redefining "structure." I guess it needed that.

Sure, go ahead and do whatever you think works. If you're an alcoholic, it either will, or won't, work; with [rewards|consequences] to follow.

If you're not, it probably won't hurt. In fact, it could definitely enrich your life.

I highly doubt there was ever any doubt about the benefits of socialization. Science just confirmed what used to be commonly held beliefs

Well, just speaking for myself, socialization is the least of the benefits of the structure I follow. That socialization is also incredibly deep. It's not your usual Kiwanis Club.

I have learned that addicts (and alcoholics are just alcohol addicts), need a lot more than just "socialization."

Most folks have no idea how to address true addiction.

Well, they have "ideas," but very few are at all effective.

> "The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake."

> "There's always an easy solution to every human problem; Neat, plausible and wrong."

- H. L. Mencken

I certainly don't claim to have all the answers, but I know one that works for me, and I have seen a lot of people fail; often, spectacularly. It really is one of those "If I have to explain, you wouldn't understand." things.

You mentioned church, so I assume you mean rituals or activities based on the religion of Christianity, what exactly is deep about those rituals or activities? You also mention true addiction, do you mean physical addiction (as opposed to psychological)? Also, regarding what addicts need, are you not just extrapolating based on your experience? It is certainly possible that what worked for you won't work on everyone else

Eh, I think we’re reaching that wall, where folks have their minds made up, and won’t accept conflicting information. There’s a ton of that, in addiction treatment.

> You also mention true addiction, do you mean physical addiction (as opposed to psychological)?

True addiction has nothing to do with physical dependence. That’s actually a by-product of addiction. It’s entirely possible to be an addict, without ever becoming physically dependent, and also, you can become physically dependent, without becoming an addict. That happens frequently, in pain management.

But a lot of folks have their minds already set in stone, here. Lots of moralizing and theories get tossed around, while addicts die, and destroy the lives of others.

I’m not going to try explaining it here. I’ve been at this, longer than many folks have been alive, and am quite aware of the futility of trying to graft new ideas onto closed minds. I’m really too busy, helping folks out, that want it.

> It is certainly possible that what worked for you won't work on everyone else

Absolutely, but it has worked for millions, so it does have some effectiveness.

Alcohol reduces inhibition but the real trick to lower your social inhibition is just practice.

It's not really complex, it's like anything else you'd study - mindful, focused practice; pay attention to details; iterate.

Could you give some specifics? For example, does this look like repeatedly trying things that make you a bit uncomfortable, and CBTing when you have those uncomfortable feelings? Is it helpful to do this with people you already feel safe around?

Sure, it's simple, but it's extremely psychologically taxing. No surprise people rely so much on alcohol.

I personally find alcohol to be vastly overrated for removing inhibitions. A few drinks and I'm still as tightly wound as ever. A lot of drinks and I end up having all sorts of unpleasant bodily effects instead.

Same. Maybe it just doesn't work on those with really deep introversion.

> When is the last time you laughed so hard with friends you couldn't breathe?

2 weeks ago in Oaxaca with some friends. We were at dinner and one (a guy) mentioned the Mormon purity defying practice of soaking which sparked confusion from the other (a girl). So he explained it in Mandarin so the others in the restaurant wouldn’t understand. It’s not a language I speak but watching her face told me everything I needed to know.

Last time I laughed like that with friends I was probably 18 or 19. That was 40 years ago.

Damn dude, I (truly) feel for you. It's increasingly rare for me too, but it's so healing. If you're comfortable sharing, whereabouts do you live? What are your political inclinations? (The latter I ask because it radically influences what you find funny, not because it matters otherwise).

With no context, I highly recommend finding a comedy club near you and having a few drinks. It might take several attempts though so don't give up

I bet issue is not the lack of jokes around but friends.

Former Mormon here, not familiar with "Mormon purity defying practice of soaking". Some explanation is needed

Google it, but not when you’re at work.

It’s how teens fuck while keeping Jesus’ approval.

Ah, the age-old practice of fooling God. A classic.

TIL. TY.

I never really do the full belly-laugh thing with friends or family. 90% of the time I'm alone in a room, seeing something funny on a screen.

I wish I had friends, but I also wish I had a Ferrari, the latter one might be reachable within my lifetime if I work hard for it.

Wait, with a budget of €100 000 I could actually get some second-hand old shitty Ferrari. That's... surprisingly affordable. I mean buying this shit right now would be highly irresponsible, but I can see myself potentially buying one in far future.

I just checked Lamborghini Murciélago, the dream sportscar of my childhood, and it goes for like €300 000. Hmmm... that's like, a lot of money for what is basically a toy, but if I really really really wanted that, it would be achievable within my lifetime without completely ruining me financially.

https://suchen.mobile.de/fahrzeuge/details.html?id=432670758...

Look at this shit, it's beautiful. €260 000. Not now and not tomorrow, but totally achievable as a lifetime goal.

What a day to be alive. Having a luxury sportscar is more realistic than having friends. Send immaterial help.

Maybe you can make some friends in the quest for the Lamborghini. Or maybe you could form a group who collectively buy it?

It used to be fashionable to collectively buy boats and vacation homes and other shit. Turns out, having a shared expensive thing quickly leads to disagreements.

> Turns out, having a shared expensive thing quickly leads to disagreements.

In this case, I'm guessing the first minor bit of body damage [gravel, whatever] or consumable replacements [tires, brakes, etc]. Ignoring the financial pressure/means aspect, preferences are what they are. Tire pressure, cleanliness, or what-have-you.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a Lamborghini without breaking it/rebuilding several times over. Fancy car, want to see what it really has. Other people? Baby it to no end because it's so precious. They got a date tonight.

All this to say: an old rustbox [or several] is probably the better group project. What little I knew of my Dad: demo derby, sounded great.

Buying a share is still very common in the personal aircraft world

If you buy the Murci you’ll be invited to every cars and coffee so lots of potential friends there!

Shit I'll do when I'm 70 and the stock market works in my favor.

Both my father and father in law retired recently. They’ve done financially pretty well in life - not super rich, but they can live loose a bit.

Both were recently in the market for new cars. As a car enthusiast, I told them to YOLO and buy something like a 911.

But no, they got a staid huge BMW sedan and a staid huge Benz SUV respectively, despite neither of them ever likely to use the back seats at all.

O they’ll be using those back seats alright ;)

I get a good chuckle out of these articles. “Here’s another thing I lack that was supposed to make me live longer!”

Speaking of living longer: I’ve had my fill of fast cars already, but how about an airplane? I watched some guys fly Piper Cubs in Alaska. That looked fun as hell. https://youtu.be/XXuIA_b35fs

Perhaps I’ll buy one of those. They aren’t so expensive.

I wanted to be a fighter pilot when I was a kid. I also wanted to be a racecar driver.

Today, I love sports cars. I’ve had a few fast cars, and owning a 911 is on my bucket list.

Funny enough, I have no interest in learning to fly. Though I’m still very into military aviation as a topic.

Maybe it’s because the delta between say, a 911 and a racecar is smaller than that between a civilian prop plane and a fighter jet?

> Maybe it’s because the delta between say, a 911 and a racecar is smaller than that between a civilian prop plane and a fighter jet?

For me it'd be more because the first three are pastimes, the fourth one is a job.

You don't get to own a fighter jet and fly it around the world doing stunts or taking in sights just because you can; you can't take your friends or loved ones with you either. You are granted the right to fly an expensive piece of government property, whose operating costs can be counted in average taxpayer's annual income tax per hour. You fly where you're told, when you're told, how you're told. The point it gets most exciting, the point where you are granted most authority over your mission, is the point where you're shooting at someone or being shot at.

The movies make it look like all four things you mentioned are fundamentally the same in terms of feelings of freedom. It's not the only case. Adult me got disillusioned about a lot of career paths I dreamed of as a kid :(.

Too much math/paperwork for flying, I'll take the [fast? unique?] car.

How old are you? I found I grew out of an interest in cars after my early 20's.

I've definitely become a fuck-cars car enthusiast in my late 20s, if that makes sense lol

In that I still love (classic) cars, I still love (sim) racing, at the same time that I absolutely despise car-centric infrastructure and urbanism as one of the great catastrophes of the 20th century.

I'm getting more and more interested in cars actually. But I don't care about specs, it's more about appreciation of the looks. Some designs can be beautiful.

that old rat experiment is considered bunkum now

Why? By whom?

The rat experiment is usually referred to as Rat Park:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park

There are criticisms of it, some of which are in the criticisms section of the Wikipedia article, and look to be valid.

I never liked when people talked about debunking an experiment that was honestly done and just needed refutation or at least correction. If researchers publish research that was honestly done and then later found to have statistical flaws, or that is disproved with a larger sample size or whatever, I wouldn’t say it had been debunked. I’d say it was refuted or corrected or refined or whatever. If it was a “research” study where the group publishing it knew is was junk designed to promote an agenda or sell a product, then the term debunked is fair.

It's all fair. All studies are flawed but some are useful. As a paradigm shift for addiction I could see it being less than a home run. As a statement about happiness it's all well and good if for no other reason than an analogy and potential positive finding.

FUN FACT:

The lead researcher of Rat Park a few years later delivered me from the womb. My dad was doing his PhD there at SFU at the time.