I had another epiphany earlier tonight over just how absurd (and creative) our excuses for drinking can get. To provide a brief background, I am now 38 days AF. The cravings are getting less intense, although I still do experience major urges at times. Anyway, last night I found myself entertaining the following argument.
1) You have been sober for 37 days
2) You have learned your lesson
3) Therefore, things will be different "this time"
4) Since things will be different "this time", you can drink, but stick to a moderate amount
5) I will have no more than 6 drinks
Main Conclusion: My drinking problem has been cured
In the past, I have fallen for this argument more times than I would care to admit. But looking at it from my current highly-motivated state, I can't believe I ever did! Let's take a close look at it.
Premise 1) is true. However, Premise 2) is only tentatively true. While it is correct that I see the damage alcohol has caused me, if I have "truly" learned my lesson, the reasonable thing to do would be to never drink again, based on a cornucopia of evidence.
However, if Premise 2) is interpreted in the latter sense, then Premise 3) no longer follows from it; if the lesson learned is that I shouldn't drink, then things will not be different "this time" if I choose to do so.
This is enough to make the argument collapse straight off. But for the sake of argument, let's accept these three premises as all true. What to make of Premise 4)? It seems okay until the jump is made in Premise 5). 6 drinks is a moderate amount? I admit, for me it probably is, but it is still enough to cause a significant alcohol buzz. What is moderate about that? More importantly, when have I ever been able to magically stop at 6 drinks? The answer; never.
This reasoning is so faulty that it can easily be seen how the final conclusion does not follow. Rather, it should read:
1) I have been sober for 37 days
2) I have learned my lesson
Therefore, I will never drink again!
1) You have been sober for 37 days
2) You have learned your lesson
3) Therefore, things will be different "this time"
4) Since things will be different "this time", you can drink, but stick to a moderate amount
5) I will have no more than 6 drinks
Main Conclusion: My drinking problem has been cured
In the past, I have fallen for this argument more times than I would care to admit. But looking at it from my current highly-motivated state, I can't believe I ever did! Let's take a close look at it.
Premise 1) is true. However, Premise 2) is only tentatively true. While it is correct that I see the damage alcohol has caused me, if I have "truly" learned my lesson, the reasonable thing to do would be to never drink again, based on a cornucopia of evidence.
However, if Premise 2) is interpreted in the latter sense, then Premise 3) no longer follows from it; if the lesson learned is that I shouldn't drink, then things will not be different "this time" if I choose to do so.
This is enough to make the argument collapse straight off. But for the sake of argument, let's accept these three premises as all true. What to make of Premise 4)? It seems okay until the jump is made in Premise 5). 6 drinks is a moderate amount? I admit, for me it probably is, but it is still enough to cause a significant alcohol buzz. What is moderate about that? More importantly, when have I ever been able to magically stop at 6 drinks? The answer; never.
This reasoning is so faulty that it can easily be seen how the final conclusion does not follow. Rather, it should read:
1) I have been sober for 37 days
2) I have learned my lesson
Therefore, I will never drink again!
Comment