| Adam: “In cultures where children are expected to have wine or beer with meals from an early age - Jews, Chinese - there apparently was no alcoholism until modern times.” Interesting comment, Adam. The behaviours that we call alcoholism do seem to correlate with the loosening of traditional family and cultural ties. Which implies that “alcoholism” occurs within a context.
The likely context is mid-20th century science, which proposed that human behaviour could be regarded as a value-free phenomenon that could be investigated for “causes” and “effects”, just like “hard” sciences such as physics and chemistry (although modern physics often seems anything but “hard” -- but let’s not go there).
No doubt there was also a therapeutic/political component in this move – medicalising behaviours such as alcoholism provided another avenue of treatment from that taken by the moralisers, and also enabled the medical profession to expand its influence.
This is not to deny that the moralisers sincerely believe that alcohol abuse is a moral failing, nor that the medicalisers sincerely believe that alcoholism is a disease.
So the debate between moralisers and medicalisers is also a turf war, with various interests competing for supremacy. A bit like SOLO, I guess.
I think there are a lot of myths surrounding alcoholism, such as the notion that alcoholics drink 24/7, or that they cannot sometimes drink in moderation, or that they are always hanging out to drink. Much depends on context and circumstance.
Very often, the decision to drink excessively is made with full conscious intent. But that intent does not include the aftermath of the decision – the alcoholic has no intention of becoming a sloppy, sometimes dangerous drunk with mayhem on his mind. But the substance he is ingesting subverts this understanding, and he becomes the thing he doesn’t want to be.
So while medicine and morality are components of the behaviours we call alcoholism, they cannot present a solution, because the solution involves the alcoholic grasping an understanding of his predicament.
Once he achieves that, he is on the way to recovery, and can take whatever medical and moral prescriptions may be necessary to achieve that goal. But the understanding is primary.
Brendan
| 
