oliver burkeman on “empowered refusal” in the guardian:
“Who wouldn’t rather be the self-directed, principled type who doesn’t have more than one beer, than the rule-oppressed drudge who can’t’?”
do addicts have a choice? (the atlantic)
“Eventually, addicts find themselves torn between reasons to use and reasons not to. Sometimes a spasm of self-reproach (“this is not who I am;” “I’m hurting my family,” “my reputation is at risk”) tips the balance toward quitting. Novelist and junkie William S. Burroughs calls this the “naked lunch” experience, “a frozen moment when everyone sees what is on the end of every fork.
In short, every addict has reasons to begin using, reasons to continue, and reasons to quit. To act on a reason is to choose. To make good choices requires the presence of meaningful alternatives. And making a series of good choices leads to achievements—jobs, relationships, reputations. These give a person something meaningful to lose, another reason in itself to steer away from bad choices.”
a philosopher weighs in on the addiction choice vs. disease debate in the nyt
(p.s. writing yourself a thank you letter is exactly something a person in recovery might do)
