Swarley said:
That's fair, I have a different opinion on non-physical addictions, but I can see it from your point of view. My only problem is that, as you said, those types of addictions can be applied to almost anything that the brain finds pleasurable, not just drugs, so why does it even really apply? A person who is "addicted" to LSD is the same as a person who is "addicted" to cheese. Hell, I would venture the person addicted to cheese would be causing more health problems.
edit: I would also venture that most people who recreationally smoke are early 20's, but that's just my experience.
My problem with it is while things like food and what not generally do not leave the original. Most alcoholics with emotional dependencies do not move on to drugs. Most people who over eat just keep over eating.
However when it comes to weed if a teenager uses that drug through there high school life medicating every unhappy moment it can very well lead to harder drug use once the weed starts to weaken.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to say its an epidemic, or that its even a moderate problem among users. However when it comes to teenagers, who are not exactly know for making good choices. Out of the twenty who do it safely it only takes the one who moves on to hard drugs to spoil any chance of people taking the drug seriously to consider legalization.
From my own life i mostly see people starting use at 14.
BobDobolina said:
In the context of drugs, "addiction" is generally used to mean physical dependency, and for good reason; it's a much more powerful and more dangerous form of dependency than the psychological and habitual variants. Trying to make exaggerated claims about the addictive properties of a substance -- or to broaden the usage of "addiction" to support such claims, even when questionable -- just robs you of credibility that you might need when it comes to talking about more serious substances.
Most psych books recognize emotional dependencies as a distinct from of addiction. I was also not using a blanket term seeing as how in the original post i made i went into great detail to make sure i was referring to a distinct psychological dependency and not physical ones. You can debate it, but that debate has been going on for a very, long, time. I care little for it. I have chosen my side. You have chosen yours.
However i do not view it as an exaggeration. An exaggeration would be "USING THIS DRUG WILL MAKE YOU EMOTIONALLY DEPENDENT!!!!!111!!!ONE" Where as what I am saying is, "A teenager who is already going through a shit load of physical and emotional changes using pot every time the slightest thing happens will cause them to form an emotional dependency. This can have bad results and ignoring it, even if it is only one out of every twenty, fifty, hundread kids is neglectful".
Understand?