Chandler from FRIENDS vs Peter Hitchens
- Thread starter moosed
- Start date
- Status
Peter Hitchens is abysmally wrong there, absolutely ridiculous as per usual. I'm not sure how he can possibly think that prison alone is any sort of deterrence to drug usage. How he can seriously sit there and say that addiction is a "fantasy" is quite mad; clearly addiction is a real thing. He's an utter madman.
Credit to Perry for retaining his dignity in face of the insults. Very interesting to see that a supposedly educated man in Hitchens is actually that ignorant - proof that a smart voice doesn't necessarily say smart things.
Credit to Perry for retaining his dignity in face of the insults. Very interesting to see that a supposedly educated man in Hitchens is actually that ignorant - proof that a smart voice doesn't necessarily say smart things.
Del
Ric Wee fan club member 2014
Was disappointed when i read Tubey's post as I like Hitchens, turns out this fella is a different Hitchens. Comes across as a tool.
on further inspection it seems the one I liked is dead. sad.
on further inspection it seems the one I liked is dead. sad.
Peter Hitchens has carried a huge chip on his shoulder about being his brother's intellectual inferior for years.
Nowadays he just spouts silly reactionary bollocks like this. Bellend.
Nowadays he just spouts silly reactionary bollocks like this. Bellend.
Is the media really so troll like these days? This so called debate had no other intention other than to whip up anger. That kind of behaviour would be banned on here. Really poor.
Chandler didn't even tell any jokes!
Thumbs down to "The one where Chandler has a bitter argument with some posh nonce"
*1/2, if that
And the Ross sub plot was sorely lacking
Thumbs down to "The one where Chandler has a bitter argument with some posh nonce"
*1/2, if that
And the Ross sub plot was sorely lacking
Dymak
Player Valuation: £40m
Dependency is scientifically proven, and I am surprised that the doctor didn't state that.
At the end of the day Hitchens is right, but he is ignoring the complexity that surrounds psychological addiction. It is a battle that takes place inside the head, the user does have a choice as to whether they use or not, but you are dealing with drugs that alter brain chemistry, which stimulate the reward pathways that have played a key role in our evolution as human beings.
You can't apply sound logic to addiction (If it's causing you harm then stop bloody doing it) because addiction is illogical, the addict genuinely considers their need for drugs to be of greater importance than their health. The same can be applied to numerous other diagnosable impulse control disorders, like excessively repeated nail biting, hair pulling or skin picking. Just saying "Stop it, your harming yourself" doesn't cut it, addiction is a mental health problem.
So it isn't a matter of "You can stop when you want", it's a matter of re-programming your brain to not want drugs. For some people this will come naturally, but other people need to join cults like AA or NA in order for them to make changes. The reason people say AA is like a cult is because it is one, but it works for many people. CBT also works with the objective of altering the way an individual thinks. But if the individual doesn't want to change the way their brain thinks then it won't work, which is why I am inclined to agree with the doctor when she said that the drug courts have a similar success rate to voluntary treatment.
I'm very skeptical of all that Portugal nonsense, that drug induced harm is being decreased now that it's decriminalised, and that the numbers in treatment have suddenly sky rocketed, and that their experiences are now immensely better than everywhere else. Yeah right. As I've just said, the addict will or will not make changes when they are ready to do so. They will need support to do this, but if they aren't interested then it won't happen.
We already have similar interventions to the US drug courts in the UK. The legislation used within the Drug Intervention Programme makes similar, if not identical, orders to that of a US drugs court. It's just that we don't have a specific court for these issues, and issues regarding children will be dealt with within public law family proceedings.
At the end of the day Hitchens is right, but he is ignoring the complexity that surrounds psychological addiction. It is a battle that takes place inside the head, the user does have a choice as to whether they use or not, but you are dealing with drugs that alter brain chemistry, which stimulate the reward pathways that have played a key role in our evolution as human beings.
You can't apply sound logic to addiction (If it's causing you harm then stop bloody doing it) because addiction is illogical, the addict genuinely considers their need for drugs to be of greater importance than their health. The same can be applied to numerous other diagnosable impulse control disorders, like excessively repeated nail biting, hair pulling or skin picking. Just saying "Stop it, your harming yourself" doesn't cut it, addiction is a mental health problem.
So it isn't a matter of "You can stop when you want", it's a matter of re-programming your brain to not want drugs. For some people this will come naturally, but other people need to join cults like AA or NA in order for them to make changes. The reason people say AA is like a cult is because it is one, but it works for many people. CBT also works with the objective of altering the way an individual thinks. But if the individual doesn't want to change the way their brain thinks then it won't work, which is why I am inclined to agree with the doctor when she said that the drug courts have a similar success rate to voluntary treatment.
I'm very skeptical of all that Portugal nonsense, that drug induced harm is being decreased now that it's decriminalised, and that the numbers in treatment have suddenly sky rocketed, and that their experiences are now immensely better than everywhere else. Yeah right. As I've just said, the addict will or will not make changes when they are ready to do so. They will need support to do this, but if they aren't interested then it won't happen.
We already have similar interventions to the US drug courts in the UK. The legislation used within the Drug Intervention Programme makes similar, if not identical, orders to that of a US drugs court. It's just that we don't have a specific court for these issues, and issues regarding children will be dealt with within public law family proceedings.
paulbefc
Player Valuation: £60m
Was hoping for a: "Could you be more incorrect?" at least ffs.
- Status
Welcome
Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.
Shop
