So a friend says...

[Crimmy]

That "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you don't have a drinking problem."

Would you agree?

And please, keep it civil.

[Scorpina]

Uh, isn't that a tautology? I think maybe a word is missing from the key sentence, there.

If not, then yes, I'd have to agree.

EDIT: Okay, not sure if you changed that or I just messed up. As the sentence now reads, I'd tend to disagree. A 'drinking problem' could be any number of things that the sufferer doesn't see as a problem - from being a violent or abusive drunk to alcaholism to just being a lightweight.

[Roland St. Jude]

Antimetabole ftl!

It sounds neat, but it is patently ridiculous. If what he means is that as long as you can physically drink, you don't have a drinking problem, well, I guess we'd need further definitions. As long as you can physically drink, you don't have a problem physically drinking, that seems like a tautology, so true but meaningless.

But do you have a "drinking problem" in the sense of impairment of other life functions? Lots of people do. I've known some very high-functioning drunks, but they still are impaired and do what they do at a severely diminished level. Not to mention the downward spiral involved as they seek to overcome increasing tolerance or obtain greater highs with a chemical where the increased impairment outstrips the increased high.

[Whammydill]

Witty, but then again people will come up with many a varied way to be in denial.

[Comet]

This is one of those things I keep running into in semi-witty Facebook groups, isn't it?

Sure, if you don't have a drinking problem, you don't have a drinking problem, if you want to convince yourself that way. Your drinking might still be a problem for others and bite you in the donkey later, though.

[Jokasti]

Some people just choose not to drink, or are underage.
Edit: We're talking about alcohol right?

[Zocelot]

I could see it as "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you have a drinking problem", which would be saying that it is a problem if you think drinking is fine. The way it is though doesn't make much sense.

[Eloi]

Well just remember to be lying passive aggressively is the same as if you were to be lying passively to aggression.

[valadil]

Would you agree?


No. It sounds clever, but doesn't really pan out.

[Seffbasilisk]

Perhaps in the physical sense.

There are however, peoples who are not pleasant at all when drunk. I'm talking to you:

The Weepies.
The Chip on Shoulders.
The Slobbery Fall Down.
The Suicidally Stupid.

At some time or another, most drinkers will fall into one of these categories. I am not speaking of a rare instance, but instead those who habitually fall into a deplorable category.

Those of you. You have a quite more heavily weighted drinking problem.

[Scorpina]

Perhaps in the physical sense.

There are however, peoples who are not pleasant at all when drunk. I'm talking to you:

The Weepies.
The Chip on Shoulders.
The Slobbery Fall Down.
The Suicidally Stupid.

At some time or another, most drinkers will fall into one of these categories. I am not speaking of a rare instance, but instead those who habitually fall into a deplorable category.

Those of you. You have a quite more heavily weighted drinking problem.

I think that list could be heavily expanded to include all manner of drunken types, such as:

The Sleazy.
The Obnoxiously Loud.
The Violent.
The Vomity.
The Slutty.
The Singer.

[Crimmy]

Well, according to his definition, he meant "problem drinking" as in "If you don't mind doing it".

@Roland:
Well, I don't have a problem per se. I don't drink of my own decision. (Yeah, I'm legal now, I still don't see the point of getting drunk every time a friend's parents are not home). He has made a habit out of doing so, and when I confronted him, he said so.

@Jokasti:
We are, indeed.

@Whammy:
First thing to pop into my head, yes. Witty form to deny it, but I figured some people might think otherwise.
Besides, I know plenty of people who drink a lot, and do not have drinking problems, as well as people who have problems with drinking, and when they finally give in, are vile indeed.

[Crimmy]

I think that list could be heavily expanded to include all manner of drunken types, such as:

The Sleazy.
The Obnoxiously Loud.
The Violent.
The Vomity.
The Slutty.
The Singer.

See, that's what I wanted to avoid.
Categorizing is a way to be a bit offensive. Sure they act that way, but then it falls near the "calling names", then goes on to "catfight", and it all snowballs.

I just want clear, uncategorized opinions on whether "Problem with drinking = Drinking problem" is good or "ungood".

[smellie_hippie]

That "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you don't have a drinking problem."

... until such time as his drinking "causes" him to have other problems that are frequently related to drinking.

1. Poor judgement
2. memory lapses or blackouts
3. vehicular crashes
4. long term/permanent consequences from #1

It's a fine line that is very easy to cross. In all honesty, alcohol does not mind if you suddenly start making poor decisions.

[Telonius]

That "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you don't have a drinking problem."

Would you agree?

And please, keep it civil.

That's about as smarmy as having a case of the Mondays. I'd take whoever said this a lot less seriously.

[Scorpina]

By 'slutty' I mean 'drunk slutty', not simply promiscous. The latter is a matter of personal choice, the former is a case where alcahol makes someone do things they wouldn't do sober, and will likely come to regret come morning.

[Crimmy]

... until such time as his drinking "causes" him to have other problems that are frequently related to drinking.

1. Poor judgement
2. memory lapses or blackouts
3. vehicular crashes
4. long term/permanent consequences from #1

This, of course, leads not only to "problems to self", but also" problems to others", which would very well place 10 points against the Original Posting Statement.


By 'slutty' I mean 'drunk slutty', not simply promiscous. The latter is a matter of personal choice, the former is a case where alcahol makes someone do things they wouldn't do sober, and will likely come to regret come morning.

Ah, lost in translation.

[Keld Denar]

The Singer.

This is me...do I have a problem? Cause that would be a bummer...I swear I only do it sometimes!

[Comet]

This is me...do I have a problem? Cause that would be a bummer...I swear I only do it sometimes!

I could swear the majority of my friends are Singers. And it's almost always great fun.

[Jokasti]

I have no experience with this sort of substance, so I shall take my Earl Grey and bid you all farewell.

[RandomNPC]

Here's how I see it.

I don't drink, if you choose to, good for you.

If you cause problems, either with your own life, or with people around you, you have a drinking problem.

To clarify, if you bump into someone, say sorry, and both of you go on your merry little ways, you're fine. but if you bump into someone, demand they appologize, and start a fight over it, even just one time, you need some help.

Drinking is one of the things I'm heavily against.

[Haruki-kun]

That "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you don't have a drinking problem."

Would you agree?

No, and I don't really find it clever, either. Way too simple and you can do it with anything.

[Eldan]

No. Nononono.

And a few nos more. My father works in a clinic for, amongst other things, alcoholics*. That's exactly the kind of sentence you hear from those people. "Hey, I don't have a problem. My wife is the one with the problem. If she wouldn't make such a stupid fuzz about it, everyone would be happy."
or
"I don't have a problem. My boss just fired me for having a beer or two before work. I never did anything really bad."
or
"I don't have a problem. I just need my vodka in the morning to get up, and everything's fine."

All quotes, by the way.

*Go look up the definitions. You'd be surprised how little makes one an alcoholic.

[Dvil]

To clarify, if you bump into someone, say sorry, and both of you go on your merry little ways, you're fine. but if you bump into someone, demand they appologize, and start a fight over it, even just one time, you need some help.

I'd mainly agree, but with a little addition. If you do something like this, that's not a drinking problem. If you do this, then don't learn and drink to the same extent in the future, knowing you've previously messed up while under this level of inebriation, that's a problem.
So basically, it's fine to make a mistake, as long as you learn from it.

[Dr.Epic]

I'd say that anyone who thinks that is in denial.

[Shas aia Toriia]

Interestingly enough, the reverse is quite true.
"Anyone who has a drinking problem, has a problem drinking."

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

If you don't think you have a drinking problem, you don't. If other people think you do, they have a problem with your drinking.

Simply put, if someone has several drinks before work, but performs his/her work well, they don't have a problem. There's no reason to fire him/her for it if it doesn't alter his/her performance for the worse other than intolerance and a desire to hold power over others. If it does affect his/her work, he/she should be fired for performing poorly, and the only problem she/he has is being stupid, no different from someone who chooses not to sleep for several days before work and performs poorly as a result.

Drinking problems aren't real. Stupidity, in making choices of activities which do not mix well, is a real problem. You can be drunk all the time, and that's fine. If you drive while drunk, it's not because you have a "drinking problem," it's because you're stupid. You could be drunk and not drive, or be sober and drive, and there isn't a problem in either case.

[mucat]

May be a generational thing, but I'm amazed no one has quoted Airplane yet in this thread.


Ted Stryker (after telling a long, tearjerking story of lost love, and survivor's guilt over his dead war buddies): "...I guess that's when my drinking problem started."

(flashback to Ted sitting forlornly with a bottle of gatorade. He tries to take a drink, misses his mouth, and splashes the Gatorade all over his face. For the rest of the movie, this happens every time he tries to drink anything.)


Although if we're on the topic of witty ways to deflect attention from your own incipient alcoholism, my favorite was always:


Person #1, morosely philosophical: "I drink to forget."

Person #2: "To forget what?"

Person #1: "No idea. It's working."

[Anuan]

Has nobody mentioned the use of the term 'drinking problem' to mean 'dependancy on alcohol,' or am I just reading wrong?

Basically, if you say "I can still physically drink, so I've not got a drinking problem" you're either A) trying to be 'witty' in that you can recognise and use grammar and such to change the meaning of a sentence, or B) completely in denial.

That's...really all there is to it, as far as I can see.

[Worira]

If you don't think you have a drinking problem, you don't. If other people think you do, they have a problem with your drinking.

Simply put, if someone has several drinks before work, but performs his/her work well, they don't have a problem. There's no reason to fire him/her for it if it doesn't alter his/her performance for the worse other than intolerance and a desire to hold power over others. If it does affect his/her work, he/she should be fired for performing poorly, and the only problem she/he has is being stupid, no different from someone who chooses not to sleep for several days before work and performs poorly as a result.

Drinking problems aren't real. Stupidity, in making choices of activities which do not mix well, is a real problem. You can be drunk all the time, and that's fine. If you drive while drunk, it's not because you have a "drinking problem," it's because you're stupid. You could be drunk and not drive, or be sober and drive, and there isn't a problem in either case.

That's like saying you don't have a problem with getting shot, just with maintaining an appropriate degree of organ integrity.

[Eloi]

That's like saying you don't have a problem with getting shot, just with maintaining an appropriate degree of organ integrity.

Well ya kinda have both, really.

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

That's like saying you don't have a problem with getting shot, just with maintaining an appropriate degree of organ integrity.

Not really, unless I missed some people being essentially (excepting for gradual organ damage which is really entirely their business, not yours) unharmed by bullets. It's more like saying you don't have a problem with aerosol sprays unless you are stupid and use them near open flames.

[Pyrian]

If you don't think you have a drinking problem, you don't.Alcohol rather directly impairs judgment. Not thinking you have a problem is one of its more common symptoms. People who are perfectly capable of assessing others' level of intoxication while themselves are sober (or even intoxicated) are often nevertheless incapable of (and/or unwilling to!) accurately assessing their own level of intoxication.

Put another way, simply believing in a false statement does not make it true. Solipsism has a measurable effect on certain forms of performance, but it's no guarantee.


Simply put, if someone has several drinks before work, but performs his/her work well, they don't have a problem.The world is full of people who drink and THINK their performance is unaffected, but are wrong. There are relatively few jobs which are not degraded by even mild alcohol intoxication.


Stupidity ... is a real problem. You can be drunk all the time, and that's fine.:smallamused:


If you drive while drunk, it's not because you have a "drinking problem," it's because you're stupid.This assumes no connection between "stupidity" and drunkenness, when in fact the loss of inhibitions (such as "I shouldn't drive like this") isn't even really a side-effect for alcohol, it's the main event.


Not really, unless I missed some people being essentially (excepting for gradual organ damage which is really entirely their business, not yours) unharmed by bullets.That happens.

[Crimmy]

If you don't think you have a drinking problem, you don't. If other people think you do, they have a problem with your drinking.

Simply put, if someone has several drinks before work, but performs his/her work well, they don't have a problem. There's no reason to fire him/her for it if it doesn't alter his/her performance for the worse other than intolerance and a desire to hold power over others. If it does affect his/her work, he/she should be fired for performing poorly, and the only problem she/he has is being stupid, no different from someone who chooses not to sleep for several days before work and performs poorly as a result.

Drinking problems aren't real. Stupidity, in making choices of activities which do not mix well, is a real problem. You can be drunk all the time, and that's fine. If you drive while drunk, it's not because you have a "drinking problem," it's because you're stupid. You could be drunk and not drive, or be sober and drive, and there isn't a problem in either case.


And please, keep it civil.

Just saying.

[Jokasti]

When I saw that, I thought of those Hefty trash bag commercials.
"Stupid, stupid, stupid. Hefty Hefty Hefty."
O god I'm a capitalist slave.

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

Alcohol rather directly impairs judgment. Not thinking you have a problem is one of its more common symptoms.
If you don't feel as though you have a problem, you don't. You may have an addiction, but if you don't mind it, and you don't endanger others with actions taken as a result thereof, it's not really a problem, except in the eyes of peers who see anyone who chooses different ways to live and die as having a "problem."


People who are perfectly capable of assessing others' level of intoxication while themselves are sober (or even intoxicated) are often nevertheless incapable of (and/or unwilling to!) accurately assessing their own level of intoxication.
You miss the point; I am not asserting that if you don't think you're drunk, you're not drunk. I'm asserting that if one doesn't mind beind drunk, there is no problem with one being drunk, in and of itself.


The world is full of people who drink and THINK their performance is unaffected, but are wrong. There are relatively few jobs which are not degraded by even mild alcohol intoxication.
People can blame chemicals and any other inanimate objects they choose, but the simple fact is that they and those who led them to be the way they are the only things at fault.


This assumes no connection between "stupidity" and drunkenness, when in fact the loss of inhibitions (such as "I shouldn't drive like this") isn't even really a side-effect for alcohol, it's the main event.
I' ve known plenty of people who would be too far gone to stand up from drunkedness and never considered driving. Inhibitions, as their name implies, inhibit one's impulse to take certain actions. I'm saying that the impulse to do so, not the removal of inhibitions, is the real problem.


That happens.
Then the analogy applies, I suppose, although I somehow doubt that's really the spirit in which it was meant.



Just saying.

I didn't mean it in an insulting sense, I meant it in the sense that in any situations in which alcohol is a problem, there are plenty of other sources of the exact same problem which have nothing to do with it, with the common thread of making poor/"stupid" decisions, not being a drunk. In example, that alcoholics who take the bus have less of a "problem" than people who text while they drive.

[Eldan]

I've seen dozens of alcoholics, and I can't remember a single one not endangering others with their actions.

Just saying. If you know any exceptions, I'd like to see them.

[Eloi]

When I saw that, I thought of those Hefty trash bag commercials.
"Stupid, stupid, stupid. Hefty Hefty Hefty."
O god I'm a capitalist slave.

"Communism, Communism, Communism. CAPITALISM CAPITALISM CAPITALISM."

But back on alcohol, I personally think that its fine in moderation and in your house, but out and the about in excessive qualities is a bad thing. i.e. don't be dumb with it.

[Reluctance]

Sometimes I really want to agree with people like Veisu. If somebody thinks that their alcohol consumption is not causing any problems, it's up to their boss/teachers, their partners and the police to decide whether or not they agree.

[smellie_hippie]

Sometimes I really want to agree with people like Veisu. If somebody thinks that their alcohol consumption is not causing any problems, it's up to their boss/teachers, their partners and the police to decide whether or not they agree.

It's tempting to agree to this because it seems reasonable. A critical flaw is that alcohol is typicalyl a "social drug", which makes it very easy to cross over into your behavior affecting other people. That's where the true definition of a "problem" resides. Take my user name... I'm smellie_hippie. Now lets assume that I decide bathing is unnecessary. This is unlikely to be a problem until I interact with someone else. Then it becomes their problem.

This was all typed before coffee, so please excuse any typos and faulty logic. I need a cup and a shower... :smallwink:

[VeisuItaTyhjyys]

Dozens isn't really a viable sample size. Just saying. Also, it's not fair to use personal observation, since you're going to notice the obnoxious, dangerous, and otherwise unpleasant alcoholics, while the functional, mild-mannered ones evade both notice and memory, as they make far less of an impression; the news mentions a drunk driver killing a family, but there aren't really stories about the drunk guy feeding pigeons in the park without really bothering anyone. That's not to say the media is unfair or any such thing, just that, realistically speaking, exemplars of any trend who make themselves noteworthy are more likely to be noticed. Take everyone in a bar who isn't obnoxious and takes a cab home. A lot of them are drunk, a decent number of them are probably considered alcoholics, but I doubt you count the majority of people you've seen in bars when calculating your statistics. As I said, a quiet, mild-mannered alcoholic who takes the bus doesn't have a "problem," while a perfectly sober dude who texts while driving does.

[Rutskarn]

I'd respond to this thread, but it turns out YooToo doesn't have that clip from Airplane!, so I'm not sure I see the point now.

Oh, alright.

The phrase he's looking for is, "If you can drink in moderation, are not susceptible to large quantities of alcohol (to the point where you are unlikely to become addicted), or are untroubled at the prospect of being a dependent substance abuser, then you don't have a drinking problem."

[Haruki-kun]

The world is full of people who drink and THINK their performance is unaffected, but are wrong. There are relatively few jobs which are not degraded by even mild alcohol intoxication.

Only sober people can tell they're drunk.

[Procyonpi]

I whole-heartedly disagree with this. While getting drunk every now and then can be fun, drinking too much can easily become a dependence or negatively impact your life, especially if you're drinking to avoid dealing with issues.

[Scorpina]

I whole-heartedly disagree with this. While getting drunk every now and then can be fun, drinking too much can easily become a dependence or negatively impact your life, especially if you're drinking to avoid dealing with issues.

Surely the issue is a debate about where the line between 'getting drunk every now and then' and 'a dependence' falls?

[Procyonpi]

the news mentions a drunk driver killing a family, but there aren't really stories about the drunk guy feeding pigeons in the park without really bothering anyone. That's not to say the media is unfair or any such thing, just that, realistically speaking, exemplars of any trend who make themselves noteworthy are more likely to be noticed.

Just because not EVERY alcoholic gets in a car crash and kills someone doesn't mean that alcoholism greatly increases your chances of killing someone in a drunken car crash. Just because not every alcoholic gets in a car and kills someone every time they get drunk doesn't mean it's not a problem for themselves and society.


Surely the issue is a debate about where the line between 'getting drunk every now and then' and 'a dependence' falls?

To me, it's mostly about WHY you drink. If you're drinking to avoid dealing with issues, that's a dependence. If you're drinking in reasonable quantities to get a bit drunk and have a good time, that's all good fun.

The ultimate test though is your ability to go extended periods of time without drinking without it impairing day-to-day functions.

[Runestar]

To which I would respond to the OP's friend, "Uh yeah, so...what's your point?" I am betting he himself doesn't really understand what that statement means, and is just saying it because it sounds cool. :smallwink:

Just like when people ask me if the glass is half-full or empty, and I say that it is simply twice as big as it needs to be. I myself don't know what it is supposed to mean, but it is just so much fun to say, not to mention the shocked expression on their face. :smallbiggrin:

[Eldan]

The glass is always full. The top half if just full of air.

[The Succubus]

I don't work with alcoholics but I do recognise the behaviour all too easily. There's strange aura of invunerability people seem to have when overindulging in something. For me, it's people cranking up their iPods and car stereos. A polite request to moderate their behaviour usually results in dismissal, often with a suggestion that "I'm just fine, you're being spiteful/stupid/silly". You might think you're fine but I promise you in ten years, when you're sitting in front of your doctor complaining about liver pains or tinnitus, you feel a lot more vunerable.

[Nevitan]

No, and I don't really find it clever, either. Way too simple and you can do it with anything.

Ha, If you don't have a problem murdering people, you don't have a murdering problem.

[Anuan]

The glass is always full. The top half if just full of air.

I.
I think I love you.

[Cealocanth]

[QUOTE=Crimmy;8707852]That "If you don't have a problem drinking, then you don't have a drinking problem."

Would you agree?
QUOTE]

No. The first sentence states that one does not find any drawbacks or penalties that come from drinking (I'm assuming) alchohal. The second sentence states that =if the first is true, then that same person doesn't have a drinking "problem" ie. over abuse of alchohal, alchohalism...

Yes, the first statement has to be true in order to have the second statement, but There is a middle round between not having a problem drinking and having a drinking problem that the two sentences fall in but ignore the extreme of alchohalism.

[Form]

No, excessive alcohol use can cause severe brain and liver damage which will be a serious issue in the long run. Even if one does not care about the immediate effects such as humiliating oneself and offending others through drunken, inappriopriate behaviour, then there are still the very serious long term physical effects.

There's a big difference between not having a problem and just pretending to not have a problem.

[Cobalt]

The glass is always full. The top half if just full of air.

gaaaaah. Gaaaaaah. GAAAAAAAH.


*boom. splat.*





Anyway. It just sounds like a bad joke to me. A joke someone makes while drunk.