Alcoholism – disease or not?

[Anonymous 1]

Pedal, run, row wrote:

Personal religious beliefs is not something I use to filter people through. I use other criteria that serve me better in weeding people out.

Ha you cought me unguarded there, my friend. Very true and I’m the same, but I’m tired of both sides preaching.

AA does not work and even though your friends have been successful, there is way too many that haven’t.

[TattooDaveParticipant 6952]

In our lives as men we find many red pills hidden along the path. There is no argument for critical thinking. If somebody is going to tell me that I’m powerless at the most vulnerable time in my life they should have an answer that is 100% foolproof or should shut the f~~~ up.

At least using the Sinclair method of extinguishment of addictions there’s a 78% chance that you have a chance

I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d

[PuniShredderParticipant 2268]

No it’s not a damn disease. It’s a lack of self control.

Be professional be polite but always have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

Anonymous wrote:

But AA generally doesn’t work. The failure rate is extremely high.

The failure rate you’re quoting is including people who don’t even take the suggested actions.

That’s like saying the failure rate of a workout plan is extremely high, where most people never go to the gym to try it.

When you just look at those who actually take the suggested actions, success rate is 75%

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

[TattooDaveParticipant 6952]

surfdude12 wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

But AA generally doesn’t work. The failure rate is extremely high.

The failure rate you’re quoting is including people who don’t even take the suggested actions.

That’s like saying the failure rate of a workout plan is extremely high, where most people never go to the gym to try it.

When you just look at those who actually take the suggested actions, success rate is 75%

The suggestive program of recovery includes:

Giving your will in your life over to the care of God but you don’t need to understand

Realizing that you have been insane because you know you’re a man

Telling another human being all of my secrets because, you know God….

Being willing to give up my individuality to join a group of defective individuals who are no doubt going to continue to repeat the same mistakes.

Continue to tell everybody what a defective human being I am just for being a human being.

Continue to pray to a being I have no idea of even though it goes against everything I’ve been taught

Do you want me to go on.

Once you take the red pill you can’t go back if you haven’t taken the red pill there’s a dispensary located right behind @mgtower

I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d

[Anonymous 1]

.

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

No, you clearly attacked my character instead of my argument. You said that it took me a while to come up with my response because it was the best I could do. That’s diminutive, and you can rationalize it however you choose. Btw, I used a term (Ad Hominem) that has been around since before the internet existed. It’s not my fault you can’t follow me verbiage. Get a dictionary. See? That was an Ad Hominem. It’s rather simple.

[TattooDaveParticipant 6952]

Anonymous wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

No, you clearly attacked my character instead of my argument. You said that it took me a while to come up with my response because it was the best I could do. That’s diminutive, and you can rationalize it however you choose. Btw, I used a term (Ad Hominem) that has been around since before the internet existed. It’s not my fault you can’t follow me verbiage. Get a dictionary. See? That was an Ad Hominem. It’s rather simple.

Dude you just started posting don’t come out with guns blazing. Don’t get offended because somebody s~~~posts you. When I think about it he wasn’t s~~~posting. Look we are inundated with trolls so break out of the shell grow a pair get with the rest of the program so to speak. Damn that sounds a lot like Alcoholics Anonymous

I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

TattooDave wrote:

Do you want me to go on.

LOVE IT, bro!!!

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

No, you clearly attacked my character instead of my argument. You said that it took me a while to come up with my response because it was the best I could do. That’s diminutive, and you can rationalize it however you choose. Btw, I used a term (Ad Hominem) that has been around before the internet existed. It’s not my fault you can’t follow me verbiage. Get a dictionary. See? That was an Ad Hominem. It’s rather simple.

TUNA!!!

As I said, I don’t know you.

Have you posted an introduction?

I don’t know who you are, and I’m not going to argue with you anymore.

[surfdude12Participant 4103]

TattooDave wrote:

break out of the shell grow a pair get with the rest of the program so to speak. Damn that sounds a lot like Alcoholics Anonymous

just made me spit out my coffee!

[Anonymous 1]

TattooDave wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

No, you clearly attacked my character instead of my argument. You said that it took me a while to come up with my response because it was the best I could do. That’s diminutive, and you can rationalize it however you choose. Btw, I used a term (Ad Hominem) that has been around since before the internet existed. It’s not my fault you can’t follow me verbiage. Get a dictionary. See? That was an Ad Hominem. It’s rather simple.

Dude you just started posting don’t come out with guns blazing. Don’t get offended because somebody s~~~posts you. When I think about it he wasn’t s~~~posting. Look we are inundated with trolls so break out of the shell grow a pair get with the rest of the program so to speak. Damn that sounds a lot like Alcoholics Anonymous

Too many assumptions to even address, but I will address a couple. I’m just pointing out bulls~~~ when I see it. Get an IQ, and come back. I’ve got a pair, do you? I understand there are trolls here, and I think that’s stupid.

I understand I just started posting, but that does nothing to delegitimize my arguments. Trust homie, I’m not offended. It’d take better than the two of you to get me there.

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Ad hominem = invalid argument. There seems to be a lot of those floating around. In case you don’t understand an Ad Hominem, you attack the person instead of their argument as a way of discrediting their argument. You seem intelligent, you should know better.

I only criticised your opinion. I didn’t attack you – I don’t know anything about you.

I’m so fed up of this new age, internet bulls~~~ and buzz words.

No, you clearly attacked my character instead of my argument. You said that it took me a while to come up with my response because it was the best I could do. That’s diminutive, and you can rationalize it however you choose. Btw, I used a term (Ad Hominem) that has been around before the internet existed. It’s not my fault you can’t follow me verbiage. Get a dictionary. See? That was an Ad Hominem. It’s rather simple.

TUNA!!!

As I said, I don’t know you.

Have you posted an introduction?

I don’t know who you are, and I’m not going to argue with you anymore.

First thing I did was post an intro. Check my profile is you’re that concerned.

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

First thing I did was post an intro. Check my profile is you’re that concerned.

Just read it, but it does confuse me. You post that then act like you know everything and spout a load of s~~~e on this thread.

Less talking and more reading might help you.

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

First thing I did was post an intro. Check my profile is you’re that concerned.

Just read it, but it does confuse me. You post that then act like you know everything and spout a load of s~~~e on this thread.

Less talking and more reading might help you.

I would never make such a claim. The more I learn, the more I understand that I don’t know s~~~. Just because I claim a side on an issue, that doesn’t mean I’m claiming that I know everything on the issue. Is it s~~~e because you disagree with me? Keep in mind you actually quoted me on this very thread and agreed with me. Your exact words were, “Well said.” All of a sudden I’m tuna because you disagree with me and I won’t concede?

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

Is it s~~~e because you disagree with me?

I will reiterate – speak less and read more.

Good luck.

[TattooDaveParticipant 6952]

Anonymous wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

First thing I did was post an intro. Check my profile is you’re that concerned.

Just read it, but it does confuse me. You post that then act like you know everything and spout a load of s~~~e on this thread.

Less talking and more reading might help you.

I would never make such a claim. The more I learn, the more I understand that I don’t know s~~~. Just because I claim a side on an issue, that doesn’t mean I’m claiming that I know everything on the issue. Is it s~~~e because you disagree with me? Keep in mind you actually quoted me on this very thread and agreed with me. Your exact words were, “Well said.” All of a sudden I’m tuna because you disagree with me and I won’t concede?

You just joined don’t get into a debate unless you want to lose or you have a tremendous amount of experience in which to offer an experienced debate

I can see their heads have been twisted and fed with worthless foam from the mouth. Bob d

[Anonymous 1]

Anonymous wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Is it s~~~e because you disagree with me?

I will reiterate – speak less and read more.

Good luck.

I’m laughing so hard right now. That’s really all you have to say? You should follow me, so that in the future when I have thousands of stars you, can learn something real and actually believe it.

[Anonymous 1]

TattooDave wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

Joller984 wrote:

SJAWMan666 wrote:

First thing I did was post an intro. Check my profile is you’re that concerned.

Just read it, but it does confuse me. You post that then act like you know everything and spout a load of s~~~e on this thread.

Less talking and more reading might help you.

I would never make such a claim. The more I learn, the more I understand that I don’t know s~~~. Just because I claim a side on an issue, that doesn’t mean I’m claiming that I know everything on the issue. Is it s~~~e because you disagree with me? Keep in mind you actually quoted me on this very thread and agreed with me. Your exact words were, “Well said.” All of a sudden I’m tuna because you disagree with me and I won’t concede?

You just joined don’t get into a debate unless you want to lose or you have a tremendous amount of experience in which to offer an experienced debate

You’re assuming I lost a debate I didn’t even know existed. I merely expressed dissent, and you turned it into some weird duo attack on a new member regarding a subject over which men shouldn’t even be fighting. Don’t assume I don’t have the experience to speak on these topics.

[Author]

Posts