Marijuana vs. Alcohol...the debate

myp · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
This is beginning to sound a bit like the "chicken or the egg". I personally don't subscribe to the idea that a "chemical reaction" causes me to think in a certain way. I think it's the other way around. A thought produces a feeling (via chemical reaction), and not vice versa.

Thought is a continuum, so to ask that question at any point except the beginning won't give you an answer. Given neurophys studies, I think it is quite safe to say that without the chemistry you wouldn't have the thought. Whether you measure charge across a neuron and see its mechanical and electrical effect or you look do an MRI while doing some activity, you can see the chemical changes. If thought isn't tied to the chemistry, what do you think it is physically?

=Zoomer= said:
This sequence of events (or chemical reactions) that facilitated that thought are irrelevant to the discussion of addiction (in my opinion).

When it comes to addiction of things like cocaine, etc. we know it isn't thoughts that cause it. Many studies have measured notable changes in molecules associated with such addictions (it is why you see higher addiction rates with something like cocaine than say alcohol- if it was just thoughts wouldn't you expect the same addiction rate for abused substances?). So then the question is what addictions are you saying that thoughts cause?

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

myp said:
Thought is a continuum, so to ask that question at any point except the beginning won't give you an answer. Given neurophys studies, I think it is quite safe to say that without the chemistry you wouldn't have the thought. Whether you measure charge across a neuron and see its mechanical and electrical effect or you look do an MRI while doing some activity, you can see the chemical changes. If thought isn't tied to the chemistry, what do you think it is physically?

An interesting topic! Does a thought (made up of neural responses) produce chemical reactions? Or are the neural responses responsible for producing the thought?....:unsure:

myp said:
When it comes to addiction of things like cocaine, etc. we know it isn't thoughts that cause it. Many studies have measured notable changes in molecules associated with such addictions (it is why you see higher addiction rates with something like cocaine than say alcohol- if it was just thoughts wouldn't you expect the same addiction rate for abused substances?). So then the question is what addictions are you saying that thoughts cause?

My original intention was to lend a bit of credibility to clax's comments....I don't know of any addictions that are caused by thought alone. That was Clax's contention. But I do know that addictions can be cured by cognitive therapy (smoking cigarettes for example). So my conclusion was that Clax's observation that addiction is "mental" is (however minor), partially correct.

myp · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
An interesting topic! Does a thought (made up of neural responses) produce chemical reactions? Or are the neural responses responsible for producing the thought?....:unsure:

I'd say the literature suggests the second one (from what I have read- I am not an expert though [although I have taken classes taught by experts]). There might even be conclusive proof that the 2nd one is correct if they did some sort of timing study, but I don't know. Either way, a thought quite literally is changes in brain action and that is chemical.

At some point this debate might hit into an area of philosophy. Although, again that might not be true- I am not well versed enough in this to really say. If the first point is a viable point of argument though, then what would a thought be? It can't just be something that magically happens- seems too mystical to me.

=Zoomer= said:
My original intention was to lend a bit of credibility to clax's comments....I don't know of any addictions that are caused by thought alone. That was Clax's contention. But I do know that addictions can be cured by cognitive therapy (smoking cigarettes for example). So my conclusion was that Clax's observation that addiction is "mental" is (however minor), partially correct.

Mental and chemical are not mutually exclusive; a mental change is caused by a chemical change; this is my point. Yes, talking therapies have been shown to help- things like Alcoholics Anonymous and other support groups, etc. But at the end of the day such support and encouragement also change the chemical makeup of your mind.

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

Not to sideline...but I have an addiction based on thought and dopamine release. In this case the first leads to the other, and it is required to live well. Does this mean I am doing drugs?

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

tecoyah said:
Not to sideline...but I have an addiction based on thought and dopamine release. In this case the first leads to the other, and it is required to live well. Does this mean I am doing drugs?

Of course! By other means!

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

:help

amn....I hate to see myself as an addict.

myp · Nov 23, 2012

tecoyah said:
Not to sideline...but I have an addiction based on thought and dopamine release. In this case the first leads to the other, and it is required to live well. Does this mean I am doing drugs?

Is this meant for me or is this a joke? Because if it was meant for me, you misunderstood my point.

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

It is a jest....yet pertinent to the discussion. Sex releases a complex series of chemicals into the system that are in many ways similar to illicit drugs.

The side effects are far less damaging.

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

myp said:
I'd say the literature suggests the second one (from what I have read- I am not an expert though [although I have taken classes taught by experts]). There might even be conclusive proof that the 2nd one is correct if they did some sort of timing study, but I don't know. Either way, a thought quite literally is changes in brain action and that is chemical.

At some point this debate might hit into an area of philosophy. Although, again that might not be true- I am not well versed enough in this to really say. If the first point is a viable point of argument though, then what would a thought be? It can't just be something that magically happens- seems too mystical to me.

Yikes! The answer to that one is way above my pay grade too. I see your point on philosophy! My only response would be a philosophical one, and a guess at best. But what doesn't sit right with me is the idea that "what" my thoughts are, and my ability to reason them are determined by a chemical reaction.

Mental and chemical are not mutually exclusive; a mental change is caused by a chemical change; this is my point. Yes, talking therapies have been shown to help- things like Alcoholics Anonymous and other support groups, etc. But at the end of the day such support and encouragement also change the chemical makeup of your mind.

Yes, mental and chemical are definitely not mutually exclusive. They are "cause and effect". The question is,,,,which precedes the other????

But wait,,,,didn't you say that chemical reactions created the thought? Then wouldn't it be true that the chemical makeup of my mind changes, and therefore my thoughts change???

myp · Nov 23, 2012

tecoyah said:
It is a jest....yet pertinent to the discussion. Sex releases a complex series of chemicals into the system that are in many ways similar to illicit drugs.

The side effects are far less damaging.

Yes, but there is a (perhaps blurry) line between being addicted to or not addicted to sex.

myp · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
But what doesn't sit right with me is the idea that "what" my thoughts are, and my ability to reason them are determined by a chemical reaction.

Does it not sit right with you logically or comfortably? It might seem a somewhat disturbing thought because of the implications it might have of free will vs. fate, but the way I look it it is that every reaction still has various probabilities associated with it which lead to the end result (i.e. if you've even been in a chem lab you know that you never get 100% product). Beyond that, even if it is all chemical, doesn't that just make us that much more one with the cosmos?

//we are getting way off topic here, but I like this topic haha

=Zoomer= said:
Yes, mental and chemical are definitely not mutually exclusive. They are "cause and effect". The question is,,,,which precedes the other????

What I am saying is that they are not cause and effect. A mental change IS a chemical change, but just described at a different level of study.

(note that this is different than when I was saying 1 thought [or mental change] can trigger another)

=Zoomer= said:
But wait,,,,didn't you say that chemical reactions created the thought? Then wouldn't it be true that the chemical makeup of my mind changes, and therefore my thoughts change???

Yes, but the thoughts (which can be viewed as chemical changes) then trigger other chemical changes and thoughts.

Edit: You know what, I think I meant to say a thought IS a chemical change in our cause/effect debate. A thought can lead to another thought, but it is all via chemical means. Drugs, etc. can alter thoughts as well as create addictions or do anything because they too cause chemical changes.

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

myp said:
Yes, but there is a (perhaps blurry) line between being addicted to or not addicted to sex.

I have found the cure for sex addiction......age~

myp · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
I have found the cure for sex addiction......age~

They have pills for that

p)

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
Yikes! The answer to that one is way above my pay grade too. I see your point on philosophy! My only response would be a philosophical one, and a guess at best. But what doesn't sit right with me is the idea that "what" my thoughts are, and my ability to reason them are determined by a chemical reaction.

Yes, mental and chemical are definitely not mutually exclusive. They are "cause and effect". The question is,,,,which precedes the other????

But wait,,,,didn't you say that chemical reactions created the thought? Then wouldn't it be true that the chemical makeup of my mind changes, and therefore my thoughts change???

To my understanding...were it not for electrical and chemical interactions taking place, our brains would be mere fatty tissue similar to gelatine. The series of events that create this sentence do not truly matter, yet the product of this activity certainly does.
When we figure out what happens first, it will not change what I am thinking, nor will it impact the reality of the thought process.

I think....therefore I am.

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

=Zoomer= said:
I have found the cure for sex addiction......age~

Seems your "Cure"....is not universal.

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

myp said:
Does it not sit right with you logically or comfortably? It might seem a somewhat disturbing thought because of the implications it might have of free will vs. fate, but the way I look it it is that every reaction still has various probabilities associated with it which lead to the end result (i.e. if you've even been in a chem lab you know that you never get 100% product). Beyond that, even if it is all chemical, doesn't that just make us that much more one with the cosmos?

//we are getting way off topic here, but I like this topic haha

Logically (and therefore comfortably). And if my thoughts are determined by fate, we've just proven the bible story false, seeing as God gave us free will :smug:

I guess making us one with the cosmos is one way to look at it. I think we're looking at 2 "distinct" views of the same thing, and probably the answer to our question is that they are unique perspectives of the same thing, and not necessarily contradictory.

myp said:
What I am saying is that they are not cause and effect. A mental change IS a chemical change, but just described at a different level of study.

(see my answer to the first para above lol.....)

(note that this is different than when I was saying 1 thought [or mental change] can trigger another)

noted...

myp said:
Yes, but the thoughts (which can be viewed as chemical changes) then trigger other chemical changes and thoughts.

Edit: You know what, I think I meant to say a thought IS a chemical change in our cause/effect debate. A thought can lead to another thought, but it is all via chemical means. Drugs, etc. can alter thoughts as well as create addictions or do anything because they too cause chemical changes.

Again, the "biological" view, vs. "philosophic view".

myp · Nov 23, 2012

clax is going to come back to quite a surprise I think, haha.

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

tecoyah said:
To my understanding...were it not for electrical and chemical interactions taking place, our brains would be mere fatty tissue similar to gelatine. The series of events that create this sentence do not truly matter, yet the product of this activity certainly does.
When we figure out what happens first, it will not change what I am thinking, nor will it impact the reality of the thought process.

I think....therefore I am.

You mean you "chemically reacted, thought, and then decided you are"....

=Zoomer= · Nov 23, 2012

myp said:
clax is going to come back to quite a surprise I think, haha.

LOL!! AGREED! (there....I said it!)

tecoyah · Nov 23, 2012

Isn't that kinda the point?

Marijuana vs. Alcohol...the debate

Similar threads