Everything We Think We Know About Addiction Is Wrong

What causes addiction? Easy, right? Drugs cause addiction. But maybe it is not that simple. This video is adapted from Johann Hari's New York Times best-sell...

Views: 110

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of David Brazier at La Ville au Roi (Eleusis) to add comments!

Join David Brazier at La Ville au Roi (Eleusis)

Comment by David Brazier on March 6, 2016 at 19:52

Thanks, Mat. Looks interesting. If you get time and feel inspired, do put up a blog post about it when you get back. Very good topic for us to have some space for on this site. What is The Way of the Rose - sounds like medieval romance :-)

Comment by Mat Osmond on March 6, 2016 at 19:49

Thanks Dharmavydia. Much to consider!

I'm planning to get up to London for this event at St Ethelbuga's, London, in case any Amida folk are interested?


Have been finding myself drawn to many conversations of late around this area, not least with Clark Strand and friends at The Way of the Rose. 

Comment by David Brazier on March 6, 2016 at 10:49

Yes, it is a different conversation, but an important one. Both processes (and others) distort translation. Most of them are related to the translators understandable wish to make the text as relevant as possible to his own audience, but that audience is not the audience that the original teacher (Buddha or whoever) was talking to. Eco-spirituality is a good example. Psychologisation, ecoologisation, ontologisation, etc. Then there is the matter of traditional Western concerns that monopolise attention - thus duality, justice and justification, democracy, mercy, forgiveness are all important Western concepts that have a history is Western thought and this muddles things when translators, often unconsciously, read these meanings into a Buddhist text that was composed in a quite different social context that has a completely different history and different concerns. Then, again, a translator has to consider "pitch". Buddha was often talking to common people. When he spoke to Ambapali he was probably not using sophisticated language whereas the translator is probably writing for other holders of PhDs and so the vocabulary he or she chooses may be from a quite different register of language. And so on. Many pitfalls.

I think on of the most misleading ones is the way that the skandhas get translated as neutral psychological terms like feeling, perception, consciousness etc. Given that the Buddha is advocating getting rid of these things this produces quite nonsensical passages with a strongly extinctionist feel to them which I do not believe was the original message. Namo Buddhaya !

Comment by Mat Osmond on March 5, 2016 at 22:46

That makes alot of sense, thanks. This seems another example of what the last few of your books really helped with me with. How translation (of the Dharma) becomes adaptation, reinterpretation - now using the same texts to affirm quite different ideas - ones that have emerged in a Western\ European\ Judeo-Christian matrix.

This is a bit off-thread, but I often think of that when 'interconnectedness' is used in the context of 'eco-spirituality'. The latter is something I have much time for, but I'm not always convinced by attempts to give those ideas to the Buddha - presumably to lend them a sense of authority. You've written about this, I think?

Anyway, that's probably the seed of another conversation!

Namo Amida Bu


Comment by David Brazier on March 3, 2016 at 14:52

Yes, thanks, Mat, I agree. I think that there is a general problem in translating Buddhism into English that people tend to use general neutral psychological terms where the Buddha's language is more emotive and polemical. So attachment, for instance, refers to every kind, good and bad, but the Buddha is not, i think, saying do not be attached to the Dharma, indeed, he is saying take refuge in it. So there are attachments and attachments and they are not all the same.

Comment by Mat Osmond on March 3, 2016 at 11:59

That's how I read it, but to say 'there's nothing we can do about being attached' makes the point clearer. Which is why I distrust - or at least, am not drawn by - alot of 'non-attachment' rhetoric. We remain relational beings, even when we find our path to be a hermetic one. My own experience of addiction is that there's almost nothing that the addictive, compulsive mind cannot work with, if its distress remains unaddressed. One has to admire its pragmatism. :-)

Comment by David Brazier on March 3, 2016 at 11:41

Thanks, Mat. Yes, it seems to suggest that humans will be attached to something and if it is not a creative enthusiasm or relationships with other people or pets, then it may well be a drug, pornography or almost anything else that fills the void. In a way, i think it is saying that there is nothing one can do about being attached per se, but one can choose what one attaches to and some hings are a lot more wholesome and constructive than others.

Comment by Mat Osmond on March 3, 2016 at 11:24

Brilliant little film, thanks - I'll pass this on. Although substance addiction ceased to be a live issue as I entered my twenties, addiction as a disposition has never ceased, and remains a work in progress. Grateful for this, especially the simple summative remark: 'The opposite of addiction is not sobriety. Th opposite of addiction is connection.' And this, from comments: "Generally speaking, just trying to abandon a compulsion seems to be exceedingly difficult. What more often works is the adopting of some new enthusiasm or commitment that is incompatible with the old habit." One thing that comes across powerfully in the film's argument, I think, is that to really address our personal addictions, we find ourselves necessarily involved in a critique of the culture we move in. 

Comment by Carol English on February 25, 2016 at 12:21
The son of a close friend of mine came by for a visit recently. He has had many problems with addiction including crack cocaine and, most recently, Lorazepam. I mentioned the experiments with rats, done many years ago, where the rats given free access to some drug (cocaine or heroin I think) would push a lever endlessly, forgoing even food. Left long enough they would die. My friend's son told me about a much more recent study in which rats were given the same access to drugs but were placed in a completely enriched environment with other rats to relate to, room to exercise, and lots of toys to play with. These rats made completely different choices and did not become addicted. I think this fits in exactly with what Dharmavidya has said. I wonder about the correlation of addiction with our modern impoverished industrial environments and the ongoing breakdown of true social connection.
Comment by David Brazier on February 23, 2016 at 14:17

We can often see addiction as a form of self-medication. Unfortunately all medicines are also poisons and taken in excess do damage. However, once a person is strongly into a habit it seems to be very difficult for them to give up even if their social circumstances improve - think of smoking, for example. I think it needs not just an improvement in circumstance but also something that gives one a positive push in the right direction. Generally speaking, just trying to abandon a compulsion seems to be exceedingly difficult. What more often works is the adopting of some new enthusiasm or commitment that is incompatible with the old habit. The GIs coming back from Vietnam in the film gave up heroin because they immediately became committed to a different sytle of life in which the drug had no place.


ITZI Conference 2019

Subscribe to ITZI Conference Newsletter

* indicates required

Blog Posts

Sagesse féline...

Posted by Tamuly Annette on September 29, 2019 at 12:00 1 Comment

En l'absence de Darmavidya, j'ai - en ma qualité de voisine et d'amie - le privilège de m'occuper (un peu) de Tara, la petite chatte. C'est un bonheur  de la voir me faire la fête chaque fois que je me rends à Eleusis: elle s'étire, se roule sur le dos au soleil ou saute sur mes genoux. J'ignore si elle a profité de l'enseignement du maître des lieux, mais j'ai comme l'impression qu'elle me donne une belle leçon de sagesse: elle…



Posted by David Brazier on August 20, 2019 at 21:38 2 Comments

At the moment I am feeling very sad for the state of the planet. As I write the great forests are being consumed by fire, both the tropical forest in Brazil and the tundra forest in Russia. The great forests are the lungs of the earth. I myself have lung problems. When there are parts of the lungs that don’t work anymore one can run out of energy. It can strike suddenly. We will probably not do anything serious about climate change or wildlife extinction…



Posted by David Brazier on June 26, 2019 at 18:04 10 Comments

My medical condition continues to be a mystery. It is clear that I do not have any of the big nasty things - brain tumour, cracked skull, stroke, etc - as these have been ruled out by MRI investigation. Nonetheless I continue to have persistent, continuous head pain that varies in intensity and I become exhausted by the least effort so that I am functioning like an invalid incapable of doing very much. There is always a possibility that the whole syndrome is a…



Posted by Dayamay Dunsby on June 2, 2019 at 1:02 4 Comments

“Do we know what it means to be struck by grace? It does not mean that we suddenly believe that God exists, or that Jesus is the saviour, or that the Bible contains the truth. Grace strikes us when we are in great pain and restlessness. It strikes us when we walk through the dark Valley of a meaningless and empty life. It strikes us when we feel that our separation is deeper than usual, because we have violated another life, a life which we loved, or from which we were estranged. It strikes us… Continue

© 2019   Created by David Brazier.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service