I think few people would deny that there are some benefits for some people from alcoholic beverages, but can we really say, with all honesty, that its benefits outweigh its harms?
Like most addictive substances, the negative health benefits don't manifest themselves immediately, but often after years or decades, and those who haven't suffered claim all the benefits while the harms loom on the horizon. They change their tune later in life...sometimes.
As for the other harms, such as the amplification of violence, the loss of mental faculties – that same "social greasing" is the removal of inhibitions, including those that prevent people from committing certain crimes or harm against other people. How many alcohol-fueled rages would it take to make the equation flip for someone?
If the argument is that it is fine as long as it is done responsibly, how do we police that?
Will alcohol always be around? Of course. It's something that cannot be avoided, even in societies that have banned it for one reason or another. But to welcome it with all its complications, just because one enjoys it, and closing a blind eye to the harms, is imprudent.
And is alcohol truly a good solution as a self-medicant? I think you are spinning that as a net positive, but I highly doubt this is a professional's opinion on that matter, such as a therapist or a doctor.
Finally, to equate a negative view of alcohol as "...removing anything tasteful, fun, stupid..." and "...total boredom..." – to be honest, this is reducto ad absurdium, isn't it? If nothing is fun if there's no alcohol, then I think there's a different problem.
Two studies [1],[2] suggest 40% and 25% of certain violent crimes have alcohol involved.It may be difficult to know whether these crimes would have happened without alcohol anyway. Nevertheless, even a slight reduction would certainly be appreciated by the victims and society.
And what about inventing other means of social grease?
[1] https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/ac.pdf
[2] https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/10report/chap01c.pdf
I think 'social grease' is a good term. Grease is multipurpose: alcohol serves to lubricate a social setting, abd removes the inhibitions that can prevent people from letting their guards down and opening themselves up. In different contexts, however, it can cause one to easily fall into darker emotional patterns, resort to violence, or lead to someone being taken advantage of.
We will never be rid of alcohol, in my opinion. It's too simple and effective, and too deeply engrained in our society. What we can do is work to better educate and support society so that alcohol can exist in a safer atmosphere. Addicts don't get addicted just due to chemical means: there are deep social implications.
I think few people would deny that there are some harms for some people from alcoholic beverages, but can we really say, with all honesty, that alcohol has no benefits, or that its harms outweigh its benefits for all intake amounts?
Should we police responsible consumption more than we currently do? Perhaps, it's worth discussing for sure.
Will alcohol always be around? Of course. It's something that cannot be avoided, even in societies that have banned it for one reason or another. But to reject it with all its benefits, just because it has harms, and closing a blind eye to the good, is imprudent.
And is alcohol truly always a _bad_ solution as a self-medicant? I think you are spinning that as a net negative, but I highly doubt this is professional consensus on the matter, such as among therapists or doctors.
Finally, I don't think there's anything wrong with making boring/stressful stuff less boring/stressful, sometimes you just gotta do boring/stressful stuff
Well said. I’ve been noticing that most such things in life are double-edged swords. Alcohol, Instagram, whatever. There is much wisdom in the “middle path”, applicable to much of life. Avoid the sharp edges of the blade, be in the flat middle.
Like most addictive substances, the negative health benefits don't manifest themselves immediately, but often after years or decades, and those who haven't suffered claim all the benefits while the harms loom on the horizon. They change their tune later in life...sometimes.
As for the other harms, such as the amplification of violence, the loss of mental faculties – that same "social greasing" is the removal of inhibitions, including those that prevent people from committing certain crimes or harm against other people. How many alcohol-fueled rages would it take to make the equation flip for someone?
If the argument is that it is fine as long as it is done responsibly, how do we police that?
Will alcohol always be around? Of course. It's something that cannot be avoided, even in societies that have banned it for one reason or another. But to welcome it with all its complications, just because one enjoys it, and closing a blind eye to the harms, is imprudent.
And is alcohol truly a good solution as a self-medicant? I think you are spinning that as a net positive, but I highly doubt this is a professional's opinion on that matter, such as a therapist or a doctor.
Finally, to equate a negative view of alcohol as "...removing anything tasteful, fun, stupid..." and "...total boredom..." – to be honest, this is reducto ad absurdium, isn't it? If nothing is fun if there's no alcohol, then I think there's a different problem.