There's an inherent characteristic in mankind. Everyone thinks "that can't happen to ME!". That's why so many people smoke, because they would never imagine that they'd get lung cancer from it, or that this or that would happen to them from smoking.
I have always been under the impression that this is an afterthought rather than a driving reason why people adopt this habit.
Who, me? The reasons were half serious but yeah, I started when I was younger and I can safely say that it was a combination of those reasons, and probably others that I can't remember.
You are drawing parallels between concepts that simply cannot be compared. You've gone from food to sex and now video games.
I don't see anything wrong with switching subjects if you are refusing to see a quite obvious point in other subjects. I understand it's very difficult for people to see sex as negative, and that's precisely why I use it - because nobody wants to admit sex is a very bad thing at times, and calling nicotine the great enemy of all is just silly in comparison.
Sex is an instinctual drive. Food is a need.
Those are facts. Both can lead to problems but that's not the the point at all here.
Instinctual drive is a lousy excuse. Addictions and instinctual drives are pretty much on the same level. I do not believe that instinct excuses anything. Because once you go there, you start excusing rape. And there are people who have done so.
Food is a need, but not all food is needed. Dessert is not a need. Junk food is not a need. I do not like repeating myself.
It would be much more interesting to directly discuss why people pick up smoking despite knowing the harmful side effects instead of those weirdly absurd comparisons to justify this habit.
Dunno, I really could care less why people begin to smoke/stay addicted. That's not what I was discussing in the first place and if you want to discuss that, find someone else. To me, that's a very simple issue that I am not interested in discussing at all. I also don't know where you pulled the idea that I'm trying to justify the habit.
- I don't smoke;
- Most people who smoke do not smoke electric cigs;
- Most people who smoke generally do it for pretty bad reasons.
I'm not talking about smoking. Uses of nicotine is a whole other issue entirely.
It would be much more interesting to directly discuss why people pick up smoking despite knowing the harmful side effects instead of those weirdly absurd comparisons to justify this habit.
Curiosity - What's all the fuss about? I should try it to judge for myself. I mean you can't get addicted off one right? right? <_<
Stupidity - I don't wanna be a hobbling around with my walker when I'm old. Might as well waste some money and smoke every day till I die.
Self-absorbed - I'm a special flower and I'm not going to get addicted, I'll just smoke occasionally and it won't fuck up my health because I'm different.
Bad-assery - A man's got an image to uphold.
I never understood those reasons and I don't think I ever will.
Equinox I'm pretty sure those e-cigarettes are bad for you. I don't think they've been around long enough to be studied properly. I don't know why you're still making those weird arguments - safe sex is a natural and healthy exercise. Also, you can't really compare nicotine to caffeine, it's way more addictive.
@ Daemaro - The bait looked so delicious, it was hard to resist.
Equinox I'm pretty sure those e-cigarettes are bad for you. I don't think they've been around long enough to be studied properly.
I've seen them. They are plastic things that burn w/e you put in them. Nothing more. Other such devices exist, they are just not called cigarettes because they are not directly marketed to burn nicotine. I don't see why they need to be "studied properly". Nobody is going to give you a nice certificate because electronic cigarettes are in direct competition with tobacco companies and tobacco companies are lobbying various govt organizations to kick electronic cigs off the market.
I really don't want to go on an extra long offtopic spin here, I'll leave it at that.
I don't know why you're still making those weird arguments
They're not weird. And if you keep treating them like they are, you will never understand them. You just automatically assume you're right and I'm wrong and that will not get you anywhere.
A few smokes of nicotine will do pretty much nothing to you as well.
"Natural" is a lousy argument. Do you really want to go there? Because I can go there.
Also, you can't really compare nicotine to caffeine, it's way more addictive.
I consider the addiction coefficient irrelevant. I don't evaluate substances by whether they're addictive or not. Most people I met don't quit smoking because they don't realize how dangerous it is (like Mephisto said, people don't think "it" will happen to them). People who want to quit smoking but can't don't really want to quit smoking. And a good argument for that is not easy to make when you take all the factors present into account.
My dad quit smoking the moment he decided that smoking was bad for him and he needed to kick the habit. He just went ahead and kicked the habit. Instantly.
Psychological addictions are VERY powerful and that's what is more often at play here than physical addiction, IMO.
I know this may come off as almost a conspiracy, but I was thinking about how CNN omitted the votes of voters under the age of 35 when they conducted a marijuana legalization poll in April. Then I thought about D.A.R.E.
I feel that D.A.R.E might have been implemented to reduce the number of people who support marijuana legalization. Of course, in an earlier post, I noted that D.A.R.E hardly has any real effect on whether people actually don't do drugs (maybe even planting the seed of possibility and familiarity within an impressionable mind). Most people deem it a failure, but I feel that the fact that D.A.R.E even exists, despite it's ineffectiveness, says that there are interests who wish to keep marijuana illegal through the will of the populace. The facts about marijuana that get taught during a D.A.R.E class are just recycled untruths based on biased tests performed in the 1970s with the DEA's approval.
So, it's not only a program to deter the populace from passing marijuana initiatives, it is also machine that instills constant propaganda into the minds of our youth.
I realized that I just used pathos, which is pretty underhanded in any argument, but it is pretty much fact that if that wasn't what they were doing, they wouldn't be teaching it to 5th graders. Young children are impressionable, we all know that, but just look at what D.A.R.E is:
- A dog mascot
- Authority members (police officers) talking to the class
- Course focused almost wholly on misinformation
It's almost as if they weren't even trying to cover up what they really are. It's almost like what McDonald's did with the Ronald McDonald movies; it is an attempt to gain a greater hold on the conscience of the youth while they're still young enough to be influenced by things they don't truly understand and in a stage where they are hardly interested in the truth.
But, yeah, I think D.A.R.E is there to try to spread the prohibition seed into the minds of voters to manipulate the effort of statewide initiatives.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I hate the way you cling to ignorance and pass it off as innocence
I don't see anything wrong with switching subjects if you are refusing to see a quite obvious point in other subjects. I understand it's very difficult for people to see sex as negative, and that's precisely why I use it - because nobody wants to admit sex is a very bad thing at times, and calling nicotine the great enemy of all is just silly in comparison
Silly comparison? I think you'll know all about that.
A person can eat their whole life(probably will, rofl) and have sex for the most part of their life and remain healthy.
The same does not go with smoking because of the strong element of addiction and subsequent issues of withdrawal.
I know- you'll go all over again on how sex CAN be bad and how food CAN be bad.
You know what? Strolling outside CAN be bad. You get exposed to harmful rays of the sun which can lead to skin cancer or you can get hit by a meteorite.
Yes, anything and everything can be bad. Your examples are plain ludicrous and you are deluding yourself if you think you are making any point at all through them. You cannot lessen the dangers of smoking by drawing abstract parallels between the bad of other notions.
This is precisely why I said you were looking for justification, nothing else.
Instinctual drive is a lousy excuse. Addictions and instinctual drives are pretty much on the same level. I do not believe that instinct excuses anything. Because once you go there, you start excusing rape. And there are people who have done so.
Food is a need, but not all food is needed. Dessert is not a need. Junk food is not a need. I do not like repeating myself.
Reality check- Instinctual drive is not a 'lousy excuse'. It is a fact.
And no, it is not the same or on the same level of addiction at all. Physiological changes within you increases your desire to have sex.
Smoking causes physiological changes that makes you want to keep smoking. See the difference?
I doubt you will since you are stuck on some preconceived ideas of sex and your argumentation is becoming more and more obscure and irrational.
Rape now?
You should stop. Understanding that sex is an instinctual drive does not make forced sex excusable/justifiable in one's mind. This is the bad part. Just like eating like a pig.
Like I initially said, anything and everything can be bad.
Sex can be good and healthy; same for food- they can be present your whole life.
It is a choice that is not driven by any instinct.
Which changes absolutely nothing.
Unless you're gonna tell me sex is not a choice.
How do you even come to that conclusion?
Did you even understand what I wrote? You obviously didn't.
This is EXACTLY why you cannot draw parallels between sex, food and smoking. You've just gone ahead and proved it right there.
I was telling why they CANNOT be compared since the driving factor is completely different. Wanting to have sex is NOT a choice. Having it, is.
I hope you get it now. Stop taking things out of context please. It is getting ridiculous.
I have always been under the impression that this is an afterthought rather than a driving reason why people adopt this habit.
Edit-
@Critter- LOL
Some reasons you got there...
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
I like this new dude.
I hate you with deep passion.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
OMG, Zhar didn't swear!!
Thank you Zhar.
Mephisto is really a sensitive guy. Sometimes we talk on MSN and he tells me about his hobbies collecting tea, and taking flower arranging classes.
Mephisto - Too hot to handle, too cold to hold.
All in all, good job avoiding bait.
Instinctual drive is a lousy excuse. Addictions and instinctual drives are pretty much on the same level. I do not believe that instinct excuses anything. Because once you go there, you start excusing rape. And there are people who have done so.
Food is a need, but not all food is needed. Dessert is not a need. Junk food is not a need. I do not like repeating myself.
Which changes absolutely nothing.
Unless you're gonna tell me sex is not a choice.
Dunno, I really could care less why people begin to smoke/stay addicted. That's not what I was discussing in the first place and if you want to discuss that, find someone else. To me, that's a very simple issue that I am not interested in discussing at all. I also don't know where you pulled the idea that I'm trying to justify the habit.
- I don't smoke;
- Most people who smoke do not smoke electric cigs;
- Most people who smoke generally do it for pretty bad reasons.
I'm not talking about smoking. Uses of nicotine is a whole other issue entirely.
@ Daemaro - The bait looked so delicious, it was hard to resist.
I really don't want to go on an extra long offtopic spin here, I'll leave it at that.
They're not weird. And if you keep treating them like they are, you will never understand them. You just automatically assume you're right and I'm wrong and that will not get you anywhere.
A few smokes of nicotine will do pretty much nothing to you as well.
"Natural" is a lousy argument. Do you really want to go there? Because I can go there.
I consider the addiction coefficient irrelevant. I don't evaluate substances by whether they're addictive or not. Most people I met don't quit smoking because they don't realize how dangerous it is (like Mephisto said, people don't think "it" will happen to them). People who want to quit smoking but can't don't really want to quit smoking. And a good argument for that is not easy to make when you take all the factors present into account.
My dad quit smoking the moment he decided that smoking was bad for him and he needed to kick the habit. He just went ahead and kicked the habit. Instantly.
Psychological addictions are VERY powerful and that's what is more often at play here than physical addiction, IMO.
I know this may come off as almost a conspiracy, but I was thinking about how CNN omitted the votes of voters under the age of 35 when they conducted a marijuana legalization poll in April. Then I thought about D.A.R.E.
I feel that D.A.R.E might have been implemented to reduce the number of people who support marijuana legalization. Of course, in an earlier post, I noted that D.A.R.E hardly has any real effect on whether people actually don't do drugs (maybe even planting the seed of possibility and familiarity within an impressionable mind). Most people deem it a failure, but I feel that the fact that D.A.R.E even exists, despite it's ineffectiveness, says that there are interests who wish to keep marijuana illegal through the will of the populace. The facts about marijuana that get taught during a D.A.R.E class are just recycled untruths based on biased tests performed in the 1970s with the DEA's approval.
So, it's not only a program to deter the populace from passing marijuana initiatives, it is also machine that instills constant propaganda into the minds of our youth.
I realized that I just used pathos, which is pretty underhanded in any argument, but it is pretty much fact that if that wasn't what they were doing, they wouldn't be teaching it to 5th graders. Young children are impressionable, we all know that, but just look at what D.A.R.E is:
- A dog mascot
- Authority members (police officers) talking to the class
- Course focused almost wholly on misinformation
It's almost as if they weren't even trying to cover up what they really are. It's almost like what McDonald's did with the Ronald McDonald movies; it is an attempt to gain a greater hold on the conscience of the youth while they're still young enough to be influenced by things they don't truly understand and in a stage where they are hardly interested in the truth.
But, yeah, I think D.A.R.E is there to try to spread the prohibition seed into the minds of voters to manipulate the effort of statewide initiatives.
I hate the way you cling to ignorance and pass it off as innocence
A person can eat their whole life(probably will, rofl) and have sex for the most part of their life and remain healthy.
The same does not go with smoking because of the strong element of addiction and subsequent issues of withdrawal.
I know- you'll go all over again on how sex CAN be bad and how food CAN be bad.
You know what? Strolling outside CAN be bad. You get exposed to harmful rays of the sun which can lead to skin cancer or you can get hit by a meteorite.
Yes, anything and everything can be bad. Your examples are plain ludicrous and you are deluding yourself if you think you are making any point at all through them. You cannot lessen the dangers of smoking by drawing abstract parallels between the bad of other notions.
This is precisely why I said you were looking for justification, nothing else.
Reality check- Instinctual drive is not a 'lousy excuse'. It is a fact.
And no, it is not the same or on the same level of addiction at all. Physiological changes within you increases your desire to have sex.
Smoking causes physiological changes that makes you want to keep smoking. See the difference?
I doubt you will since you are stuck on some preconceived ideas of sex and your argumentation is becoming more and more obscure and irrational.
Rape now?
You should stop. Understanding that sex is an instinctual drive does not make forced sex excusable/justifiable in one's mind. This is the bad part. Just like eating like a pig.
Like I initially said, anything and everything can be bad.
Sex can be good and healthy; same for food- they can be present your whole life.
How do you even come to that conclusion?
Did you even understand what I wrote? You obviously didn't.
This is EXACTLY why you cannot draw parallels between sex, food and smoking. You've just gone ahead and proved it right there.
I was telling why they CANNOT be compared since the driving factor is completely different. Wanting to have sex is NOT a choice. Having it, is.
I hope you get it now. Stop taking things out of context please. It is getting ridiculous.
It wasn't bait
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions