Debate:Sobriety is a Myth

Proposition
The concept of a "drug" is a socially constructed category with no agreed upon operational definition across medical institutions. Stating a drug is any substance that has a physiological effect on the body would include food, air, and water. Stating a drug is a substance to which you can develop a physiological dependence to would also include food, air and water; while also excluding things like marijuanna and psilocybin mushrooms. Something like "mood altering effects" again would include food (i.e. some folks get moody when they are hungry). Drugs having to be psychoactive is just synonymous with "mind affecting" and is subject to the same counter examples. This arguably extends to "altered consciousness" as well which is hopelessly vague. Given all of this we may be inclined to say that drugs are a family resemblance concept and cannot be analyzed on the basis of necessary and sufficient conditions. We can be charitable to our intuitions and class drugs in the family resemblance of medical products regulated and provided by hospitals and pharmacies, controlled illicit substances that get you "high", and the recreational substances that either "over-stimulate" or "depress" the central nervous system such as alcohol, caffeine, tobacco, etc.

This is all to establish premise 1: "Drugs are a family resemblance of substances that  can be understood as drugs when referred to as 'drugs' by the general linguistic community". This premise is more so auxiliary to address potential counter-arguments that in the service to the validity of the main argument itself.

Now this does not create an impossibility for someone to live a "drug-free" or "sober" lifestyle on principle, but it does make it overwhelmingly unlikely. Ever eaten chocolate or drink tea? You have consumed caffeine. Give our included conception of medical products regulated and provided by hospitals and pharmacies this will include vaccines, the use of epi pens, cough syrup, anti-histamines, anti-depressants, the use of an inhaler for asthma, antibiotics etc. This are all classified as drugs by the FDA.

So Premise 2: "It is nearly impossible for anyone to live a drug-free life".

Premise 3: "A sober life is a drug-free life"

Conclusion: "Therefore it is nearly impossible to live a sober life".

In addition to the above argument I present this follow up argument.
 * 1) P1:Ethically we should make our moral principles ones that are realistically achievable.
 * 2) P2: It is an unrealistic aim to achieve sobriety as a lifestyle.
 * 3) C: Ethically we should not make sobriety as a lifestyle one of our moral principles. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk) 19:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC).

Moderation
Perhaps a more realistic goal would be to preach the virtue of moderation as opposed to complete abstinence? Obviously it depends on a case by case basis, some people would genuinely benefit from complete abstention from partaking in certain products, whereas with other people that wouldn't help so much. Vee (talk) 20:02, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Absolutely! The argument I present isn't incompatible with this claim. Even complete abstinence of a particular substance can arguably be a realistic aim, i.e. abstaining from the use of alcohol. The main point of contention is the supposed virtue or aim of living a life of sobriety which is defined in this context as a lifestyle that is "drug-free".  The idea that this is even realistically achievable is what is being called a myth in this context.  Though you make a point that abstinence is not always the best policy, this is sometimes true even in the context of drug dependence.


 * The point of this argument largely is trying to redirect the goal of producing sobriety in society, or that drug-use itself is some moral failing that only certain kinds of people engage with. If we drop the pretense of this entirely we then look to social policies that more so focus on say treating alcohol dependence, or providing a safe-supply of recreational opiates, etc. Instead of focusing on trying to live to some unrealistic aim of making people "sober". Given your political leanings I imagine I am just preaching to the choir here :P. - Only Sort of Dumb (talk)