The Addict and his Addiction

When the language of addiction is used, that is to say, whenever we talk about addiction and of people or nations being 'addicted' to things, we are really establishing the reality of two objects: the addict and the addiction (and a complex narrative of their interrelationship). It does some good, therefore, to try to fix a definition for addiction specifically as opposed to other forms of need. The form of addiction is a subspecies of need: it is, to be precise, attachment to a false need (specifiable ceteris paribus). For instance, when the addict cannot live (or function well) without the 'addiction', we are rather describing an essential need of the subject than an addiction. Food, water, are examples of true biological needs. If we are Thomistic, we might add thought as another kind of true need. Against true needs, the relational concept of addiction may be said to describe the condition of a subject who (falsely) believes himself to need an object which he, in fact, does not. He may here be said to be 'addicted' to his object. Connected to the concept of addiction , interestingly, is that of 'recovery'. Recovery is defined in contraposition to addiction. It is the refined absence of the substance that is its positive addiction. For recovery consists in the rehabilitaton of the subject so as to be free of the extraneous object to which he has become attached, of which believing himself to be in need--falsely I may add. Freedom in this case means the ability and the willingness to do without.