@ ⛩oizen
2024-08-08 21:43:52
# *Drugs* since the lens of *habitus*
## present
Good day everyone. Thanks for coming to this mesh talk. Before start I want to give special love to the Meshtadel, not only for having me grab this opportunity to share some of the experience I have about life, but also for being that digital place that resonates at the in-real-life place.
## intro
Having said that, my professional experience is about places, to be more precise, the experience of places. Architecture, you see, is not only about if a building is pretty or if it is functional; it is about living places, that is, to inhabit. Here is where my trench of expertise might be colliding with those of psychology and physiology; granted by the favors of philosophy. Saying it like this, the "adversary" I want to bring attention this day to you is the one named as "addiction".
The middle ground I would like to propose for this talk are founded on-and-by the *terms of perception*; granted that, "term" and "perception", each, can be criticized by their own merits, however the idea I want to expose this day to you is that the "terms of perception" can be considered as the signature of *drugs*. In other words, *drugs* have the ability to drive *perception*; in architecture, for example, could be said that experience is driven by our walk through the arrangement of the building, —namely the structure, furniture and ornament—, the very definition of a *drug* in architecture lies thus in the objects, as well as in the use we humans make of them.
The object, and the experience of the object thus con-forms *perception*. *Habitus* is the particular way each individual arranges it's own *terms of perception*. Or to put it over a fashion apart, *habitus* can be understood alike traditions, culture, or rituals. Thus, a natural question surges towards the whereabouts of the origins of these habits.
Now then, here is precisely where we can draw a first line that describes the form of an addiction. Simply put, an addiction is an habit that went wrong. Or to say it otherwise, it is an habit that is detrimental to human existence by the terms of the healthiness of both, the body and the mind.
With these sentences I would like then to advance to the discussion or mezzanine of the talk.
## mid
If there could ever be a common law for *perception*, I would like to lie it, —for this occasion at least—, with the following sentence: *perception* lets itself be the pray of the living experience. This means that, —in a healthy condition—, the identification of the state of awareness can be exercised, or saying it like this, a recognition can be drawn between a "natural" and a "distorted" state awareness. Precisely, it could be said that this late is the very definition of an addiction, that is, the placement of oneself in state of distortion.
The handshake of a *drug* usually is also the first time for an individual to notice that there's a "*perception* apart" than the one experienced all along the time of being alive. Taking a personal example for consideration, the years of college, —or well discussed, the years of social interaction—, usually are also the years where the coincidence with *drugs* happen. I mention this precisely to have in mind the importance of context, and even so for the little coincidences, if one like it to have it like that.
To describe the conventional definition of an habit that went wrong, imaging the following sentences: "*Where* precisely the *drug* is injected?, well it depends of the desired effect..."
To offer an alternative for an habit that "works OK", I will dare to say that a good habit is that one that you don't notice. It is there, that say, it exists; it can be at the sight of others, but at the same time can be out of the mere recognition of one. Here precisely is where the terms of habit coincides with ideas of the terms of character, —namely style, temperament, or likelihood— of a person. The habit and the person justifies each other at all moment for the sake of reach an agreement of terms.
To offer an example, a person that commutes everyday to his workplace might likely reach a point where it does it "by default", without ever noticing or thinking about it. Later, by whatever reason, a deviation of the usual commute happens, either a shortcut, a better skilled chauffeur, or getting distracted by the infatuation of a pretty smile. The *habitus* takes a new reform, even if momentarily just to disrupt the usual. Sometimes it can be of good outcomes, some other times maybe not so much.
This may be the opportunity then to lead to the description of the capitulation of an habit, simply put: it can hardly be appreciated or taken nor even with two grains of salt. In other words, to try measure the start and the end of an habit might very well be as to try playing speculation. Needless to say that every *drug* has his trade offs, not so obvious often is that the worst outcome can strike as disruptive as a thunder to life experience.
But what does that mean in layman terms?. What I try to tell you here, meshtadelian, is that a *drug* is a thing as well as an idea, and even more than that, it is always a mix of both the thing and the idea.
You see, when knowing people one might get to see their character not only by their wearings but also by their behavior, that is, the things they do and how they do it, in the same sense a person likes to consume cannabis either by edibles or by cigarettes, an architect can decides, —following the wishes of the inhabitants at best—, to use traditional style or modern style of buildings. The problem often becomes evident when the character gets out of place, when the people doesn't match what at is also seen by others.
Does this mean that there's no way out of an addiction? The answer at least, can not be located at the terms of the addiction itself. To elaborate, a person that looks so hard to stop "doing a *drug*" might soon or later find that the effort can become as important as the *drug* itself, that being, as if the addiction gets displaced from a *drug* to another.
By this terms sobriety is hard to define. The simply usual would be that sobriety is the "default settings" of *perception*. But also by the terms of aesthetics, —taking help of professor Adorno here—, "a lack of style becomes and style itself".
Hoping to having ignited a spark of good will. I would like to go then to the closure of this lecture. I would like to offer a paragraph to the discussion that is held between psychology and physiology towards the definition and treatment of addictions.
## closure
At first, I would like to express that *drug* are not only the prescribed ones, the natural that growths from soil; as well as *drugs* is not only that miracle that brings health, as much as I can say for the sing of a mother can heal a son. It is the combination of both; the whole plot is for people to be experienced and an emphasis should be put on the fact that a person can choice the terms of how the plot is arranged.
In other words, I want to bring the idea that we might be having to pay attention to the possibility that an addiction, —or a disease daring to say so—, not only ca be treated with that or that *drug*. It also matters the place the person's individuality, in which nonetheless, places are also involved.
Finally. I would like to offer you an experience of a dear friend that struggled to stop smoking tobacco but so far has accomplished twenty years more or so of not smoking. He made a bet. He and a friend of his bet to stop smoking. I can not enter in the details of their relationship but I dare to assume is one that has a mix of friendship and rivalry. The trick, if you like to name it, is that the bet can not really have a settle until... yes, it has a morbid sense... someone capitulates. For now I'd lead to tanatology to deal with the terms of how one does face capitulation. However I would like to remind you that as long as there is live, as long as there could be choices.
Thanks now, I have to go fix my own dankruptness.