help with assgn due in 24 hours (3)

SLIPS AND HUMAN NATURE By William D."Silky" Silkworth, M.D., published in the A.A. Grapevine, January 1947.

The mystery of slips is not so deep as it may appear. While it does seem odd that an alcoholic, who has restored himself to a dignified place among his fellowmen and continues dry for years, should suddenly throw all his happiness overboard and find himself again in mortal peril of drowning in liquor, often the reason is simple.

People are inclined to say, "There is something peculiar about alcoholics. They seem to be well, yet at any moment they may turn back to their old ways. You can never be sure."

This is largely twaddle. The alcoholic is a sick person. Under the technique of Alcoholics Anonymous he gets well -- that is to say, his disease is arrested. There is nothing unpredictable about him any more than there is anything weird about a person who has arrested diabetes.

Let's get it clear, once and for all, that alcoholics are human beings. Then we can safeguard ourselves intelligently against most slips.

In both professional and lay circles, there is a tendency to label everything that an alcoholic may do as "alcoholic behavior." The truth is, it is simple human nature.

It is very wrong to consider any of the personality traits observed in liquor addicts as peculiar to the alcoholic. Emotional and mental quirks are classified as symptoms of alcoholism merely because alcoholics have them, yet those same quirks can be found among non-alcoholics too. Actually they are symptoms of mankind!

Of course, the alcoholic himself tends to think of himself as different, somebody special, with unique tendencies and reactions. Many psychiatrists, doctors, and therapists carry the same idea to extremes in their analyses and treatment of alcoholics.

Sometimes they make a complicated mystery of a condition that is found in all human beings, whether they drink whiskey or buttermilk.

To be sure, alcoholism, like every other disease, does manifest itself in some unique ways. It does have a number of baffling peculiarities that differ from those of all other diseases.

At the same time, any of the symptoms and much of the behavior of alcoholism are closely paralleled and even duplicated in other diseases.

The slip is a relapse! It is a relapse that occurs after the alcoholic has stopped drinking and started on the A.A. program of recovery. Slips usually occur in the early states of the alcoholic's A.A. indoctrination, before he has had time to learn enough of the A.A. techniques and A.A. philosophy to give him a solid footing. But slips may also occur after an alcoholic has been a member of A.A. for many months or even several years, and it is in this kind, above all, that often finds a marked similarity between the alcoholic's behavior and that of "normal" victims of other diseases.

No one is startled by the fact that relapses are not uncommon among arrested tubercular patients. But here is a startling fact -- the cause is often the same as the cause that leads to slips for the alcoholic.

It happens this way: When a tubercular patient recovers sufficiently to be released from the sanitarium, the doctor gives him careful instructions for the way he is to live when he gets home. He must drink plenty of milk. He must refrain from smoking. He must obey other stringent rules.

For the first several months, perhaps for several years, the patient follows directions. But as his strength increases and he feels fully recovered, he becomes slack. There may come the night when he decides he can stay up until ten o'clock. When he does this, nothing untoward happens. Soon he is disregarding the directions given him when he left the sanitarium. Eventually he

has a relapse.

The same tragedy can be found in cardiac cases. After the heart attack, the patient is put on a strict rests schedule. Frightened, he naturally follows directions obediently for a long time. He, too, goes to bed early, avoids exercise such as walking upstairs, quits smoking, and leads a Spartan life. Eventually, though there comes a day, after he has been feeling

good for months or several years, when he feels he has regained his strength, and has also recovered from his fright. If the elevator is out of repair one day, he walks up the three flights of stairs. Or he decides to go to a party -- or do just a

little smoking -- or take a cocktail or two. If no serious after effects follow the first departure from the rigorous schedule prescribed, he may try it again, until he suffers a relapse.

In both cardiac and tubercular cases, wrong thinking preceded the acts that led to the relapses. The patient in each case rationalized himself out of a sense of his own perilous reality. He deliberately turned away from his knowledge of the fact that he had been the victim of a serious disease. He grew overconfident. He decided he didn't have to follow directions.

Now that is precisely what happens with the alcoholic -- the arrested alcoholic, or the alcoholic in A.A. who has a slip. Obviously, he decides to take a drink again some time before he actually takes it. He starts thinking wrong before he actually embarks on the course that leads to a slip.

There is no reason to charge the slip to alcoholic behavior or a second heart attack to cardiac behavior. The alcoholic slip is not a symptom of a psychotic condition. There's nothing screwy about it at all.

The patient simply didn't follow directions!

For the alcoholic, A.A. offers the directions. A vital factor, or ingredient of the preventive, especially for the alcoholic, is sustained emotion. The alcoholic who learns some of the techniques or the mechanics of A.A. but misses the philosophy or the spirit may get tired of following directions -- not because he is alcoholic, but because he is human.

Rules and regulations irk almost anyone, because they are restraining, prohibitive, and negative. The philosophy of A.A. however, is positive and provides ample sustained emotion -- a sustained desire to follow directions voluntarily.

In any event, the psychology of the alcoholic is not as different as some people try to make it. The disease has certain physical differences, yes, and the alcoholic has problems peculiar to him, perhaps, in that he has been put on the defensive and consequently has developed frustrations. But in many instances, there is no more reason to be talking about "the alcoholic mind" than there is to try to describe something called

the "cardiac mind" or the "TB mind."

I think we'll help the alcoholic more if we can first recognize that he is primarily a human being -- afflicted with human nature.

1

Avocado Vs Artichoke Views Of Self

SOURCE: https://uniquewritersbay.com/blog/avocado-artichoke-views-self-compare-contrast-

essay/

Historical and Philosophical Approaches to the Self – Assignment Instructions

Who Am I?

The purpose of this discussion assignment is to reflect upon your understanding of different

historical and philosophical approaches to the self. After completing your readings, write a 2–3-

page paper contrasting the avocado/ essentialist idea of the self with the artichoke/protean

view of the self. Remember to explain specific theories with supporting citations from the

textbook and online lectures before contrasting them. As you develop your response, you might

find some of the following questions to be relevant:

What are some of the differences/similarities between the avocado and

artichoke views of the self?

What do you make of the feminist, existential, and non-Western critiques of the

essentialist/avocado self? Are there any other problems with the idea that human beings are

fundamentally rational creatures?

What is the role of desire in the self? Is it really something separate from reason, as

modernism, Christianity, and Islam assert? Can it be controlled? Should it be?

Comparing And Contrasting the Avocado / Essentialist Idea of the Self with the Artichoke /

Protean View of the Self – Sample Answer

Introduction

There are a number of theories developed to explain human nature. However, they can all be

classified into two major groups that include avocado or artichoke. Human based on avocado

view is a stable, enduring self, perceived as existing at a person’s core. However, according to

artichoke view, an individual is perceived as a protean without enduring stable core. The two

views can be used to define different individuals based on their value of life, with most religious

based individuals portraying avocado nature while others demonstrating artichoke nature. This

discussion focuses on reviewing the two existing nature of human being.

Similarities and Differences between Avocado and Artichoke Views of Self

2

According to avocado view, there is always an inner unchanging core in human being after

peeling of the outer skin. This inner self is never changed by life experiences. It remains to be

and it is the one that defines the human nature. According to most religious view, this is

perceived as the soul. On the contrary, artichoke view perceives human beings as an onion

which does not have any core. This demonstrates that human are changing in nature and their

reaction are influenced joy different experiences at a certain moment. However, due to the

power given to human, one can get hold of the situation and develop a character that does not

change despite of the life challenges. This is what gives artichoke at least one similarity with

avocado (Mitchell, 2014).

Feminist, Existential, and non-Western critiques of the essentialist/avocado self

Aristotle and Plato defined human nature by identifying men with more rational aspects and

women with irrational aspects such as body and emotion. In addition Christians in the fourth

century church discuss whether women were created with God’s or Man’s image. This

perspective is just defined to undermine a certain group of people based on their inabilities or

cultural degradation. Moreover, the idea of using one character to classify individuals or to

generalize on their behavior is highly criticized. Based on non-western, existential and feminist

critiques human being cannot be classified based on any irrational aspect.

Despite of appearing very similar, every person has his or her own nature that makes that

person unique and different from others. The grouping and generalization has highly resulted

to undermining of a certain group of people in the society since according to essentialist view

they have a certain inability that makes none of them to be able to handle a certain task or to

behave in a certain manner. Therefore, essentialism is highly disregarded by feminist since is it

is used to undermine women and their role in the society. It is also used to group others such as

Africans as poor or individual with poor mental and financial ability. In this regard, existential

utters that human being have freedom and diverse perspectives and meaning of life and

despite of being marginalized in one way or another, they have the ability to make rational

decisions (Phillips, 2010).

Role of Desire in Self

Desire when perceived with regard to our self-realization evolution is directly connected to the

association between our transformation and awakening on the human level and the relation

between our human self and the soul in general. The desire force is essentially positive since

there would be no an inducement to live without the desire. Desire is associated to pursuit or

survival pleasure and it touches all the measures of our existence that include our spiritual

evolution, love, creativity, and learning. Desire has both negative and positive side and as

advised by modernism, Islamic and Christianity, desire is separate from reason. Although

3

people have desires, they tend to follow their reason. Desire may not always be viable and thus,

it should be controlled since it is possible to do so by holding into the unique power possessed

by humans to control their moves and life (Hsieh, 2003).

Why is it Especially Important to Understand “Human Nature” in our times?

Human nature refers to a set of inherent characteristics which all humans share. (Wikepedia: Human Nature). Efforts to identify and understand these characteristics date back to ancient times. The issue of whether human nature is biologically hard-wired or whether it is formed by socialization and education is highly debatable. In any case, there are many good reasons for trying to formulate an objective understanding of human nature, not the least of which is, in doing so, we partly define who we are as individuals. But in our times, in the 21st century, it has become even more crucially important than ever for educated people to understand human nature because “human nature arguments” are frequently used to avoid responsibility.

An example of how the “human nature argument” is misused is when someone might say “I can’t do anything about ending war. War is part of human nature.” In saying this person claims powerlessness and asserts that war is inevitable and unavoidable. Another example of how the “human nature argument” is misused would be if a husband goes out on his wife and then claims "I didn't mean to cheat, but it's just human nature for men to play around." Furthermore, in a discussion you might hear “You can't blame Wall Street brokers and bankers for being greedy; greed is just human nature.” “You can't criticize gun manufacturers for violence; violence is human nature.” The “human nature argument” which these people evoke is not based on philosophy, or anthropology, or religion; it is an uninformed rationalization for immoral behavior. Furthermore, in today’s America, market ideology is a distortion of an accurate understanding of human nature. This ideology saturates the airways, internet, and magazines. It conveys messages over and over, day in and day out, persuading us we are aggressive, competitive, and self-centered. Unless you had a chance to become informed on human nature, you would be misled to believe human beings are creatures we are not. To be able to respond to people who use the “human nature” argument,” and to be able to evaluate advertisements, articles, and TV shows conveying market ideology, we must have a clear understanding of human nature. The Webster’s Dictionary definition of human nature is “the essential essence of who we are collectively as human beings.” This means the traits, behaviors, and characteristics essential to what it is to be a human being as a matter of natural (usually biological) fact and which cannot be changed without making us other than the sort of being we are. Someone might also add that it is the hardwired structures that are innate in our biology. Some people might have a broader definition of human nature and say that everything humans do is in our nature. Love is in our nature, hate is in our nature. War is in our nature. Peace is in our nature. Reflection is certainly in our nature. Lions can't reflect on whether to go vegetarian, and pandas can’t decide to drop bamboo in favor of small rodents. If reflection is in our nature, then so is choice about our actions. And moralists assert that awareness, reflection, and choice are where morality lies.

To arrive at a clearer understanding of human nature we will survey historical attempts to explain it. The ancient Greeks, the world religions, the European Enlightenment thinkers of the 1600’s and 1700’s, and modern-day scientists all grappled with what is human nature. I will summarize their various perspectives here. Greco-Roman Views of Human Nature Philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome contemplated human nature and Plato’s Republic provides insights into ways in which they viewed it. People are made of body and soul, the body is material and the soul is immaterial. The soul consists of appetite, spirit (courage), and reason. Reason and courage must control the appetites. The highest form of human existence is when people exercise their reason. People are fundamentally social and need others for physical and mental needs. Good should be reflected in an individual’s actions. Chinese Views of Human Nature (Confucian) People are so social they must insure a stable and orderly social life. As the basis for this social life Confucius organized a system to make clear to everyone who should obey whom. In the family, wife should obey husband, children should obey parents, parents should honor ancestors and all people should obey the Emperor as he was viewed as the father of the civilization. People were supposed to be sensitive to other people’s feelings and accommodate other people’s wishes. Indian Views of Human Nature (Hindu, Buddhist, Jain and Sikh) Human beings are part of a larger spirit called Brahman the supreme unity and eternal oneness of the universe. Human beings are part of the universal oneness itself. Humans are supposed to perform the duties of their caste in order to be reincarnated into a higher state. African, European, and Middle Eastern Religions’ Views of Human Nature (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Zoroastrian, Manichean) Human beings are God’s creation. God created people in his image and he guides our lives in the destiny he has in mind for us. The book of “Genesis” in the Hebrew Old Testament contains a passage where humans were created “God said, “Let me make humankind in my image and likeness and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the cattle, over all the wild animals and every creature that crawls on the earth.” God created humans with a free will, but they must be guided by moral teachings. When a person does wrong, this wrong is a result of the evil in human nature which is brought out by the devil. Enlightenment in Europe in 1600’s and 1700’s Enlightenment thinkers believed in science and reason and provoked intense curiosity about human nature. This curiosity arose from the European voyages of discovery, the encountering of “primitive” peoples, and confronting new truths from the microscope and telescope. God receded into the background and philosophers wanted to understand how humans endured in a natural state before civilization. Many Enlightenment

philosophers concluded people possessed free will and reason, but disagreed on other human characteristics. Rousseau, Locke, and Montesquieu thought people were social, cooperative, considerate, unselfish and loyal in the state of nature, but Hobbes concluded people are aggressive, self-centered, greedy, and fickle. These philosophers asked “When evil exists, is it a result of evil in human nature or is it a result of evil in institutions?” MODERN SCIENTIFIC VIEWS OF HUMAN NATURE Biology In the 1800’s Darwin’s theory focused on humans’ primate heritage and began a new period of questioning. From this came the modern scientific study of humans in fields as diverse as biology, anatomy, physiology, genetics, psychology, sociology and anthropology. From these fields have come modern theories of human nature. Primatology holds we are determined in our deep brain structures, our instincts, and our physical make-up by our primate heritage. Adherents of this thinking are E.O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, and Richard Audrey. Barbara Ehrinreich believes fears and anxieties were hard-wired into human and pre-human species during millions of years when these species were vulnerable prey to wild beasts. She asserts that human fears and anxieties of an “other” (originally wild beasts), were later transferred to fear of other human beings. Anthropology Through a 6-million year evolutionary path, about twelve species in the human family tree evolved biologically and culturally from chimps and bonobos. The 12 species all extincted and modern humans are the only surviving species of this evolutionary path. All of the pre-human species were bipedal. Walking upright led to hands becoming free to use tools. The use of tools required eye-hand coordination and concentration which led to an increase in brain size. The increasing use of speech to name and describe features of the environment also led to the growth of the brain. Sociability allowed for collective learning. The growth of the brain and social interaction in bands stimulated the brain to a point where species in the genus Homo evolved to being highly conscious and intelligent. From modern anthropological theories, it can be concluded that due to 6 million years of evolution, humans emerged hard-wired for tool use, speech use, sociability, and high levels of consciousness. Psychology Among the many different theories and schools of psychology, a few stand out for their efforts to explore human nature. Freud believed aggression was a major element of human nature which enables survival, but which is sometimes accompanied by violence. Carl Jung thought there was a collective unconscious which could imbue an enemy with hateful traits, traits which actually originated within oneself. Alfred Adler created theories about interpersonal struggles for social dominance. Harry Stack Sullivan said humans have fears and anxieties derived from inhibited communication which caused a tendency to strike out at t hose who are different. Erik Erikson said social ambiguity in a society can produce confusion in individuals and a tendency to follow misguided leaders. Irving Janis explored “group think” which derives from human beings’ social nature. In 1941, John Dollard, Neal Miller, and other social scientists coined the "frustration- aggression hypothesis," arguing that violence and aggression are reactive, as distinct from

Freud's notion of them as proactive. In this view frustration leads to anger (as do hurt and fear, which are variations of frustration) and anger sometimes leads to violence. CONCLUSION While it is challenging to explore the subject of human nature, it becomes a necessity in our times due to the misuse of the concept to promote a fatalistic and defeatist outlook that prevents people from evolving morally. Human beings are much more than merely “self-centered, aggressive, and competitive”. Recent tendencies to misuse the concept of human nature prove what American philosopher Henry Miller said “Man has demonstrated he is master of everything -- except his own nature.” What is your view of human nature?