A lot of people benefit from AA, the issue with the costs, such as having to admit stuff you don’t like to admit, making you feel bad and powerless and so on. A ritual, a fellowship of losers rubs me entirely the bad way. Perhaps it works for people who feel like they are amazing and need their ego cut down, but I far more often feel like a worthles POS so a fellowship that rubs precisely that in does not sound attractive. I have more than enough self-esteem problems, if anything, I need the opposite, a winner’s fellowship (Toastmasters or our local martial arts club). If I saw no other ways I would pay that cost, but since a 30 days stoppage worked well, I think I can try longer ones, eventually a full one, without many problems. In fact the 3 weeks rule (there is a “folk knowleddge” saying it takes 3 weeks to ingrain or delete a habit, such as it took us 3 weeks to not smoke inside our flat to get to the point where doing it would feel positively weird) worked, after 3 weeks I did not even think of it, and only the frustration of the illness brought it back. From this experience, I can easily imagine being completely abstinent as a general rule, when things are good, and turning to drink when something bad happens, say on the average 3-5 weeks a year. That would not be a particularly unhealthy way to live?
A lot of people benefit from AA, the issue with the costs, such as having to admit stuff you don’t like to admit, making you feel bad and powerless and so on.
My understanding is that those “costs” are why it works, e.g., you aren’t going to solve your problem without admitting to things you’d rather not admit to.
A lot of people benefit from AA, the issue with the costs, such as having to admit stuff you don’t like to admit, making you feel bad and powerless and so on. A ritual, a fellowship of losers rubs me entirely the bad way. Perhaps it works for people who feel like they are amazing and need their ego cut down, but I far more often feel like a worthles POS so a fellowship that rubs precisely that in does not sound attractive. I have more than enough self-esteem problems, if anything, I need the opposite, a winner’s fellowship (Toastmasters or our local martial arts club). If I saw no other ways I would pay that cost, but since a 30 days stoppage worked well, I think I can try longer ones, eventually a full one, without many problems. In fact the 3 weeks rule (there is a “folk knowleddge” saying it takes 3 weeks to ingrain or delete a habit, such as it took us 3 weeks to not smoke inside our flat to get to the point where doing it would feel positively weird) worked, after 3 weeks I did not even think of it, and only the frustration of the illness brought it back. From this experience, I can easily imagine being completely abstinent as a general rule, when things are good, and turning to drink when something bad happens, say on the average 3-5 weeks a year. That would not be a particularly unhealthy way to live?
My understanding is that those “costs” are why it works, e.g., you aren’t going to solve your problem without admitting to things you’d rather not admit to.
I wish you the best of luck in whatever technique you try to be happier.