Originally Posted by GringoStar
Really? It's great trying to debate with someone who's incapable of primitive thought. I JUST read a book all about this called "The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives"
But I am glad that you actually read through my points. Even if you can poke some tiny hole in my definition of the gambler's fallacy, I explained how I was using it in the context of generally misinterpreting probability to be something that shifts and accumulates based on past/current events.
No, not literally all wrong, I was about to head back to the zoo when I saw your post but generally, yeah.
This is my main sticking point. " I am describing how an addict will assume that future events will present a different set of circumstances than the present, when in reality the present is identical to the future and must be treated as such, instead of assuming that one is having a hard time now and because one is having a hard time now, that the future will not be as hard."
The mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future.
That is the definition of the GF. It works for chance and more I'm sure but you can't make the assumption that a drug addict is guided by it. In fact, an addict's decisions are dominated by a negative feedback loop and the efforts to maintain it. The drug addict especially is focused on the present in preparing for a high, getting high, and getting rid of that shitty feeling when the effects are gone. They're not planning on much besides that process. Sure gamblers may incorporate that fallacy as part of their addiction but that's in addition to what fundamentally drives all addicts.
Also, I know about Ibogaine and you can bet most heroin addicts do as well. The full treatment sounds intense but there is evidence that it can get that monkey off your back.
Reply With Quote
