Drunk Objectivists

[John McVey]

I would like to dispute the 'objectively inferior'

I was thinking in terms of alcohols generally not tasting as good (as far as I can tell thus far) as other drinks, plus that it reduces ability to drive. The latter is particularly annoying when one is still (for a few months yet) on a restricted motorcycle licence.

I will admit that possibly I spoke in haste and that there may well be wines out there that I might actually like (that's why I got a few last week), but I still don't accept that 'acquired taste' argument. Either something tastes good (whether alone or in combination with other things), or it does not. Repeatedly forcing down one's throat a non-medical something that one doesn't like does not strike me as rational. Physiological changes as one grows up I readily understand, but now as an adult the whole matter smacks of second-handedness.

Try soft cheese (double cream Brie, Camembert, Boursault, Chaource) on a toasted raisin bread canape with half a red, seedless, grape and half of a California walnut on each. Every bite should contain a bit of each. That should take care of your sweet-tooth

Now that you mention it, I am fairly partial to both Brie and Camembert (I will have to look up the other two next time I am in a respectably sized city), I have grapes growing out the back, and I do happily snack on unsalted nuts from time to time (cashews are my personal favourite). However, your ensemble just screams kitchen-chemistry train-wreck

Now try it with a glass of Pinot Grigio (or any light white wine). Then try it with a glass of pepsi. You will clearly see why people choose to have wine.

*eyes Sophia warily

Okay then, you're on. I have to try making at least one just to see if it's going to go BOOM. I've done that before. (*whistles nonchalantly)

For now, if it makes you feel any better, I have cracked open the David Morris muscat to go with a Magnum Ego ice-cream (is that an Objectivist-sounding brand or what!!).

...

...

Dammit, woman, you have driven me to drink!

JJM

[stellavision]

I would like to dispute the 'objectively inferior'

Try soft cheese (double cream Brie, Camembert, Boursault, Chaource) on a toasted raisin bread canape with half a red, seedless, grape and half of a California walnut on each. Every bite should contain a bit of each.

That should take care of your sweet-tooth

Now try it with a glass of Pinot Grigio (or any light white wine). Then try it with a glass of pepsi. You will clearly see why people choose to have wine.

Now you've gone and made me hungry, and I just had lunch!

The last time I was stinking drunk was in college, well before I discovered Objectivism. I got plastered many times, once badly enough to get mightily sick the next morning. That experience pretty much killed my attraction to drunkenness. That and the empty calories -- I was about 25 pounds heavier in college than I am now.

That being said, I do enjoy a drink once in a while -- usually a glass of wine or a good beer. I'm not fond of bitterness either (I hate coffee with every fiber of my soul), but there are plenty of wines and beers that I enjoy. (For those of you who've bashed beer in this post, try the good stuff -- say, Franziskaner or Negra Modelo. It's worlds different from the junk advertised in most beer commercials!) I no longer drink for the mood-altering effect, but because a good glass of wine or beer can really enhance the taste of a fine meal. Yum!

[D'kian]

(For those of you who've bashed beer in this post, try the good stuff -- say, Franziskaner or Negra Modelo. It's worlds different from the junk advertised in most beer commercials!)

I have. I still don't like it.

But since you offered beer advice, I think it's fair I give coffee advice: try good coffee, nothing fancy like Hawaiian coffee, not necessarily, but any good medium roast, freshly ground, from a quality source. At first try making it with milk (latte, capuccino and such) and add whatever flavorings you like, such as chocolate syrup or any coffee sweetening/flavoring syrup (almond and hazelnut are particularly good). Then you are ready to move on to coffee with sugar and cream, or without.

If that doesn't help, try coffee ice cream, coffee candy, or coffee-flavored chocolate. It will grow on you.

[Capitalism Forever]

I still don't accept that 'acquired taste' argument. Either something tastes good (whether alone or in combination with other things), or it does not. Repeatedly forcing down one's throat a non-medical something that one doesn't like does not strike me as rational.

LOL, if that's how you've been trying to acquire tastes, no wonder you don't believe it works. It would only work if for some weird reason your objective were to turn your distaste into visceral hatred of the stuff.

As I said, acquiring a taste means discovering a value, by learning why something is beneficial for your life. That is mental work, not repetitive manual labor where the greatest challenge is overcoming your disgust.

[D'kian]

LOL, if that's how you've been trying to acquire tastes, no wonder you don't believe it works. It would only work if for some weird reason your objective were to turn your distaste into visceral hatred of the stuff.

How would you go about it?

Me, I've some notions.

First, some tastes are unappealing to most people at certain periods in life. Take alcohol for example. Few children and pre-teens like it for the flavor, and even some teens are averse to much of it until they mix it with something (or until they like the side effects). On the flip side, children like things sweeter than most adults do (yes, even those who have a self-described sweet tooth).

You can acquire a taste for them anyway. Children in Europe are given watered-down wine with meals. In Latin America children get coffee made with milk instead of water, and with more sugar than an adult would use. Both these examples show how you go about it: modify the intended taste a little, or lessen it, but leave it there. The purpose isn't to acquire a taste, but it works for that.

So, yes, there is a mental effort involved, but a physical process is essential also.

[Capitalism Forever]

The purpose isn't to acquire a taste

That's just what I was going to say in answer to your question, although in a different sense: in the sense that your purpose should not be to acquire a taste. You don't sit down and say, "Okay, so I've been enjoying Dom Perignon but now I want to acquire a taste for cheap beer, as that will save me a lot of money--so how do I go about it?" Instead, what happens is that you become aware of a reason to like something you have not known of a reason to like until now--perhaps because of a change in the set of nutrients that your body needs, or because somebody has explained to you what he likes about it and you find that it makes sense, or because you are able to afford new kinds of food that the beverage in question is a good complement for, etc. And when you have made the positive value-judgment about it, your emotional reactions will follow suit, and you begin to like the food or drink (or music, etc.).

Often, the reason people don't like something at first is that they don't try it in the right context, with all the right ingredients in place. For example, when I was a kid, I didn't like red meats very much, and when I got to the age where I started trying various wines, I would mostly prefer white ones, since I was only eating white meat. At this point, I didn't really see a place for red wine in my life. All this began to change very quickly when one day, just out of curiosity, I tried a red meat dish with a glass of red wine in a quality restaurant. I found that, while my body hadn't liked red meats without any alcohol to go with them, the red wine helped me digest them much easier--and voilá, I acquired a taste for red meat and for red whine! And this to the extent that by today, the great majority of wines I buy are red ones (and most of the rest are Tokaji dessert wines, to go with all the sweets I have acquired a taste for!)

[John McVey]

...try coffee ice cream, coffee candy, or coffee-flavored chocolate. It will grow on you.

Mmmmmm....chocolate-covered coffee beans...*gurgle*

As I said, acquiring a taste means discovering a value,

"Acquisition" my bloody foot. You aren't doing anything except exploring possible tastes and combinations thereof, which is exactly what I said and what I am slowly doing - hell, you even note that yourself to D'Kian. Whether or not one has an actual taste has already been set by one's genetic and other physiological predispositions corresponding to the position in one's life cycle. Nothing one does is going to change that predisposition - there is nothing that may be acquired as a result of one's choices, thereby stripping the word 'acquire' of any usable meaning.

From a purely technical perspective, the 'acquisition' part is the fact that your body has changed of its own accord to react favourably (which you have indeed pointed out), but the way the word is actually used in practice (which you have also done) is to connote the learning of the nuances of airs and expressing them properly in one's choice of beverages. The more I think about this whole 'acquisition' caper, and the more that people laugh at me and accuse me of infantility, the more it sounds like pretentious claims of being or aspiring to be of this or that social class and I am thoroughly unimpressed. If you will excuse me, I will go back to experimenting with various drinks and accompaniments, and dispense with slapping BS class marker tags on the process and results.

by learning why something is beneficial for your life. That is mental work

Balderdash. The real why is simple: physiology - you body is set such that like it or you don't. Leaving aside the growing recognition of the fact that the blandishments of wine connoisseurs are mostly just bollocks, the actual mental work is carried out by chefs, food scientists and geneticists exploring flavour compounds, enzymes etc, physical conditions, quality and quantity of taste receptor sites, the neurology of taste and smell interactions, and compatibilities or clashes between all these. Knowing these may guide one's choices of what to experiment with, but learning of them changes nothing about actual physiological responses. Taste meaning actual physical sensation is not the same thing as taste meaning aesthetic appreciation, and the principles of the latter have no place being applied to the former.

JJM

[Capitalism Forever]

From a purely technical perspective, the 'acquisition' part is the fact that your body has changed of its own accord to react favourably (which you have indeed pointed out)

That is only one of the possible ways of acquiring a taste, and even here, the change in your body does not automatically result in a change in your taste. Your emotional reactions to foods and drinks are a result of your evaluations of them, and the evaluations are the result of your thought process. You will NOT automatically like whatever is good for your body and dislike what is bad for it--this is precisely why there are so many people who eat unhealthily.

[dianahsieh]

For those of you with a sweet tooth who've yet to find any wines you like, I'd strongly recommend that you try Riesling (particularly sweeter rather than drier varieties) and (even more so) Gewurztraminer. For the time being, avoid red wines altogether, as all of them are bitter to varying extents. Also avoid chardonnay, as the oak is often seriously unpleasant.

I never liked wine at all until I tried Rieslings and Gewurztraminers. They are still my favorites. Even years later, I still have little tolerance for red wines, I still dislike chardonnay, but I've developed a taste for Pinot Grigio and her cousins. Oh, and I have a very powerful sweet tooth. Jellie Bellies are more "addictive" to me than cigarettes ever were.

To address the topic of this thread, I have only gotten seriously drunk twice in my life. Both times were by accident, in the sense that I thought I was drinking far less alcohol than I actually was. I hope to never make such a mistake again, as I was deeply worried for my safety, yet unable to do anything about my situation.

In my view, to deliberately become seriously drunk is deeply irrational by proper egoistic standards, as such a person is unable to act purposefully and competently -- meaning that he's unable to act to preserve and protect his life. That's not good, to say the least. Personally, I don't recommend that anyone drink beyond the relaxing warm and fuzzies.

[Inspector]

One thing I'd like to point out - it's quite true that younger people prefer sweeter foods, biologically. Generally, as you age your palette tends to shift away from this. Interestingly, some older people have been known to shift back toward sweetness as they become more senior.

The confusion sets in because some people simply have a stronger built-in preference for sweeter foods (or aversion to bitter ones, which isn't quite the same thing). The mistake is to think that because young people go for the sweets, that this means that adults with a sweet tooth have "immature" tastes. This is entirely false - their tastes are as mature as they are going to get... and likely they preferred even sweeter things in their youth.

Personally, I don't have a particularly sweet tooth, but I do have a strong aversion to bitter tastes because I am a supertaster. (this fades with age, too, by the way) Wine and beer are completely horrible to me. I can't even drink water most of the time because I can taste it and it is bitter. Whiskey is completely unthinkable. Vodka, on the other hand, doesn't trouble me very much at all. At least in its flavor.

But it does trouble me otherwise, because I have a rather nasty condition which basically means that I will never enjoy drinking. It took me about a decade to discover it, however, because I drink so little and so seldom. It just never appealed to me in any sense, even before being an Objectivist. That and I am cheap so I only drank when someone else was buying.

I've never sought to become actually drunk, and I actually doubt that I physically could, even if I wanted to, given my condition. I think people who specifically set out to become drunk "for fun" are sick, sad creatures who need to re-evaluate their lives. Note that this is categorically different from enjoying a drink or two with a meal or at a party or on a friday or similar. Kendall pretty much covered the bases on that one.

So if you think there are Objectivist drunks, I'd say check one of those premises.

[athena glaukopis]

PLAYBOY: What about discriminate and selective indulgence in other activities—drinking, for example, or gambling? Are these immoral?

RAND: To begin with, those are not in the same category as sex. Drinking, as such, is not immoral, unless a person is a drunkard. Merely taking a drink is hardly a moral question. It becomes an immorality only when a man drinks to the point where it stifles and stunts his mind. When a man drinks in order to escape the responsibility of being conscious, only then is drinking immoral.

from the "Lost" parts of Ayn Rand's Playboy interview

the last and second-to-last statements are not the same, but they are both the "only" times when drinking is immoral? so which is it? when a man drinks to escape responsibility or when it stifles and stunts his mind? are they the same thing?

It becomes an immorality only when a man drinks to the point where it stifles and stunts his mind. -- and what exactly is this point? is this not a line drawing fallacy? is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason that drinking even in small amounts is considered "relaxing"?

Edited January 10, 2008 by athena glaukopis

[Thales]

It becomes an immorality only when a man drinks to the point where it stifles and stunts his mind. -- and what exactly is this point? is this not a line drawing fallacy? is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason that drinking even in small amounts is considered "relaxing"?

When you drink in small quantities you are still in control of your faculties, it's just that your state is more relaxed for a while, and in some contexts, it puts you more in control. When you drink in large quantities, you lose complete control over your faculties. That's a difference not just in degree, but in kind.

If you want to know exactly when that point is, that's very difficult to determine. However, so long as you know approximately one glass of wine and I'm in control, five glasses and I'm smashed you have a barometer to go by.

[athena glaukopis]

When you drink in small quantities you are still in control of your faculties, it's just that your state is more relaxed for a while

the question still stands; is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason why it is "relaxing"?

[Qwertz]

Not entirely. Alcohol is also a muscle relaxant. And a vasodilator. These are results of its effect on the peripheral nervous system, not its effects on the CNS.

~Q

[Thales]

the question still stands; is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason why it is "relaxing"?

Qwertz may have your answer for you, but even if it does slightly reduce your mind's capacity to think, it's very low risk behavior, and offers benefits.

[Lorenzo de' Medici]

There are several issues in regard to drinking that I would like to mention and address. Drinking is sometimes a difficult subject because we are dealing with range, measurement, degree, and the psychological reasons and motives involved.

Health:

Do I drink in a range that will benefit my health, harm it, or have little or no effect? Do I value the health of my body and my mind? To what degree should I allow myself to become influenced by the effects of alcohol?

Personal pleasure:

Do I enjoy drinking? Do I enjoy becoming incapacitated by the effects of alcohol, or am I looking to relax socially? Does only one or two drinks have any effect on my mind at all? Do I enjoy the tastes, the aroma, the flavors, and at what expense?

Context:

Is it appropriate to be drinking or would it be reckless? Should I drink when I drive? How much can I drink if I need to drive? Should I drink when I'm working or when I need my mind the most? Perhaps the world is ending, and in this case perhaps a drunken state might be better.

Responsibility, results, effects, consequences:

What is my behavior like when I drink? How much can I drink before my judgment becomes too impaired, and becomes poor? Should I desire to be in such a sate? Am I aware that I will be held responsible for my actions regardless of how much I end up drinking? Will the effects of my drinking over time, harm me, or benefit me?

Purpose:

What is my short term and long term purpose in drinking? Am I drinking to escape from reality, to evade my problems, or to lighten myself up? Am I celebrating a victory or drowning myself to escape from pain?

How one answers the preceding questions will resolve the issue of morality and rationality.

[D'kian]

I've never sought to become actually drunk, and I actually doubt that I physically could, even if I wanted to, given my condition.

Oh, you can. Not by drinking, unless you have tremendous will power and a strong masochistic streak in you. But you could take pure alcohol intravenously, no taste involved at all.

Why you would want to is another matter entirely.

I think people who specifically set out to become drunk "for fun" are sick, sad creatures who need to re-evaluate their lives.

Yes. But there is such a thing as addiction. I don't see addicts as helpless victims of a psychological illness. I mean, they are ill, no question, but they can also help themselves and beat their addictions. However, doing so is a difficult process that requires a lot of effort. It's not easy and it takes time.

[Adrian Hester]

the question still stands; is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason why it is "relaxing"?

Leonard Peikoff has already addressed this issue in a Q&A of 1 Nov 2006. (I believe he asked that his answers not be quoted in other forums so as to avoid being taken out of context. Just scroll down most of the way to the bottom; it's the second question under the date.)

[D'kian]

the question still stands; is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason why it is "relaxing"?

Because you do not need to stun your mind in order to relax. Suppose you lie down on a beach to sunbathe. Maybe you let your mind wonder, maybe you stare at the sky, or the ocean, or just look at people passing by. Either way you do not actively engage your mind on anything, you just relax.

Well, a little alcohol proves relaxing, but it doesn't necessarily affect your cognitive faculties. BTW I think alcohol also has an effect on one's muscles, making you feel more relaxed, but I'm not sure.

[athena glaukopis]

Well, a little alcohol proves relaxing, but it doesn't necessarily affect your cognitive faculties. BTW I think alcohol also has an effect on one's muscles, making you feel more relaxed, but I'm not sure.

I already addressed its physiological properties here (straight out of my psychology textbook chapter on drugs and stimulants.

[D'kian]

I already addressed its physiological properties here (straight out of my psychology textbook chapter on drugs and stimulants.

All right. I've read it now. I still see nothing wrong with it. The mind needs rest, too. And there's no reason one has to keep one's mind fully engaged and active at all times.

[-archimedes-]

My question is, how do you Oist drinkers out there morally justify your drunkenness? Or do you see it as immoral, but treat yourself to irrational behavior every once in a while?

Drinking to the point of drunkenness is a temporary, excessive, ever fleeting, self-defeatist, escapist vehicle ladened with overly negative side-effects practiced by those mentally incapable of rationalizing their self-scripted, degenerate encounters with their environment/others/the machinations of their own minds/as a means of compensating for their ill-defined social interaction skills....

Why would a self-professed/practicing O'ist engage in such a vice? Well...even Atlas Shrugged.

[Capitalism Forever]

The mind needs rest, too.

It absolutely does. If drinking a little is a vice, then so is falling asleep.

[John McVey]

the question still stands; is it not the slight stunting and stifling of the mind the reason why it is "relaxing"?

In reference to your post on effects, the 'small' amount part depends what you mean by 'small.' A single drink? Just enough to put you over 0.05? At truly small amounts, the notion of stunting and stifling is open to question.

Two allegations I've heard come to mind. First, there are supposed health benefits, though apparently restricted to red wines. A glass at dinner is satisfactory, then. Much of life is about trade-offs, and that would be just one more.

The other - more controversially - is that with amounts that are actually small the mind's ability is improved. There is a general principle of biological responses to damaging influences called hormesis. If memory serves me the 0.05 BAC legal limit for driving was set there because it was reckoned to be the point at which the increased dose of ethanol undoes the hormesis attached to it and puts driving skills back down to the level of a 0.00 BAC. Groups like MADD go ape at this idea because it is seen as the thin end of the wedge for binge drinking followed by reckless driving. The same principle (and foam-at-mouth response from activists) is found in the biological effects of radiation.

JJM

[JMeganSnow]

If that doesn't help, try coffee ice cream, coffee candy, or coffee-flavored chocolate. It will grow on you.

I'm one of those people that doesn't like coffee. I don't like it to the point that I can't eat things like Tiramisu or even chocolate-coffee *cheesecake*. They taste NASTY. It may just be in my head, but I don't think any amount of work is going to make me like coffee. Plus, I like tea, and I don't really need any other method of getting a caffeine fix. If I'm somewhere where they only have coffee, I just drink water. Better for me anyway.

A lot of mixed drinks have coffee or coffee flavor in them, which cracks me up. I've been to restaurants with people that were asking "is there alcohol in this coffee drink" while I was asking "is there coffee in this alcohol drink?"