You said
Well alcohol is very prevalent and often drunk at my house (3 or 4 times a week), i'm wanting you to show me where the poverty, depravity, and misery are?
I would agree with you if you had said
Whether a cause or an effect, there can be no doubt where alcohol and narcotics are abused, so is poverty, depravity, and misery.
Why would I beat my head against the wall trying to reason with limited literacy. Nonetheless, here goes.
Example of Reverse Logic.
True Statement: Wherever we observe poverty and depravity, we are certain to find alcohol and or narcotics.
Therefore, wherever we find alcohol or narcotics, we will find depravity.
Answer: The conclusion is not valid simply because the conditions have been reversed. We do not necessarily find poverty everywhere alcohol is found.
What could be troubling is the sense of
denial that may often accompany
flawed reasoning. The individual comes to the conclusion because he
wants to believe a certain thing, and any suggestion to the contrary
threatens his comfort level. Consequently, he will deny the validity of the observation and rationalize his position with
selected evidence.
Of course the comment was not a blanket assertion about every bottle of wine or bag of cocaine. Everyone knows that cocaine is a play toy of the wealthy. I will go out on a limb and virtually assure you that the average wealthy cocaine user couldn't care less about the average American, rich or poor, or the nation, for that matter. As scripture quotes, woe be unto the man who follows strong drink from the break of day to the night. Why not quote that, as opposed to the one that says make thy heart glad with a little wine?
Mrs. Wilson wrote a beautiful lesson, full of good advice. Not long ago, before the idiots had taken over the country, it was suggested that liquor ads be banned from television, for a variety of reasons. People realized that alcohol had a net negative social consequence, even though those companies were wealthy enough to afford enormous advertising. The rule gained support and it was put into effect. The idea that rule could be passed today is inconceivable. The drug companies moved in to fill the gap, and now we are a nation of pill poppers. Incidentally, that ban on television liquor ads proved a bonanza for Playboy and Penthouse.
We could even go so far, Charmer, as to say, in the mean while, we have gone from listening to people like Mrs. Wilson and Billy Sunday to people whose thinking process resembles yours. Some call that progress.
