Drug Addict or Regular User? (Day 87)

Who determines the "label" placed upon a human being who uses marijuana (For instance)?

Is there any difference within people's reaction towards one word/concept or another?

How can only one concept create a complete misunderstanding towards another human being?

I once was talking with a friend about the language, words, concepts, etc. and understanding how only ONE WORD/CONCEPT can create an alternate reality or even a "distorted reality" that has nothing to do with the real reality.

Within this post I am not writing against or in favor of drugs/marihuana. I am only using the topic as an example of how we create "our reality" through the words/concepts we speak/express/accept.

So - The one who determines the label whether a person is a "drug addict" or a "regular user" might be a psychologist or any other person that has the Power and Knowledge to apply a survey and then come up with a diagnostic.

It will depend on the questions included within the survey. It will depend on the approach/paradigm they apply. It will depend on the psychologist's cognitive bias.

Now - If you compare the concept of "drug addict" v/s "regular user" it seems that everyone who smokes weed would prefer to be called a "regular user" instead of a "drug addict", because the concept of "drug addict" contains a more "negative" charge and as a consequence, the reaction from society towards a person labeled as a "drug addict" would be "negative" and linked to delinquency and other "negative" stuff existing within the collective imagination. But, the concept of "regular user" seems more related to a person who works, pays his/her taxes, has a family, etc -  More "positive" than the other one (at least to the eyes of moral and society).

Therefore, it is interesting to realize how only one concept or word can build a whole reality/perception, because most people don't question the words/concepts they speak/express. They just take/accept them "by default" and then they understand through inter-subjectivity. In other words, we are conditioned/pre-programmed even within the way we interpret and analyze what surrounds us.

So, when we come to observe a specific phenomenon, we are already starting from a pre-programmed configuration instead of doing it from a clear/neutral starting point.

Do you think that how we understand someone will determine how we interact with that person? - I would say yes.

How do we come to understand someone before meeting them? Through what we think about them.

Do we think through our language? Yes. Therefore, our language is directly related to how we think about other people. So, if we do not deconstruct/re-define our language…will our ability to understand another human being be distorted or accurate?


I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to not question/deconstruct the words/concepts that I express and only use them as they come "by default".

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to speak system language without being aware of how that will determine the way I see the world.

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have a distorted understanding about people and the world because of the way I have used the language.

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to not see, realize and understand that the language is directly linked to the way I think, because I think using the language I speak/express.

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to participate in inter-subjetivity as the collective way of interpreting and analyzing the different phenomena that I have come to interact with in this world.

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to not see, realize and understand that through deconstructing and re-defining the language I speak I can change the way I see and understand the world.

Self-Corrective/Commitment Statements

When and as I see myself interacting with other human beings, I stop and breathe. I see, realize and understand that I am communicating through language, therefore, I have to be aware of the words/concepts I am expressing, because that will build a specific reality within the micro-universe among the people involved in that context.

I commit myself to become more aware of the words/concepts I speak, in order to then be able to deconstruct/re-define new/old words/concepts that are presented to me in my world, so then I can approach that "reality" in a more critical and constructive manner fostering what is best for all instead of supporting the fuck up that has been existing here through the words/concepts we have accepted and allowed to use/express to define/interpret/analyze people/the world/reality.