The Argument I Could Always Win
A convincing defence of drinking can still leave the most useful question unanswered.
I could make a convincing case that my drinking was under control. I knew when I had work the next morning. I could point to people who drank more. I could stop for a while if I decided to.
I had assembled so much evidence for the defence that I rarely had to examine the question. As a courtroom strategy it was excellent. As a way of understanding myself, less so.
What I could not explain was why I kept returning to something I spent so much time defending. Or why giving it up altogether felt less like a sensible decision and more like someone had proposed bricking up the fire exit.
Winning the argument gave me relief. It did not give me freedom.
The question that eventually helped was simpler: if alcohol was merely an optional pleasure, why did I need it to remain an option?
An original reflection by Theo Luke Dornan. Independent and not affiliated with Alcoholics Anonymous or AA World Services.