I'm a drinker and proud of the contributions I still make to society, but also that I won't hang on for too long past my invitation to stay on this rock. There are people better than me who should occupy it.

And while we know that ancient civilisations drank alcohol, we don’t know how widespread or frequent it was, was it just an elite? Was it a very occasional ceremony (as some indigenous tribes still do, using psychoactive substances as part of group rituals once or twice per year)?

But how certain are you that most of the problems that we struggle with today aren't a result of insufficient ritual sacrifice? Maybe we need to heed the lesson taught to us by the movie Cabin in the Woods.

... Because the process of making beer consists of boiling the wort!

But if you can boil water to make beer, you can just, well, boil water to drink.

People have known since antiquity how to make water potable.

Also, putting sterilized water into airtight sterilized containers, as normally done with beer, works well. Carry a can of Liquid Death with you instead of a can of Bud, the weight is the same.

Maybe humanity is not that hopeless.

So if you're going to be a moron, then you can claim that the Bible teaches that the world was created in six days 6,000 years ago, with the light from distant stars already in transit.

"Alcohol - the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems."

Many games do, though.

However what you describe - effectively novelty seeking, which is very human - is a far cry from the chronic alcohol culture that permeates society.

The former is healthy exploration, what we have however is chronic dissociation.

I hope in the future biochemical augmentation will be just as accepted as electromechanical.

I'm not sure that electromechanical modification is accepted today. Things like limb replacements are now accepted for those with injuries - but I don't think there is widespread acceptance of mechanical augmentation for _enhancement_. There is a grey area though for tool usage which is acceptable and what is "augmentation".

edit: for the non-Californians, this is a reference to proposition 65. https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/07/opinion-californias-j...

Everything in moderation including moderation, as the saying goes.

Yes. There is a related issue, which is that a lot of people just can't accept that something they like is actually detrimental. Since I've never drank, I never experienced this specific kind of cognitive dissonance (if you can even call it that), but I've seen in so many people, it's depressing. There are some things that I love despite knowing that they are bad for your health (like certain unhealhty foods), but I would hate to deceive myself about it (knowing that they are bad allows me to manage the risks, like being aware that I should reduce consumption if I'm indulging too much). But a lot of people have the exact opposite attitude. Which is curious, because the damages are some times very obvious.

Is driving in any amount self-destructive? Eating bacon? If we're going to call mildly (or moderately) unhealthy things "self-destructive", what term should we use for... well, truly self-destructive things?

If it's not alcohol it's drugs, if it's not drugs it's gambling. If it's not gambling it's approaching women at the bar. If it's not approaching women at the bar it's speeding.

People have a deep need to do something that entails risk or that it's frowned upon (or both).

Cultures where this doesn't happen such as Japan are essentially dying and going extinct and so is Europe and US aelbit at a slower rate. Will rightfully get replaced by cultures who DGAF and have a high turnover rate such as the Arab world, Indians and Sub-Saharan Africa

We don't always (want to) make optimal decisions based only on how objectively healthy they are, and that's perfectly fine, and not really "self-destructive" in the sense you're implying. There's an adage somewhere about living health and becoming a beautiful, healthy corpse some day.

Alcohol is bad. Maybe cutting it entirely from your life will get you an average 0.56% increased life span. Will it be worth it?

This isn't to say being a drunkard is good, or that widespread alcohol consumption can't be a problem (see Russia's and native Americans' history).

Might still have a glass of bubbly in celebration of something or enjoy the occasional wine tour at a vineyard, but I have no real intent to continue drinking regularly. The health tradeoffs aren't worth it to me.

Note also that unfortunately it seems women are much more sensitive to the risks of alcohol than men. I'm not a big fan of this "mommy needs her wine" culture we have.

Society believes alcohol changes personality, and that drunk people are less themselves. Thus, they judge drunk people less harshly (including themselves).

But alcohol doesn't actually change personality. It only makes your brain work slower. It doesn't make it go anywhere it otherwise wouldn't, you just get there later.

What we've developed is a way to split up when we're accountable. I promise you that split is zero-sum: the more leniently they judge your social behaviour when drunk, the more harshly they judge it when you're sober.

It's an example of bad high-status science suppressing good low-status science. Neurochemists asking, "Why does alcohol make us do this?" without checking with cultural anthropologists if it actually does make us do this, or if it just makes "WEIRD" people do it.

I did not say it was all in your head, by the way. The lower reaction times and slower thinking is obviously real (and present everywhere).

I suggest studying epistemology

So maybe organized, community-oriented religion is the right suggestion? Or some secular organization devoted to community betterment?

If you aren't already in such dire straits as to require this kind of help, it really seems like a form of self-harm to me. I've met many people who've gone through 12 steps. Some advocate for it, some protest it. I'm genuinely happy for people to get the help they need wherever they can find it. But I absolutely would not recommend it to someone that isn't already so desperate that they're willing to give up their autonomy because they don't know what else to do.

Yes something is deeply wrong with human nature, and human existence is largely suffering no matter how you try to mask it.

I agree that it's a bandaid but what solution are you proposing? There is of course the option to simply exit the game, but for various biological reasons this is a real challenge.

Poisoning ourselves regularly and feeling good doing it sounds like a reasonable compromise.

That is really interesting.

So, what do you do now instead of Beer and Whiskey?

Edit: Don't tell me it's karma.

I was recently at a very small but upscale restaurant and they had a no-alcohol dinner flight pairing that was fantastic.

There is so much variety and no downsides!

And caffeine from coffee/tea while fine in moderation, becomes really bad if abused as part of a pattern of chronic sleep deprivation which is really common.

I have probably had a sum total of 10 mocktails in my life - each of which has less caffeine and sugar than a half can of coca-cola

I was just being a pedantic jerk reacting to: "no downsides."

There are often possible downsides to anything one can do ... but that doesn't mean it isn't something worth doing. I love to hike - I could break my ankle or fall of cliff - but that doesn't mean I should never hike.

Define "healthy". Breathing toxic fumes on the roadways isn't healthy, and yet most of us prefer to live near civilization. You can't exclude one side of a tradeoff, you have to measure them against each other.

Moderate alcohol consumption may provide some health benefits, such as:

    - Reducing your risk of developing and dying of heart disease
    - Possibly reducing your risk of ischemic stroke (when the arteries to your brain become narrowed or blocked, causing severely reduced blood flow)
    - Possibly reducing your risk of diabetes

I don't think any study really proved that a glass of beer a month would do anything to your life expectancy no?

For populations between 15–39 years old, the theoretical minimum risk capped at 0.603 standard drinks per day.

So a "safe" amount of alcohol for the majority drinking population is less than one standard drink per day

For populations over 40 years old, the theoretical minimum risk is capped at 1.87 drinks per day

"This study had various limitations that should be taken into account when interpreting the findings. First, we did not incorporate patterns of drinking, and therefore did not distinguish between individuals who infrequently engage in heavy episodic drinking and those who consume the same amount of alcohol over several days."

From what I'm reading it seems like the study was looking at habitual drinker, either drinking regularly or in big amount.

There's no rollover. If you don't drink during the week, that doesn't mean you get five drinks on the weekend. Each day is independent.

Good luck with these calculations if you’re using imperial units. And you’re tipsy. But for metric countries it’s not too hard a calculation.

It is in our nature to disassociate with reality/consciousness imo, for many of us it's too much to handle.

There are much better alternatives out there and I wish they weren't so demonized.

Yup, this seems quite accurate to me. Hence the desire to regularly dissociate.

Incas drank alcohol regularly and I doubt they were stressed for their 9 to 5 job.