I've been dying to discuss what is perhaps the most popularly used, yet frequently overlooked, logical fallacy in the treatment and recovery culture. It essentially leads us to assume that due to the literal physiological nature of the addictive process, the addicted individual has no control over his behavior.
Those promoting the brain disease model are intentionally misleading when they reason that "addiction is a physiological condition of the brain, the brain literally changes its structure, ergo, willpower and morality have nothing to do with addiction." What they are doing here is deliberately muddying the waters of the debate to create a fundamental misconception.
Let's analyze; in the above statement, what exactly is the speaker suggesting the addict has no control over? Well, the speaker in this case, never actually specifies, which I find interesting - they are intentionally vague, and would like to give the listener the impression that the poorly defined phenomenon of addiction in general, and all associated behavior, is something that the addict has no control over.
Ideally, the listener will subsequently conclude that this absence of choice or control would apply to the behaviors which we associate with addiction. When speaking in such deliberately vague terms, this is exactly the goal the speaker has in mind.
This assumption is wrong. The addict has complete control over his behavior. The only thing that the addicted has no control over, at least not in the literal sense, is the condition of his brain at the moment - indeed, willpower and morality have nothing to do with the biology of ones brain. Simply put, just because an individual does not have immediate control over his brain chemistry, this does not mean he has no control over how he chooses reacts to this biological disposition (reaction which takes place through planned, deliberate motor movements - i.e. behavior).