ABSTRACT
Addiction can be explained and understood from many different perspectives. The disease concept just happens to be the one explanation that has the longest history and, more important, the most practical reasons for its utilization. It has been, so far, the only perspective that has had any long-standing pragmatic influence on successful treatment outcome and recovery. Historically, a multitude of alternative views have been presented from behavioral, spiritual, cognitive, transactional, phenomenological, cultural, sociological, biological, genetic, existential, psychological, and epidemiological perspectives. Many of these explanations have had much merit and plausibility. However, only one-the disease concept-has demonstrated any consistent benefit over any extended period of time in the treatment of addiction. In short, the disease concept has so far stood the test of time. New methods, with all their initial promise, excitement, and elaborate explanations, have faded faster than last year's latest pop-music star. This is not to imply that tradition and orthodox should rule the medical sciences. To the contrary, alternative explanations, especially those that either complement the pragmatic aspects of another perspective or, in the case of addiction, provide more subtle and thorough descriptions of the same phenomena, are crucial if the chemically dependent person is going to be helped more effectively in the future.
