As far as num de plum goes...I don't hate drugs because society tells me to...I hate them because they steal all my money, are killing me, and suck every ounce of joy out of my life unless I'm high
I'm hopeful that you'll consider and think over my argument, here. However, you have the liberty to dismiss, reject, deny, and/or ignore it if you don't really care for any real advice, but instead just want some pacifying reassurance of your own foregone conclusions thoughtlessly spoon-fed to you with a superficial veneer of advice.
1.) Money is itself a social construct. Therefore, a life lived addicted to money is a life lived addicted to society.
2.) The absence of money is undesirable to the individual because society regards the abundance of money as a virtue.
3.) The repercussions of not having an abundance of money only exist because society creates them by appending a price tag on everything, down to the most essential of necessities such as food or water or liberty.
4.) Getting rid of the heroin to have more money is no different than getting rid of money to have more heroin. You're simply shuffling the addiction from heroin to money. Now then, instead of living life happily devoted to the consumption of heroin you're living life miserably devoted to the accumulation of cash. That is utterly preposterous.
5.) What is the purpose of having money if not to spend it, anyway? Dead men can't carry gold to their graves, nor would they have any real use for it if they could. Hoarding money is as much a pathological obsession as is abusing heroin. Moreover, spending money by being a shopaholic is not dissimilar to spending money by being an alcoholic, so to say as an example.
6.) Since you see nothing wrong in being addicted to extending your life expectancy or increasing your supply of money, one can logically deduce that it is not addiction in general that bothers you, but rather socially-unapproved addictions that bother you. Thus, the individual's addiction is, you tacitly suggest, supposedly justified if and only if it is endorsed, supported, and shared by society at large.
7.) Heroin kills, but so does everything else. You're going to die from something anyway. All of life is a wager and every life ends in death and decay. What does it matter to oneself if they get hit by a bus or get cancer or overdose on some drug, outside of personal preference? Besides, a drug-induced death is comparatively a much milder way of dying than almost every other way I can imagine. Moreover, how many people are as lucky as addicts to die doing what they love or to die for something they'd really die for such as dope?
8.) You claim the absence of heroin diminishes your life's joy. How sensible would it be then to prolong the absence of heroin by overcoming the addiction, rather than, say, using more heroin more often? For example, humans feel less joy when deprived of air to breathe, but it never occurs to them that the air, as opposed to the absence thereof, is problematic and needs to be removed.
In summary, you—like all people—have established a set of extraordinarily strange, exceptionally irrational, and immensely convoluted notions with which to both justify and deny your addiction to social acceptability and dependence upon normative social influence.
This is the essence of psychological sublimation in action.
hang in there
