Is it likely to be a problem socially if I don't drink at university?

i'm so glad i'm not the only person thinking this! unfortunately i'm going to Oxford Brookes, so we can't be non-drinkers together haha. I think my plan is during freshers week and big outings and stuff i'll go out and stick to non-alcoholic drinks so then i get the friendship basis, so then in the future they're more understanding and stuff.

Thanks to everyone else; I feel quite a bit more confident now and am glad to know how many people respect it. Glad I started the thread

py0alb, your argument is completely floored. I wish you would have not joined this thread as all I wanted was an answer. You can not compare sex, friends and good food with alcohol as they are all natural and our bodies encourage them; alcohol artificially stimulates our brains which provokes a response without any benefit to the survival of our species.

In short, there is nothing alcohol can offer me and about a dozen reasons why I avoid it, if you want me to list them then just say but ultimately stay on the thread to answer the question or your answers are rendered redundant.

Thanks to everyone else; I feel quite a bit more confident now and am glad to know how many people respect it. Glad I started the thread

If you're old enough to be allowed to use the computer unsupervised and still believe in the naturalist fallacy, then Cambridge probably isn't the place for you anyway I'm afraid.

You mean to tell me that you don't believe some things are natural and some things are generated by man? That architecture grows out of the ground and cavemen used to excavate pre-made spears or buy them from the store of nature? Or maybe you believe that the world is made and controlled entirely by machines and we use our bodies to supply energy... at least your originality surpasses your intelligence. I believe in no fallacy, however, I believe you are a phallus.

Your comment makes about as much sense as your existence; Cambridge are looking for people who want to learn, test and explore their knowledge to discover new ideas; not to single out people of certain believe who can not pose a valid argument (quite the opposite). I am a man of my own beliefs and if you don't have the common decency to respect them then you don't deserve to partake in any form of argument relating to them!

People are sick of the way you are trying to assert knowledge you do not possess and unless you can put a single valid point across then nobody will respect you or your input.

Have you heard of the naturalist fallacy? Accidentally repeating it isn't the same thing btw.

try and leave the ad hominems aside, and get on with the debate. Alcohol predates domestication of vegetables and animals: if you don't believe in drinking alcohol because its "artificial", then I hope you only eat seeds and berries.

My original point was that your comparisons were incorrect as three were natural and the other wasn't;

and it is the way alcohol works that is bad.

Your last point also makes no sense, alcohol does predate it but it was originally used in very small volumes as a way of making drinking water safer; it was so week you would find it hard to get tipsy. Domestication is beside the point, humans ate meat and vegetables before they drank alcohol, the fact that they were later domesticated bears no relation; our species did not spend the majority of its existence eating seeds, we hunted animals...

Rubbish



Idiotic



Completely inaccurate, in multiple ways.


I believe that is a hat-trick!

Ok then. WHY is it Rubbish? WHY is it Idiotic? WHY is it completely inaccurate in multiple ways?

You have to justify yourself. All you are doing is acting as if you are instantly right in all that you are saying and that everyone will bow down to your assumed knowledge.

I'll be honest, I don't like people like you and unless you actually put a proper argument together nearly everyone in the thread will dislike you.

1) is the naturalistic fallacy. What is unnatural about a naturally occuring product exactly? The chemical effect on the brain is extremely similar to the effect of sexual intercourse.
2) is just meaningless gibberish. What is bad exactly?
3) is completely wrong. Alcohol was used as a drink - for the purposes of getting drunk - long before its antiseptic qualities were known. The main constituent of our diet before the invention of farming were seeds and berries. You probably envisage us hunting dinosaurs

What is unnatural is the way that it stimulates our mind in the same way without offering anything positive towards our species at all; it is an unnatural influence to our minds. Especially in my case, I can not think of a single thing that alcohol could offer me that I want or that I don't already have.

To me the question is what is good. I have no answers I can give to that question.

That dinosaur comment was a poor use of sarcasm... Before we drank there is evidence of weapons that were used for hunting; we did eat seeds and berries, but that is not all. The rest of nature does not drink alcohol but they eat meat, vegetables, fruit, berries etc.

There is nothing unnatural whatsoever about the way it stimulates our mind. All food and drink items cause a certain mix of chemicals to be released, alcohol is just a more pleasant sensation than many others. I assume you don't drink tea or coffee either? Sex and physical activity also stimulate our mind in a similar manner. I assume you avoid those activities for a similar reason?




Lots of things. It tastes incredible, it makes you feel incredible, and it helps people become more confident and outgoing.



Actually there are examples of animals that do drink alcohol, but that is irrelevent. The rest of nature do not use fire or the wheel either or fly in planes, but that is no reason not to use the fantastic technology we have invented to make our lives better, alcohol being one of the absolute best of those inventions.