Is this intuition coherent? What is the nature of this me? — Inyenzi

I believe that it is coherent. The future you is the past and present you. You are the same person from when you were born to when you die. There isn't any instance where you lose consciousness and another "you" takes over.

Yeah, I heard the withdrawals can be pretty bad. One person told me in confidence that he would rather break his leg or arm than go through an opioid withdrawal. That being said, the inevitability of the withdrawals should give you some consideration about human rationality or rather irrationality.

Painkillers?

I don't know where you live but at least in the Netherlands you can get support in weening off of drugs. It would make sense to get that support lined up now before you run out of drugs and that way, hopefully the worst effects of withdrawal can be managed. Good luck.

The expectance of suffering is the focus on suffering - bringing about suffering.
Suffering is - the tangling of desire with what is.
If you simply take things as they come and go - victory and defeat dissipate, with them suffering and ecstasy. Leaving a serenity, like that of the clouds.

So, should the future concern you?
Think thusly: When the future arrives, it will arrive in the moment.
All the suffering of the future, will be in the present.
When you worry of the future, your suffering has already begun.

Smoke lots of pot.

You won't feel any less pain...

...but you will enjoy it.

All you have is an intuition that you call your "future self", an intuition which you currently experience and which is therefore a part of your immediate present. So planning to avoid opiate withdrawal is rational in the present in order to satisfy your present intuition called "future self".

Conversely, suppose that you are presently benefiting from a sense of well-being that you attribute to giving up opiates many months ago. All you have is a present intuition called "my past self giving up opiates", an intuition which is again part of your immediate present.

I think of myself this way:

Yesterday, any notion I had of 'tomorrow', including of my "tomorrow's self", in fact referred to yesterday and only to yesterday, since today didn't exist yesterday.

Yes, the issue is that we treat the self as a non-temporal abstract object, when in fact it is not all that abstract in the context of time itself.

"Should the future concern me?"

Nah! No reason for you to worry about the future. Just carry on as if there was no tomorrow! (just joking)

The future should concern you, me, everyone especially when there is something we can do about it. It makes sense to save today for tomorrow's unexpected expenses. It makes sense to consider how yesterday brought about today will bring about tomorrow.

There is no point worrying about an asteroid killing you, because, chances are, you won't know about it in advance. (There might be some warning for a general area, like southern Africa.)

Worrying or not worrying about the future is, of course, always a gamble. You might go through the pain of withdrawal, all that misery, only to discover that you have an incurable cancer. Or, you might go through all the unpleasantness of withdrawal, only to discover the heroin fairy has left you a life-time supply under your pillow (and bed, probably -- wouldn't all fit under your pillow).

I'm assuming that your opiate scenario is a hypothetical.

I know, from reading Dr. Science (He knows more than I do; he has a masters degree -- IN SCIENCE!) that I have recycled through my corporeal cells several times since I was born -- save the brain, maybe the heart muscle. Legally, I am the same person I was 72 years ago, and I feel like there is continuity as far back as I can remember (like 68 years ago). Something drastic has to happen to break that sense of continuity -- like a run in with a brick wall, a brain tumor, alzheimers, or something like that.

Hmm, I sense a lot of bitterness in this post. Expectations change due to circumstances within or beyond our control.

I sense a lot of bitterness in this post — Wallows

It's dirty work but somebody has to do it.

I think the OP is suggesting an argument against presentism (only that which exists now has genuine existence): It would not make sense to care about something that does not exist. Caring about something is having a relation with that thing. But if there exists are relation, how can one of its subjects not exist?

What is the nature of this me? — Inyenzi

An interesting question. What is this I/me? There seems to be a paradox lurking in its understanding.

Think of ideas which shape you and form your Weltanschauung. It seems that, from a very cursory examination, people are confused about what I/me means. Sometimes people think weltanschauung = I
- they respond to your behavior which originates from your worldview and judge the I/me.

Other times they think the I/me is separate, with the ability to adopt a weltanschauung and argue with the purpose of encouraging/discouraging the I/me from a particular philosophy.

Which view is correct? The two positions are distinct, one is like judging a person for who s/he is and the other is like forming an opinion by the way s/he is dressed.