'That does it, I will never gamble again, rien de plus and place your bets my arse, I have a family to think of this cannot go on.'
The addict (or any addictive behaviour come to that) after losing all and fearing for him/herself and his family, retreats to the reflective behavior of resolving never to gamble/drink/drug again.
This motive thus enters into his facticity as a choice he has made; and, as long as he retains his fear, of losing all, it may appear to him that this resolve actually has causal force in keeping him from drugs/drink..
However, one evening he confronts the gaming tables/dealer/liqueur store and is overcome with anguish at the recognition that his resolve, while still “there,” retains none of its power: it is an object for consciousness but is not (and never could have been) something in consciousness
(so much for resolutions) that was determining his actions.
So, In order for his determination and his/her avowal 'never to do that again' (gamble/drink/drug/smoke) it to influence his behavior he has to avow it afresh.
But this is just what he cannot do; indeed, just this is what he hoped the original resolve would spare him from having to do. He will have to “remake” the self ( a Foucaldian notion) who was in the original situation of fear and threat.
As is the case most often with addicts s/he will try to relieve himself of chains of 'freedom' by giving in to the urge to gamble/drink/drug/ and chalking it up to “deeper” motives that overcame the initial resolve, problems from his childhood perhaps.
But anguish can recur with regard to this strategy as well—for instance, if he needs a loan to continue gambling and must convince someone that he is “as good as his word.” The possibilities for self-deception in such cases are endless.
The point here is that resolve, resolution cannot be 'in' consciousness as a fixity. just as the 'self' is not a fixity, however the remaking of the pliable, porous thing called the 'self'' is