3 ms·

It only compromises your integrity if you're claiming that you're not doing it -- in my experience, most people microdosing LSD don't brag about how they're not

It only compromises your integrity if you're claiming that you're not doing it -- in my experience, most people microdosing LSD don't brag about how they're not doping. Lance Armstrong, however.... I personally am on the fence about LSD microdosing (and relatedly, most nootropics). There's evidence on both sides and much of it likely comes down to personal psychology and physiology. I think we are going to have to accept the future where unenhanced humans are (largely) obsolete at the top (say, 0.1% or 0.01%), though: if it's not drugs, then it'll be cybernetic implants. I think we might actually agree at a deeper level, and disagree how to address it: you seem to be interested in regulating the actions of people to prevent a tragedy of the commons situation, while I think we need to change the fundamentally exploitative economic structure that's precipitating the tragedy; I think both of us are more concerned with the coercive aspect of the problem than that people are doping. I don't want people to be desparate for an edge, but I also think people have a fundamental right to burn brighter for less time if they want to. But I don't like the ratcheting of that becoming necessary for survival any more than you do.

M_Grey 10y ago
It definitely sounds like I want to regulate, but for all that I see these as problems, I see prohibition and the usual course of hamfisted regulation as even worse. I accept that people have varied natures and drives, and some will seek edges to the point of self-destruction. Of course, some few will find real edges and prosper too. I would dream of the kind of solution you're talking about... changing the landscape, but it's hard to imagine that happening in a positive way anytime soon. You're right in your conclusion about the right of people to push themselves, even to destruction. Imagine if the Curies had been told to quit with the experimentation by modern Health and Safety?! The problem is... Japan. Look at what it's like to work in Japan. They have all of these ideas about what you need to do to be working "110%" (roughly translated). You stay late, leave after the boss, drink like a fish, and a bunch of other things that largely do not improve life or productivity. If the search for an edge were not so tightly bound with how work cultures change, permanently, it would be less of a concern. Still, the solution, whatever it may be, is not regulating essential freedoms.

M_Grey 10y ago

It definitely sounds like I want to regulate, but for all that I see these as problems, I see prohibition and the usual course of hamfisted regulation as even worse. I accept that people have varied natures and drives, and some will seek edges to the point of self-destruction. Of course, some few will find real edges and prosper too. I would dream of the kind of solution you're talking about... changing the landscape, but it's hard to imagine that happening in a positive way anytime soon. You're right in your conclusion about the right of people to push themselves, even to destruction. Imagine if the Curies had been told to quit with the experimentation by modern Health and Safety?! The problem is... Japan. Look at what it's like to work in Japan. They have all of these ideas about what you need to do to be working "110%" (roughly translated). You stay late, leave after the boss, drink like a fish, and a bunch of other things that largely do not improve life or productivity. If the search for an edge were not so tightly bound with how work cultures change, permanently, it would be less of a concern. Still, the solution, whatever it may be, is not regulating essential freedoms.