4 ms·

Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more m

Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marketplace. Legalising drugs would essentially force everyone to use drugs. That's the same reason why drugs are banned in professional sport. From my experience, drugs make people less altruistic. Although it does also make them more social (but social != altruism).

zkomp 8y ago
I do not believe you at all. This kind of puritanism and any abstaining (from coffee, tobacco, alcohol, sex, drugs, entertainment, etc) should be a personal life choice. Not mandated by law. Drugs have been since since forever, and prohibition never really worked. It even has not so hidden racist logic baked into it, targeting minorities, civil asset forfeiture, covert wars by letter soup agencies. It must end.
ppseafield 8y ago
> Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marketplace. Perhaps not everyone's goal is to compete in the workplace/marketplace? > Legalising drugs would essentially force everyone to use drugs. Just like legalizing alcohol means everyone is forced to drink alcohol? In the US prohibition brought us a surge of organized crime. Our current demand for illegal drugs creates a very, very successful business model for drug cartels in Mezo- and South America. I don't see how that's better. > That's the same reason why drugs are banned in professional sport. How's that going? The rules are regularly broken anyways, and all the doping happens in secret. Tons of professional and amateur athletes are doping in spite of the bans.
- thefounder 8y ago
  >> Just like legalizing alcohol means everyone is forced to drink alcohol? Well the fact is that most people drink alcohol, even kids causing more or less harm to others and to themselves. The regulation story is not really that pretty once once you see the effects on poor people/families! Now replace alcohol with cocaine or heroine and see some ugly effects. I would allow alcohol and drugs only if I could enforce a minimum age of 22-23 and proper education though and this only because I believe people should be allowed to control their life.
  - ppseafield 8y ago
    > Well the fact is that most people drink alcohol Most people drink alcohol =/= people are forced to drink alcohol. You've moved the goalpost. > minimum age of 22-23 and proper education Teens keep finding ways to drink and smoke, even though there are laws about selling to 18-21 year olds. The laws make it slightly harder, but in no way make it impossible. > I would allow... I believe people should be allowed to control their life. These two things are not compatible.
malmsteen 8y ago
have you try any ?
robotbikes 8y ago
This comment is funny on a lot of levels, especially because it contradicts the standard stereotypes about drug use. People have said many things about the I'll impact of using drugs but making people ruthlessly competing for resources so they can have more fun while high is not one of them. On the other hand a drug like cocaine has been associated with this type of stereotype and could be seen as a factor fueling the conspicuous consumption of resources by the ultra-rich. Marijuana and psychedelics in general tend to have been associated with influencing people to be less obsessed with materialistic ambitions. But really drugs in and of themselves are heavily influenced by the culture surrounding them and the experiences through which people engage in them. The marijuana capitalists could certainly attempt to market weed in such a way that people feel like they haven't really lived unless theyve done X while high but that is just an echo of the booze laden bikini beer commercials etc that the alcohol industry pushes. At some point I could see certain environments having social norms that push people to try drugs that would otherwise not just like it can be difficult to hang out in a bar without drinking if you otherwise don't have a personal prohibition against drinking alcohol. But weighing the damage caused by prohibition which is ultimately could been seen as being abused as an easy way to control minority communities through repression by the hands of the police and also facilitating the lucrative and oftentimes violent drug trade. If you look at Nixon's rational for creating the war on drugs it was very much about social control and repression and very little about health concerns. I think that even Timothy Leary advocated at one time for something akin to a pilots license to get legal access to powerful psychedelics. They are not toys and the way it is now the stigma and black market make it far more likely for them to be misused than in a world where they were treated with an appropriate level of respect in terms of their potential uses. Very few cultures that utilize altered states of consciousness do so without a certain level of ritual and cultural respect for their power.
wepple 8y ago
There seems to be a fairly long chain of leaps in logic in this argument. Take marijuana or alcohol for example, two of the most popular recreational drugs. You’re absolutely convinced that a Saturday night booze bender or big smoke up will drive them to work harder on Monday because they had such a rush?
JUDAS 8y ago
There is some merit here. Aside from sports which you mentioned, psychedelics and amphetamines especially are used by creatives. Writers, illustrators, directors, musicians and so on. Someone who would be "clean" would be at an ungodly disadvantage. Although with altruism and psychedelics specifically, I would have to disagree strongly, as they actually tend to almost bestow empathy upon people who use them, that is to say that, the effect of increase in empathy is so strong that it seems as if people around and including the person who's had the experience are devoid of it by comparison. This increase in sensitivity if anything would in turn lend itself to altruism.

zkomp 8y ago

I do not believe you at all. This kind of puritanism and any abstaining (from coffee, tobacco, alcohol, sex, drugs, entertainment, etc) should be a personal life choice. Not mandated by law. Drugs have been since since forever, and prohibition never really worked. It even has not so hidden racist logic baked into it, targeting minorities, civil asset forfeiture, covert wars by letter soup agencies. It must end.

ppseafield 8y ago

> Drugs desensitise people to life's "regular highs" which makes them seek out stronger, more stimulating experiences in their lives, which makes them want more money (since these experiences tend to be expensive), which makes people more competitive in the workplace/marketplace (and more likely to be dishonest and prioritise short term gains)... This makes it harder for non-drug-users to compete in the workplace/marketplace. Perhaps not everyone's goal is to compete in the workplace/marketplace? > Legalising drugs would essentially force everyone to use drugs. Just like legalizing alcohol means everyone is forced to drink alcohol? In the US prohibition brought us a surge of organized crime. Our current demand for illegal drugs creates a very, very successful business model for drug cartels in Mezo- and South America. I don't see how that's better. > That's the same reason why drugs are banned in professional sport. How's that going? The rules are regularly broken anyways, and all the doping happens in secret. Tons of professional and amateur athletes are doping in spite of the bans.

thefounder 8y ago
>> Just like legalizing alcohol means everyone is forced to drink alcohol? Well the fact is that most people drink alcohol, even kids causing more or less harm to others and to themselves. The regulation story is not really that pretty once once you see the effects on poor people/families! Now replace alcohol with cocaine or heroine and see some ugly effects. I would allow alcohol and drugs only if I could enforce a minimum age of 22-23 and proper education though and this only because I believe people should be allowed to control their life.
- ppseafield 8y ago
  > Well the fact is that most people drink alcohol Most people drink alcohol =/= people are forced to drink alcohol. You've moved the goalpost. > minimum age of 22-23 and proper education Teens keep finding ways to drink and smoke, even though there are laws about selling to 18-21 year olds. The laws make it slightly harder, but in no way make it impossible. > I would allow... I believe people should be allowed to control their life. These two things are not compatible.

malmsteen 8y ago

have you try any ?

robotbikes 8y ago

This comment is funny on a lot of levels, especially because it contradicts the standard stereotypes about drug use. People have said many things about the I'll impact of using drugs but making people ruthlessly competing for resources so they can have more fun while high is not one of them. On the other hand a drug like cocaine has been associated with this type of stereotype and could be seen as a factor fueling the conspicuous consumption of resources by the ultra-rich. Marijuana and psychedelics in general tend to have been associated with influencing people to be less obsessed with materialistic ambitions. But really drugs in and of themselves are heavily influenced by the culture surrounding them and the experiences through which people engage in them. The marijuana capitalists could certainly attempt to market weed in such a way that people feel like they haven't really lived unless theyve done X while high but that is just an echo of the booze laden bikini beer commercials etc that the alcohol industry pushes. At some point I could see certain environments having social norms that push people to try drugs that would otherwise not just like it can be difficult to hang out in a bar without drinking if you otherwise don't have a personal prohibition against drinking alcohol. But weighing the damage caused by prohibition which is ultimately could been seen as being abused as an easy way to control minority communities through repression by the hands of the police and also facilitating the lucrative and oftentimes violent drug trade. If you look at Nixon's rational for creating the war on drugs it was very much about social control and repression and very little about health concerns. I think that even Timothy Leary advocated at one time for something akin to a pilots license to get legal access to powerful psychedelics. They are not toys and the way it is now the stigma and black market make it far more likely for them to be misused than in a world where they were treated with an appropriate level of respect in terms of their potential uses. Very few cultures that utilize altered states of consciousness do so without a certain level of ritual and cultural respect for their power.

wepple 8y ago

There seems to be a fairly long chain of leaps in logic in this argument. Take marijuana or alcohol for example, two of the most popular recreational drugs. You’re absolutely convinced that a Saturday night booze bender or big smoke up will drive them to work harder on Monday because they had such a rush?

JUDAS 8y ago

There is some merit here. Aside from sports which you mentioned, psychedelics and amphetamines especially are used by creatives. Writers, illustrators, directors, musicians and so on. Someone who would be "clean" would be at an ungodly disadvantage. Although with altruism and psychedelics specifically, I would have to disagree strongly, as they actually tend to almost bestow empathy upon people who use them, that is to say that, the effect of increase in empathy is so strong that it seems as if people around and including the person who's had the experience are devoid of it by comparison. This increase in sensitivity if anything would in turn lend itself to altruism.