3 ms·

>and are often recreational drug users themselves (i.e. too close to the issue) I think this is an interesting thought. As a recreational drug user myself (I d

>and are often recreational drug users themselves (i.e. too close to the issue) I think this is an interesting thought. As a recreational drug user myself (I drink alcohol sometimes), I do indeed feel like drugs should be legalized, so as to enable regulation. But I don't feel like me dealing with the subject in my day to day life should have a bearing on whether I'm able to have an informed opinion on the matter. It's like saying rape victims are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed.

the-printer 3y ago
> It's like saying rape victims are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed. No...no.
- wesselbindt 3y ago
  Exactly, I completely agree, it's a very silly thought! What makes drug use different from my example that people aren't able to have an informed opinion on it when they're involved?
  - blitzar 3y ago
    It's like saying rapists are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed. Drug users are not the victims
    - wesselbindt 3y ago
      Oops you're absolutely right. It's like saying drivers have skewed opinions on driving legislation because they're to close to the subject matter.
boringuser2 3y ago
Literally everyone opposes rape.
- wesselbindt 3y ago
  Yep, me too. However legislation on x (be it rape, recreational drugs, whatever), still requires discussion, and there's always ifs and buts, and the idea that someone involved in x is somehow not someone to be taken seriously on the matter strikes me as wrong.
  - boringuser2 3y ago
    Its fallacious only if I reject an argument you propose with that logic. Obviously, in the application of a logical argument, you need to respond to logic with logic. That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit -- we implicitly understand that this is part of the rationalization process for antisocial behaviors. Also, yeah, the rape "analogy" was both socially awkward and horrible, a double whammy. Generally, rape isn't a great topic for conversation.
    - RoyalHenOil 3y ago
      >That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit... How is that obvious? It's not at all obvious to me that, for example, MLK Jr was not an authority on the justice of civil disobedience because he himself practiced civil disobedience. If we disregard the opinions of people who think doing X is justified and therefore proceed to do X, then we bias ourselves toward the opinions of people who oppose X, as they will be overrepresented in the sample of people who choose not to do X. Such cherry picking is not a logically sound method for developing an honest, unbiased worldview.
      - boringuser2 3y ago
        How is it not obvious that a legal transgressor would justify their transgression? The fact that bad people generally don't feel like bad people is a universal understanding of the human condition. Not interested in making comparisons to someone that you can't separate from a type of neo-sainthood. Anyhow, having an unpopular opinion isn't antisocial or illegal. Buying heroin is.

the-printer 3y ago

> It's like saying rape victims are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed. No...no.

wesselbindt 3y ago
Exactly, I completely agree, it's a very silly thought! What makes drug use different from my example that people aren't able to have an informed opinion on it when they're involved?
- blitzar 3y ago
  It's like saying rapists are too close to rape and therefore their opinions on rape legislation are skewed. Drug users are not the victims
  - wesselbindt 3y ago
    Oops you're absolutely right. It's like saying drivers have skewed opinions on driving legislation because they're to close to the subject matter.

boringuser2 3y ago

Literally everyone opposes rape.

wesselbindt 3y ago
Yep, me too. However legislation on x (be it rape, recreational drugs, whatever), still requires discussion, and there's always ifs and buts, and the idea that someone involved in x is somehow not someone to be taken seriously on the matter strikes me as wrong.
- boringuser2 3y ago
  Its fallacious only if I reject an argument you propose with that logic. Obviously, in the application of a logical argument, you need to respond to logic with logic. That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit -- we implicitly understand that this is part of the rationalization process for antisocial behaviors. Also, yeah, the rape "analogy" was both socially awkward and horrible, a double whammy. Generally, rape isn't a great topic for conversation.
  - RoyalHenOil 3y ago
    >That being said, it's also obvious that a criminal isn't really a good authority on the justness of the crime they commit... How is that obvious? It's not at all obvious to me that, for example, MLK Jr was not an authority on the justice of civil disobedience because he himself practiced civil disobedience. If we disregard the opinions of people who think doing X is justified and therefore proceed to do X, then we bias ourselves toward the opinions of people who oppose X, as they will be overrepresented in the sample of people who choose not to do X. Such cherry picking is not a logically sound method for developing an honest, unbiased worldview.
    - boringuser2 3y ago
      How is it not obvious that a legal transgressor would justify their transgression? The fact that bad people generally don't feel like bad people is a universal understanding of the human condition. Not interested in making comparisons to someone that you can't separate from a type of neo-sainthood. Anyhow, having an unpopular opinion isn't antisocial or illegal. Buying heroin is.