3 ms·

I agree with you, but the argument that smart people smoking weed somehow makes it OK holds no water. After all, doctors were promoting cigarettes not long ago,

by imiric 2y ago

I agree with you, but the argument that smart people smoking weed somehow makes it OK holds no water. After all, doctors were promoting cigarettes not long ago, and many, many of the smartest people on Earth smoked them.

Gud 2y ago
Why does it “hold no water”? Why do I need to justify my weed use at all?
- InvertedRhodium 2y ago
  That is a very good question, why did you? Note that I vape weed several times a week, so I’m not passing judgement. Just seems odd to justify the use over several paragraphs and then ask that question.
  - atlas_hugged 2y ago
    Wrong guy
- imiric 2y ago
  Justify it or don't, I don't care. I'm just saying that using the argument that smart people doing it makes it OK is a fallacy (appeal to authority).
  - atlas_hugged 2y ago
    Useless pedantry it is then.
atlas_hugged 2y ago
The context, which is always important, was too provide several counter examples of there being no obviously major impairment to intelligence that would make a person dumb and lazy. Laziness is basically a myth/misunderstanding of the underlying cause. The use of the word is made in ignorance of the science. Though I’ll admit, while high, my thinking is different, it isn’t dumber. I don’t suddenly forget facts I knew beforehand. The speed at which I solve a puzzle would be slower, thus I wouldn’t operate heavy machinery, but that’s not because I have lost the knowledge of how to do so. It’s (partly) related to the altered state of the mechanisms that affect my perception of time (among other things). For a supposedly pro-science website, there always so many (often proudly) ignorant takes on scientific research. I think I’m just now starting to realize that by trying to avoid the arm chair quarterbacking amateurs that couldn’t perform anything they criticize people about (in athletics), I’ve just traded it for armchair quarterbacking of scientists about something they know nothing about. Yet here I am getting sucked into doing (almost) the same thing (with only a motivational difference of attempting to identify poorly constructed studies that will end up being fuel for the anti-bodily autonomy crowd.

by imiric 2y ago

Gud 2y ago

Why does it “hold no water”? Why do I need to justify my weed use at all?

InvertedRhodium 2y ago
That is a very good question, why did you? Note that I vape weed several times a week, so I’m not passing judgement. Just seems odd to justify the use over several paragraphs and then ask that question.
- atlas_hugged 2y ago
  Wrong guy
imiric 2y ago
Justify it or don't, I don't care. I'm just saying that using the argument that smart people doing it makes it OK is a fallacy (appeal to authority).
- atlas_hugged 2y ago
  Useless pedantry it is then.

atlas_hugged 2y ago

The context, which is always important, was too provide several counter examples of there being no obviously major impairment to intelligence that would make a person dumb and lazy. Laziness is basically a myth/misunderstanding of the underlying cause. The use of the word is made in ignorance of the science. Though I’ll admit, while high, my thinking is different, it isn’t dumber. I don’t suddenly forget facts I knew beforehand. The speed at which I solve a puzzle would be slower, thus I wouldn’t operate heavy machinery, but that’s not because I have lost the knowledge of how to do so. It’s (partly) related to the altered state of the mechanisms that affect my perception of time (among other things). For a supposedly pro-science website, there always so many (often proudly) ignorant takes on scientific research. I think I’m just now starting to realize that by trying to avoid the arm chair quarterbacking amateurs that couldn’t perform anything they criticize people about (in athletics), I’ve just traded it for armchair quarterbacking of scientists about something they know nothing about. Yet here I am getting sucked into doing (almost) the same thing (with only a motivational difference of attempting to identify poorly constructed studies that will end up being fuel for the anti-bodily autonomy crowd.