I think the gradients of differing cultural treatment fall along at least 3 axes: • Can the person help it? If you're 'born with' a certain neural style, that

I think the gradients of differing cultural treatment fall along at least 3 axes: • Can the person help it? If you're 'born with' a certain neural style, that argues for greater acceptance (if not 'pride'). Addictiveness might be closer to autism spectrum in this regard than the 'choice' to use performance-enhancing drugs. • Is the benefit conferred something that is relative/private/zero-sum, or absolute/public/positive-sum? In athletic competitions, a steroid-user only gains (the victory or the all-time record) when someone else loses. If everyone responds by also taking steroids, we've just created a new altered variant of the original game -- spending more, having more health effects, creating an 'incompatible' record book -- without any net gain (unless there is some absolute improvement in, say, the spectacle value of the activity). So the culture is more likely to disfavor steroid use, especially if used for secret advantage, or likely to set off a 'red queen race'. But when someone creates a lasting research result or piece of art -- that is not primarily understood as having displaced someone else's achievement, but rather setting some new absolute peak. When an addict/enhancement-user leaves the world a hit song, a great book, a new scientific breakthrough -- a non-zero-sum result -- it's easier to accept the precursor activities, even if usually illegal/taboo. And that goes doubly when we also consider the third axis... • Do usage benefits also impose clear offsetting costs? That is, does the user suffer for the advantages conferred? Otherwise, the use is more threatening: our old taboos and norms are wrong! Late adopters are screwed! What should the rules be, what should I do? Conversely, if the drugs include clear punishment with reward, people can fit outlier users into a comforting moral framework. "The addiction inspired his work but also drove him crazy." "She did brilliant work while addicted but died young of an overdose." Because the use seems to include its own punishment, the social shunning doesn't have to be as strong, and individuals can make the decision "that path is not for me" without resorting to moralizing absolutes.