6 ms·

I am on the fence with these topics because I have years of fear drilled into me. These topics are a taboo and I have rarely ever tried anything at all. The exp

I am on the fence with these topics because I have years of fear drilled into me. These topics are a taboo and I have rarely ever tried anything at all. The experiences did not ruin me, they made me more curious about my brain in a positive way. But the social taboo lingers. What surprises me the most is that we have accepted sugar, alcohol, cigarettes and a ton of mass manufactured food which are harming us. I am struggling with high blood glucose for 12 years. Yet, the substance which I can grow in my* own backyard and may actually not be as harmful is just brainwashed out of my limits. edits: you to me

numpad0 1y ago
Isn't the distinction based on whether the substance directly cause a wage gap and/or significant life expectancy loss? Someone on meth all the time can literally fatigue-free until there is no brain matter left, but someone on coffee or beer can not. It is often argued that some of generally illegal substances like marijuana is only toxic to comparable extents as legal substances, but there are observations that it seem to trigger some types of megalomaniac schizophrenia, so the fence probably has reasons to be there, I think.
- mcherm 1y ago
  > Isn't the distinction based on whether the substance directly cause a wage gap and/or significant life expectancy loss? No. I feel QUITE certain that the distinction is based on whether or not the substance has a history of a few generations of widespread use among western Europeans ("white people").
zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago
Is there that much of a social taboo? Maybe it's just the people I hang out with and work with, but most people are open to psychedelic use and a lot have at least tried some.
- skyyler 1y ago
  Some people’s conception of “normal people” is people on the bus or train. Some people’s conception of “normal people” is people at a church ice cream social. Different perspectives, I think.
  - tankenmate 1y ago
    Having grown up around the world and going to a few international schools I came to realise that "normal" is just what the people around you do (well "in public" is probably a good effective limit).
- lelandfe 1y ago
  Yes, it’s your bubble. There are American states still charging people over marijuana. Having grown up Christian I personally know people in their 30s who view psychedelic and heroin users similarly. Those people would have the opposite view of you. Years back, my friend’s parents asked me to stage an intervention for him after they found out he regularly took LSD. He was 19 at the time.
  - kevinventullo 1y ago
    Eh, I’m pretty open-minded to this stuff, but I would also want to stage an intervention if my 19-year-old was regularly taking LSD.
    - gavinray 1y ago
      Well, to be pendantic, you can't "regularly" (depending on your definition) consume LSD or any psychedelic. The 5HT2A tolerance is acute such that you need exponential dosing on consecutive days to achieve equivalent effects. Some psychedelics like NBOMe are such strong agonists the tolerance duration is 1-2 weeks. For "standard" psychedelics it's closer to 3-4 days. Even at the height of my psychedelic-head phase I was using twice a week, and not by choice.
      - 1y ago
stego-tech 1y ago
As a similar "Boy Scout" of sorts, the fear is/was real. I didn’t experiment with so much as nicotine or alcohol until I’d tried “stuff” with the supervision of an experienced "sitter"; I ended up having some of the best times of my life in the safety and context of home and friendships. Combined with my own life experiences with drug abuse and addictions, I was able to build a healthy relationship with those substances that didn't result in dependency or abuse. In the time since, my views have changed dramatically on these substances, and I'd like to try more of them. However, my personal moral compass prevents me from using substances outside of a legally permissible setting, at least at present - and that's something I'm fine with. Ultimately, the taboo side of things is something the individual has to grapple with on their own. I can only commiserate with your frustrations, not help overcome them unfortunately. My only other advice would be to use any substance only to amplify good vibes, never to cope with bad ones. If all you do is chase a lost feeling, you're missing out on what's in front of you now.
- sneak 1y ago
  > I ended up having some of the best times of my life in the safety and context of home and friendships. > However, my personal moral compass prevents me from using substances outside of a legally permissible setting, at least at present - and that's something I'm fine with. What on Earth do laws have to do with morals?
  - notarobot123 1y ago
    Laws encode a kind of social reasoning (the balancing of risk, ethics, societal impacts, etc) and choosing to follow the law in most situations can be a moral stance (a matter of principle).
    - mattmanser 1y ago
      To an extent, but you have to be careful with that. A common counter-argument is what happened when the Nazis allowed you to report your neighbours for treasonous talk. Lawful, but evil. There's a whole section of moral philosophy dedicated to whether it's morally right to subsequently go after the people who reported their neighbours. They knew they were sentencing their victims to imprisonment or death, but did so 'lawfully'. Ex post facto laws are an interesting moral conundrum. Also laws sometimes don't actually reflect society as the process gets hijacked by companies, the billionaires controlling the media or vocal minorities (usually religious vocal minorities).

numpad0 1y ago

Isn't the distinction based on whether the substance directly cause a wage gap and/or significant life expectancy loss? Someone on meth all the time can literally fatigue-free until there is no brain matter left, but someone on coffee or beer can not. It is often argued that some of generally illegal substances like marijuana is only toxic to comparable extents as legal substances, but there are observations that it seem to trigger some types of megalomaniac schizophrenia, so the fence probably has reasons to be there, I think.

mcherm 1y ago
> Isn't the distinction based on whether the substance directly cause a wage gap and/or significant life expectancy loss? No. I feel QUITE certain that the distinction is based on whether or not the substance has a history of a few generations of widespread use among western Europeans ("white people").

zoklet-enjoyer 1y ago

Is there that much of a social taboo? Maybe it's just the people I hang out with and work with, but most people are open to psychedelic use and a lot have at least tried some.

skyyler 1y ago
Some people’s conception of “normal people” is people on the bus or train. Some people’s conception of “normal people” is people at a church ice cream social. Different perspectives, I think.
- tankenmate 1y ago
  Having grown up around the world and going to a few international schools I came to realise that "normal" is just what the people around you do (well "in public" is probably a good effective limit).
lelandfe 1y ago
Yes, it’s your bubble. There are American states still charging people over marijuana. Having grown up Christian I personally know people in their 30s who view psychedelic and heroin users similarly. Those people would have the opposite view of you. Years back, my friend’s parents asked me to stage an intervention for him after they found out he regularly took LSD. He was 19 at the time.
- kevinventullo 1y ago
  Eh, I’m pretty open-minded to this stuff, but I would also want to stage an intervention if my 19-year-old was regularly taking LSD.
  - gavinray 1y ago
    Well, to be pendantic, you can't "regularly" (depending on your definition) consume LSD or any psychedelic. The 5HT2A tolerance is acute such that you need exponential dosing on consecutive days to achieve equivalent effects. Some psychedelics like NBOMe are such strong agonists the tolerance duration is 1-2 weeks. For "standard" psychedelics it's closer to 3-4 days. Even at the height of my psychedelic-head phase I was using twice a week, and not by choice.
    - 1y ago

stego-tech 1y ago

As a similar "Boy Scout" of sorts, the fear is/was real. I didn’t experiment with so much as nicotine or alcohol until I’d tried “stuff” with the supervision of an experienced "sitter"; I ended up having some of the best times of my life in the safety and context of home and friendships. Combined with my own life experiences with drug abuse and addictions, I was able to build a healthy relationship with those substances that didn't result in dependency or abuse. In the time since, my views have changed dramatically on these substances, and I'd like to try more of them. However, my personal moral compass prevents me from using substances outside of a legally permissible setting, at least at present - and that's something I'm fine with. Ultimately, the taboo side of things is something the individual has to grapple with on their own. I can only commiserate with your frustrations, not help overcome them unfortunately. My only other advice would be to use any substance only to amplify good vibes, never to cope with bad ones. If all you do is chase a lost feeling, you're missing out on what's in front of you now.

sneak 1y ago
> I ended up having some of the best times of my life in the safety and context of home and friendships. > However, my personal moral compass prevents me from using substances outside of a legally permissible setting, at least at present - and that's something I'm fine with. What on Earth do laws have to do with morals?
- notarobot123 1y ago
  Laws encode a kind of social reasoning (the balancing of risk, ethics, societal impacts, etc) and choosing to follow the law in most situations can be a moral stance (a matter of principle).
  - mattmanser 1y ago
    To an extent, but you have to be careful with that. A common counter-argument is what happened when the Nazis allowed you to report your neighbours for treasonous talk. Lawful, but evil. There's a whole section of moral philosophy dedicated to whether it's morally right to subsequently go after the people who reported their neighbours. They knew they were sentencing their victims to imprisonment or death, but did so 'lawfully'. Ex post facto laws are an interesting moral conundrum. Also laws sometimes don't actually reflect society as the process gets hijacked by companies, the billionaires controlling the media or vocal minorities (usually religious vocal minorities).