|
On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend.
Not to mention the entire thing isn't transcendent. It's just your brain perceiving things horribly incorrectly.
On October 17 2011 12:05 naggerNZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 Chargelot wrote:On October 17 2011 11:59 dupshflayh wrote:On October 17 2011 11:44 MrDudeMan wrote:On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town.
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. So judging someone for taking Benzodiazepines is OK. Let's say they didn't buy them on the black market and have a prescription for severe social anxiety. Is it still ok? See, there's plenty of uses for most of the things you normally call drugs. It's a way to wide description, as simply "drugs" implies pretty much anything that can alter your consciousness to any degree. Coffee is a drug(although not nearly as potent as say amphetamines), yet you judge no one for using it, do you? Yes, every action taken can be called "good" or "bad" for different reasons. If a man kills me, that's wrong. If a man kills me, and that action saves the lives of 5 other people, that's not wrong. It's why its called "abuse". It's not THC "abuse" if its prescribed for end-stage cancer analgesia. It's abuse if you're taking it solely because you like the feeling. Sex not for the purpose of reproduction is abuse, because you're only doing it because you like the feeling.
It regulates heart rate, blood pressure, long-term satisfaction with ones life, and is a safe and reliable method of stress reduction which uses the already (safe) in place chemicals in your brain.
It reduces the risk of a heart attack and stroke, and studies have linked it to lessening the risk of prostate cancer, as well as lessening the effects of PMS.
All without a single negative effect if two healthy people are doing it.
Amazing how much logic helps.
|
Racism/sexism is being prejudiced against someone for something they were born with and is out of their control. Drug use is a choice. It is perfectly fine to dislike someone for doing actions you disagree with.
|
On October 17 2011 12:05 brokor wrote:
i greatly enjoy good food, and some of my best times have been with friends who share this passion in some good restaurants around the world.
however i despise fat people.
i will not suffer the company of a fat person however "funny" or enjoyable and lovable he may be. thankfully noone in my immediate family is fat, and ofcourse none of my friends.
Woah there.
|
If you want to smoke some pot, then that's whatever. I get that. I drink a good bit, and can't really see much of a difference in their severity. If you want to do heroin, well then yeah, I'm gonna judge you.
|
On October 17 2011 12:07 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Not to mention the entire thing isn't transcendent. It's just your brain perceiving things horribly incorrectly.
If we had the capacity to perceive everything for exactly what it is, then transcendent experiences wouldn't exist.
|
On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend.
Sort of reminds me of the phrase "I don't need drugs to have fun"
I don't need running shoes to run, either, but they have their benefits :D
|
On October 17 2011 12:09 ShamTao wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Sort of reminds me of the phrase "I don't need drugs to have fun" I don't need running shoes to run, either, but they have their benefits :D
Running shoes don't cause brain deterioration.
|
I'm just going to say that the term "drug" is a very broad term that is hard to generalize without blanketing a very large group of substances. Caffeine is a drug, as is aspirin. Nicotine and marijuana are drugs as well but then you have your hardcore drugs like crack and heroin.
If someone came up to me and admitted they were a pot smoker, I don't think my opinion on them would change. However, if someone tried to befriend me as a heroin user, I'd definitely question their integrity a bit. I don't think that trying any drug once classifies someone as a "user" of that drug. Frequency of use is a huge factor especially when it comes to drugs like alcohol.
Also certain people react differently to various substances. I know people who can slam down a 12 pack of beers and have a completely normal conversation with me. On the other hand I know some really annoying alcoholics that turn out to be huge assholes when they get a few drinks in them.
|
On October 17 2011 12:02 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 11:59 dupshflayh wrote:On October 17 2011 11:44 MrDudeMan wrote:On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town.
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. So judging someone for taking Benzodiazepines is OK. Let's say they didn't buy them on the black market and have a prescription for severe social anxiety. Is it still ok? See, there's plenty of uses for most of the things you normally call drugs. It's a way to wide description, as simply "drugs" implies pretty much anything that can alter your consciousness to any degree. Coffee is a drug(although not nearly as potent as say amphetamines), yet you judge no one for using it, do you? Yes, every action taken can be called "good" or "bad" for different reasons. If a man kills me, that's wrong. If a man kills me, and that action saves the lives of 5 other people, that's not wrong. It's why its called "abuse". It's not THC "abuse" if its prescribed for end-stage cancer analgesia. It's abuse if you're taking it solely because you like the feeling.
According to you, then, I abuse coffee every day. I like the feeling of waking up faster. I also abuse alcohol, because I like to have a drink now and then. You see, when you put wide open definitions like that, it becomes very easy to talk "past" one another, as you're not talking about specifics but rather an idea of substances that is widely open to interpretation.
Then it becomes a discussion where recreational users come with other definitions of "drugs" than you, and therefore talking "past" (I don't know if this is the right english term for it) eachother. Because the stereotypical stoner will of course not put his marihuana under the category "drugs", while the sheltered soccer mom will.
Also, the definition of "good use" will also vary to an enourmous extent, as even heroinists will say that it's "good use" because otherwise they will get sick from withdrawal.
|
On October 17 2011 12:06 F1rstAssau1t wrote:
I really dont care about what happends to the person that use ilegal drugs, i care of the people that gets the money from the drugs and in my case those are the drug cartels that are destroying my country.
it may be cartels destroying the country, but it is the government/state that enables them to do so, by banning all drugs and making a choice of an adult person about his life illegal.
call me a libertarian but the government shouldnt have a say in what i do unless i am hurting someone else's rights. they might also get a good chunk of money out of it instead of funding cartels and criminals.
|
Gaming excessively can cause people to ignore other responsibilities in their lives in a similar way to heavy drug use. Another similarity between the two is that there are both people who do them to excess and people who enjoy the activity in a controlled fashion that doesn't harm anyone.
Does anyone here think it's ok to discriminate against people who play video games because some of them can't control their habits?
|
On October 17 2011 12:10 UmiNotsuki wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:09 ShamTao wrote:On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Sort of reminds me of the phrase "I don't need drugs to have fun" I don't need running shoes to run, either, but they have their benefits :D Running shoes don't cause brain deterioration.
Being alive causes brain deterioration, too. Kill yourself.
|
On October 17 2011 12:07 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Not to mention the entire thing isn't transcendent. It's just your brain perceiving things horribly incorrectly.
I'd be much less worried about one's perception and the "reality," but rather the emotional weight attached with the experience. Tripping has helped people put things into perspective, and brought a lot of inward thought and reflection.
Even though it's artificially induced, if somebody feels more comfortable with themselves after tripping, would you argue that they actually don't or shouldn't be because the experience was from a drug?
|
On October 17 2011 12:02 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 11:59 dupshflayh wrote:On October 17 2011 11:44 MrDudeMan wrote:On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town.
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. So judging someone for taking Benzodiazepines is OK. Let's say they didn't buy them on the black market and have a prescription for severe social anxiety. Is it still ok? See, there's plenty of uses for most of the things you normally call drugs. It's a way to wide description, as simply "drugs" implies pretty much anything that can alter your consciousness to any degree. Coffee is a drug(although not nearly as potent as say amphetamines), yet you judge no one for using it, do you? Yes, every action taken can be called "good" or "bad" for different reasons. If a man kills me, that's wrong. If a man kills me, and that action saves the lives of 5 other people, that's not wrong. It's why its called "abuse". It's not THC "abuse" if its prescribed for end-stage cancer analgesia. It's abuse if you're taking it solely because you like the feeling. Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
I smoke weed, and use hallucinogenics/amphetamines. I have so many deep character flaws to begin with, that I don't see why I should be worried about smoking some weed and tripping on a weekend. Anyone who tells you that they're too self-aware or emotionally secure to use drugs is lying. We all need ways to deal with the constant barrage of cognitive dissonance that people lucky enough to not be born as a starving African corpse have to deal with. For some people it's drugs, for others it's alcohol, or self-harm, or suicide. Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Non-drug users usually make the same "stupid" argument about you.
Reasons to living can be different from person to person regardless of how effective/ineffective their style is.
What you're saying about a man killing you isn't wrong it's just what the vast majority of the world agrees with, so do i.
But my point is that there's no right or wrong.
If you wanna go on a moral quest go right ahead but don't become ignorant.
Double check your sources on drugs before you judge a person for being a casual pot smoker.
Come up with the actual obvious damage it does without just asuming but with real facts.
You're a gamer enlighten yourself stop bullshitting yourself, it's your loss else in the end.
|
On October 17 2011 12:09 naggerNZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:07 Chargelot wrote:On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Not to mention the entire thing isn't transcendent. It's just your brain perceiving things horribly incorrectly. If we had the capacity to perceive everything for exactly what it is, then transcendent experiences wouldn't exist.
It's not a real perception. That's why it's called a hallucination. Your logic is horribly/nonexistent.
|
On October 17 2011 12:11 dupshflayh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 Chargelot wrote:On October 17 2011 11:59 dupshflayh wrote:On October 17 2011 11:44 MrDudeMan wrote:On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town.
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. So judging someone for taking Benzodiazepines is OK. Let's say they didn't buy them on the black market and have a prescription for severe social anxiety. Is it still ok? See, there's plenty of uses for most of the things you normally call drugs. It's a way to wide description, as simply "drugs" implies pretty much anything that can alter your consciousness to any degree. Coffee is a drug(although not nearly as potent as say amphetamines), yet you judge no one for using it, do you? Yes, every action taken can be called "good" or "bad" for different reasons. If a man kills me, that's wrong. If a man kills me, and that action saves the lives of 5 other people, that's not wrong. It's why its called "abuse". It's not THC "abuse" if its prescribed for end-stage cancer analgesia. It's abuse if you're taking it solely because you like the feeling. According to you, then, I abuse coffee every day. I like the feeling of waking up faster. I also abuse alcohol, because I like to have a drink now and then. You see, when you put wide open definitions like that, it becomes very easy to talk "past" one another, as you're not talking about specifics but rather an idea of substances that is widely open to interpretation. Then it becomes a discussion where recreational users come with other definitions of "drugs" than you, and therefore talking "past" (I don't know if this is the right english term for it) eachother. Because the stereotypical stoner will of course not put his marihuana under the category "drugs", while the sheltered soccer mom will.
Please just stop talking. Everyone knows what sort of things we're talking about and not everything needs to have a perfect definition to carry meaning.
|
On October 17 2011 12:11 Shifft wrote:
Gaming excessively can cause people to ignore other responsibilities in their lives in a similar way to heavy drug use.
Does anyone here think it's ok to discriminate against people who play video games because some of them can't control their habits?
Yes it is. If playing video games in excess is destroying parts of your life, then it is completely ok for me to judge you.
|
On October 17 2011 12:05 naggerNZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:02 Chargelot wrote:On October 17 2011 11:59 dupshflayh wrote:On October 17 2011 11:44 MrDudeMan wrote:On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town.
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. So judging someone for taking Benzodiazepines is OK. Let's say they didn't buy them on the black market and have a prescription for severe social anxiety. Is it still ok? See, there's plenty of uses for most of the things you normally call drugs. It's a way to wide description, as simply "drugs" implies pretty much anything that can alter your consciousness to any degree. Coffee is a drug(although not nearly as potent as say amphetamines), yet you judge no one for using it, do you? Yes, every action taken can be called "good" or "bad" for different reasons. If a man kills me, that's wrong. If a man kills me, and that action saves the lives of 5 other people, that's not wrong. It's why its called "abuse". It's not THC "abuse" if its prescribed for end-stage cancer analgesia. It's abuse if you're taking it solely because you like the feeling. Sex not for the purpose of reproduction is abuse, because you're only doing it because you like the feeling.
That sounds like the excuse someone would give for never getting laid.
Doing something because it feels good or makes you happy is not only non-abusive, but it's one of the fundamentals of human nature. It's abuse if you go out of your way to do things that bring you sadness, not happiness.
|
On October 17 2011 12:12 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:09 naggerNZ wrote:On October 17 2011 12:07 Chargelot wrote:On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Not to mention the entire thing isn't transcendent. It's just your brain perceiving things horribly incorrectly. If we had the capacity to perceive everything for exactly what it is, then transcendent experiences wouldn't exist. It's not a real perception. That's why it's called a hallucination. Your logic is horribly/nonexistent.
Yours is ignorant so your logic is biased try again.
|
On October 17 2011 12:10 UmiNotsuki wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 12:09 ShamTao wrote:On October 17 2011 12:04 ampson wrote:On October 17 2011 12:02 naggerNZ wrote:
Those who don't self medicate are usually too stupid to realize how pointless a life without transcendent experience is. Transcendent experiences do not have to come about via drugs, my friend. Sort of reminds me of the phrase "I don't need drugs to have fun" I don't need running shoes to run, either, but they have their benefits :D Running shoes don't cause brain deterioration.
hm, what?
This is a pretty big claim. If we're talking about some standard recreational drugs such as alcohol and marijuana, Id like to see some sources
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
