Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Not all drug use is abuse.

Only if you're doing it right.

 easysauce wrote:
actually, his use of "whom" is incorrect, so is "no" vs "know"...

So that makes two typos, as the no vs know was the one I was refering to earlier. Compare this to your post, again, and you'll see who has the worse syntax.

"more fool you" means nothing if you are not subscribed to whatever meme that comes from, even if you are, its not correct grammar nor is it clear what it means.

It's an accepted idiom included in the Cambridge Idioms Dictionnary. Do not blame him for your own ignorance.

the arguement he presents that "someone would have to wreck their brain with drugs to know that drugs wreck peoples brains," is fallacy at its best...

That's interpreting his two sentences in the optics that he was refering to factual knowledge of the consequences of drug use. He could as easily be referencing phenomenal data, in which case he would be correct.

its is very OBVIOUS that people, even on legal drugs like alchohol, are damaging their body, and impairing their mind.

It is very OBVIOUS that you do not know what you are talking about, as there are drugs that do not have lasting effect on either body or mind. It's also quite disengenuous as there is a very large amount of substances you ingest daily which are more damaging for your physical or mental health. Hell, texting is more damaging to your mind than a lifetime addiction to marijuana.

what is 100% sure is that none of the drug use will make them smarter,

False. Coffee, one of the most used and well known drug in the world will effectively make you better at solving problems. On the other hand, quite a few drugs (including alchool and marijuana) will make you much more creative. You proceed from a very vulgar (and almost useless) understanding of what 'smart' is.

may be a fun way to kill some time/brain cells, but nothing more will come of it.

Pink Floyd. Your argument is invalid.

same with the choke game

That, I'll agree on. The choke game is, quite simply, a bad drug. Its high is incredible, tho.

Actually most of the band members from Pink Floyd weren't into drugs, Jimi Hendrix would have been a better example.

http://www.cracked.com/article_20633_5-pleasant-surprises-about-famous-people-you-had-all-wrong.html

 Cheesecat wrote:
Actually most of the band members from Pink Floyd weren't into drugs, Jimi Hendrix would have been a better example.

http://www.cracked.com/article_20633_5-pleasant-surprises-about-famous-people-you-had-all-wrong.html

I have always assumed Tupac was so macho nothing can actually decrease his machoness. It appears I was correct

Crick discovered the double helix while under the influence of LSD.

I discovered the meaning of life while drunk once...
I wrote it down but I left it somewhere...

 Frazzled wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Those whom have never got high no not the experience. More fool them.

What? dude loose the noose. You're not making sense.

Seriously, I could list all the things I've done that have gotten me a better "high" without the use of drugs... but that would probably go over the character limit for a post

 Kovnik Obama wrote:


It is very OBVIOUS that you do not know what you are talking about, as there are drugs that do not have lasting effect on either body or mind. It's also quite disengenuous as there is a very large amount of substances you ingest daily which are more damaging for your physical or mental health. Hell, texting is more damaging to your mind than a lifetime addiction to marijuana.

drug use does not make you smarter, or more creative. That lots of creative people did drugs, is an aside. They were creative because they were creative, drugs didnt give them special powers, though I am sure the EXPERIENCE of doing drugs was emotional enough to inspire some stuff, its nothing you cant get from non drug experience.

And you have no idea what I ingest daily... so to assert that I am disingenuous because you say I consume things more toxic then hot tar blasts to the lungs, is just silly and reminds me of evangelical preachers zealotry in tagging a contrived persona to myself. Especially since I am a health nut who drinks de ionized, or distilled water, and mostly eats organic/self grown produce and meats.

Drug use does not make you smarter, and I didnt say it 100% is bad in every case, nor that they ALL have long term effects. I am not talking about long term effects of booze/pot, those wear off fairly quickly though you might be burnt out or hung over for a bit. But while under the effects, people are 100% dumber as a rule. you may think you are "more creative" but thats cause you are just high... its like drunk people thinking they are more charming.

I know exactly what I am talking about, I dont have to do the stuff to know that while on drugs people are stupider.

I LOVE pink floyd, it doesn't require drugs to do that or anything else on this planet.

So go ahead and smoke dope, its your body, should be your right to do whatever you want to it. Theres a lot worse that could go into your body then burning plant matter, of any kind, but that doesnt mean inhaling smoke of any kind isnt damaging, responsible use of anything isnt a problem.

Also for every "yellow submarine" that drugs "cause", there are numerous "train spotting" type stories where peoples lives just get ruined (yes, sometimes even by "harmless" pot, just like "harmless" tobacco, gambling or alchohol can ruin lives)


the real proof that you dont need drugs to get high and make trippy music? (as well as everything else)

frank zappa.

 easysauce wrote:

drug use does not make you smarter, or more creative.

http://www.menshealth.co.uk/healthy/brain-training/the-drugs-that-make-you-smarter wrote:What are smart drugs?

Most ‘cognitive enhancers’ are stimulants – the same class as caffeine. I take modafinil, a drug that was originally developed to treat narcolepsy. Research shows it also improves memory, problem-solving skills and mental control. Basically, it helps you think.

Are they safe?

Here’s the worrying thing: you never know exactly what you’re getting when you buy these drugs online. Before I took anything, I had a chemist check that my shipment contained the real substance. In my case it did, but that peace of mind isn’t an option for most people.
What about the side-effects?

I’ve not experienced any, although some people report headaches with modafinil. No addictive urges, either.
Are they legal?

Cognitive enhancers are like steroids: it’s legal to buy them but illegal to sell them. I purchase mine from a foreign website which asks whether my GP has given me a prescription. I lie and say he has. However, if I gave some to a friend, I could be arrested as a supplier.
Do they work for you?

In a word, yes. I’m more likely to start working on a problem and less likely to drop it once I’ve started; I can concentrate my thoughts on one task. These are things I crave when I’m writing to deadlines or visiting long conferences. I can write a persuasive argument or think through a deep philosophy lecture. But I’m not actually more intelligent when I take the drug. I’m just more focused.
How long does it last?

Anything between half a day and a day, depending on the individual.
What does it feel like?

This is not LSD – you won’t experience the world in a radically different way. It’s as though you’ve had a really good cup of coffee – only it lasts for hours and you don’t get heart palpitations. It’s a simple jolt of productive energy in pill form. Some days, that’s exactly what I need. If you do too, follow the guidelines below.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/244065.php wrote:The image of the drunk artist or author is a common one, and many creative people struggle with alcohol and drug problems during their lives; in some cases in spite of tremendous financial and popular success. As a society we've often wrestled to comprehend the tragedy of such talented young people like Amy Winehouse or Jimi Hendrix that die sudden deaths at a young age from intoxication problems. It doesn't seem to make sense.

Now, new scientific research is showing that, in fact, it makes perfect sense. An article published in Consciousness and Cognition explains that test subjects intoxicated at a blood alcohol level of 0.075, which is the equivalent of two pints of beer, performed better under tests designed to examine their creativity.

Psychologists at the University of Illinois set 40 young men a series of brain teasers known as RAT tests (Remote Associates Test). The tests are similar to those used on TV shows such as Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune.

Compared to the sober group, the men solved their problems faster and were more likely to have sudden insights. The subject's performance was assessed from a point of view of attentional control, which refers to individuals' ability to select what they pay attention to and what they ignore.

mmm hmmm and while you can certainly make the argument that many of these people attribute their "creativity", at least while using, to the drugs, in the same way that steroid users are "stronger". they are also often killed by them in the end, or suffer some sort of health or lifestyle problem.

List of drug-related deaths
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drug-related_deaths

is very long, and thats just the famous people.

the fact that your "study", and I EMPHASIZE the quotes there, says that

such talented young people like Amy Winehouse

should be setting off some warning bells

also... the study is based on people with two drinks in them, with booze being one of the most harmless drugs at that dosage.

which is not exactly saying drugs make you smarter, it is saying that two drinks makes you less inhibited, and more apt to explore creative options to the RAT test, which is limited in scope.

a study at 4+ drinks would show significant loss of motor skills, and other cognitive functions.

even at two drinks, sure you are better at solving RAT type problems and being creative with making a urinal or home made bong or something, but are you better at driving? or operating heavy equipment? or making good sound, long term life decisions? does the test account for things like that?

You just cannot give blanket statments like "drugs make you smarter" with any credence, because they deserve none, its like being the lance armstrong of artists.

I suggest you read The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell by Aldous Huxley, or simply experiment with things yourself, before you go asserting that there is no experience drugs can provide that you can't get without them.

 rubiksnoob wrote:
I suggest you read The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell by Aldous Huxley, or simply experiment with things yourself, before you go asserting that there is no experience drugs can provide that you can't get without them.

I have read huxley... again, why assume I dont? he didnt exactly talk favorable about things like "soma" drug that everyone did in his book brave new world.

Why be so condescending/insulting because I dont do drugs? doesnt mean I dont know people who do/have, or that I wasnt young once.
I think hunter s thompson would be the best person to contradict me, he talks about this kind of thing a lot. and I do agree with him, 99% of the time, that 1% where we differ, is likely why he is dead, and I am not.
I recommend you read rum diaries in addition to FALILA as I assume everyone has read that quintessential book (although I preferred rum diaries)

and that hallucination you see on LSD is different from everything else, sure thats unique i guess, cant hallucinate on lsd without lsd, fair enough.
But so is hallucinating from fever, or meditation.
So is lucid dreaming.
but so is every freaking molecule... atom/quark every thought is unique, every sunset I see, every sunrise.

every time i see the stars, that is unique, and unexperiancable in the exact the same way to anyone but me

so what compound can you take to feel what I feel?

13 year olds dealing with "chasing the dragon" type things with Autoerotic Asyphxiation /drugs because they think they are awesome ways to be "creative" like david carradine and all their celebreties? where does that fit into your "drugs make you smarter" theory?

 easysauce wrote:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
I suggest you read The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell by Aldous Huxley, or simply experiment with things yourself, before you go asserting that there is no experience drugs can provide that you can't get without them.

I have read huxley... again, why assume I dont? he didnt exactly talk favorable about things like "soma" drug that everyone did in his book brave new world.

Have you read the title I mentioned above, though? I'm not referring to Brave New World. In the Doors of Perception he goes into some depth on the experience of taking mescaline, and how it alters perception, and why it allows the user to investigate the world from a vantage point they couldn't otherwise. It is by no means a definitive account of psychedelic substances and their applications, but it's a good read, and covers a most of the major bases, I feel. If you've already read it, fine. If you haven't, though, I recommend it.

Why be so condescending/insulting because I dont do drugs? doesnt mean I dont know people who do/have, or that I wasnt young once.
I think hunter s thompson would be the best person to contradict me, he talks about this kind of thing a lot. and I do agree with him, 99% of the time, that 1% where we differ, is likely why he is dead, and I am not.
I recommend you read rum diaries in addition to FALILA as I assume everyone has read that quintessential book (although I preferred rum diaries)

I'm not trying to be anymore condescending than I assume you are trying to be. I was simply stating that I disagreed with your assertion that you don't need to do drugs to know that they "make people stupider" or something along those lines. To be fair, most do, in certain respects. However, not all.

Yes, I have read Fear and Loathing. I'll pick up Rum Diaries next time I get the chance.

and that hallucination you see on LSD is different from everything else, sure thats unique i guess, cant hallucinate on lsd without lsd, fair enough.
But so is hallucinating from fever, or meditation.
So is lucid dreaming.
but so is every freaking molecule... atom/quark every thought is unique, every sunset I see, every sunrise.

every time i see the stars, that is unique, and unexperiancable in the exact the same way to anyone but me

so what compound can you take to feel what I feel?

The idea with certain substances like LSD is that they allow the human mind to function in ways it otherwise restricted. Huxley's argument is that the brain is like a reducing valve that filters out the vast majority of perceptible experience, letting through only that which is practical for biological survival. Substances like LSD loosen or circumvent that valve, allowing the individual to perceive not hallucinations, but the actual world, simply with a less restrictive filter. It's not about seeing crazy gak (at least for some people), it's about exploring a different way of "seeing" real things. What I'm trying to get across here is that it is more intellectual than you seem to be making it out to be. The lazy drop out who sits on his couch smoking and playing CoD all day is worlds apart from individuals who carefully and maturely utilize substances such as LSD for intellectual applications.

13 year olds dealing with "chasing the dragon" type things with Autoerotic Asyphxiation /drugs because they think they are awesome ways to be "creative" like david carradine and all their celebreties? where does that fit into your "drugs make you smarter" theory?

I'm not trying to say that drugs make you smarter. I'm saying that smart people use drugs smartly, to do smart things.

Drugs won't make stupid people smart. They won't make unimaginative people creative. Drugs will, however, allow smart people to apply what they gain from the experience to developing new ideas. They will allow creative people to apply their creativity to the experience and perhaps derive inspiration from it. It's just as false a generalization to say that "drugs make people stupid" as it is to say "drugs make people smart."

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Those whom have never got high no not the experience. More fool them.

What? dude loose the noose. You're not making sense.

Seriously, I could list all the things I've done that have gotten me a better "high" without the use of drugs... but that would probably go over the character limit for a post

Wait a sec, theres a character limit?

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Those whom have never got high no not the experience. More fool them.

What? dude loose the noose. You're not making sense.

Seriously, I could list all the things I've done that have gotten me a better "high" without the use of drugs... but that would probably go over the character limit for a post

Wait a sec, theres a character limit?

I think it's a fairly huge number but AFAIK there is...

 purplefood wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Those whom have never got high no not the experience. More fool them.

What? dude loose the noose. You're not making sense.

Seriously, I could list all the things I've done that have gotten me a better "high" without the use of drugs... but that would probably go over the character limit for a post

Wait a sec, theres a character limit?

I think it's a fairly huge number but AFAIK there is...

There may be, and I was using slight hyperbole, but I find it insane that people think that drugs are the only way to get high, or that they are the "best" way to achieve that, etc.

 rubiksnoob wrote:
In the Doors of Perception he goes into some depth on the experience of taking mescaline, and how it alters perception, and why it allows the user to investigate the world from a vantage point they couldn't otherwise. It is by no means a definitive account of psychedelic substances and their applications, but it's a good read, and covers a most of the major bases, I feel. If you've already read it, fine. If you haven't, though, I recommend it.

I enjoyed the letter that William S. Buroughs wrote to his doctor about all of the drugs he's taken in his life and how they affected him. As someone that doesn't do drugs, and doesn't see the reason to do drugs, it was an interesting read. I'll have to pick up the Huxley book you mentioned.

 easysauce wrote:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
I suggest you read The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell by Aldous Huxley, or simply experiment with things yourself, before you go asserting that there is no experience drugs can provide that you can't get without them.

I have read huxley... again, why assume I dont? he didnt exactly talk favorable about things like "soma" drug that everyone did in his book brave new world.

Why be so condescending/insulting because I dont do drugs? doesnt mean I dont know people who do/have, or that I wasnt young once.
I think hunter s thompson would be the best person to contradict me, he talks about this kind of thing a lot. and I do agree with him, 99% of the time, that 1% where we differ, is likely why he is dead, and I am not.
I recommend you read rum diaries in addition to FALILA as I assume everyone has read that quintessential book (although I preferred rum diaries)

and that hallucination you see on LSD is different from everything else, sure thats unique i guess, cant hallucinate on lsd without lsd, fair enough.
But so is hallucinating from fever, or meditation.
So is lucid dreaming.
but so is every freaking molecule... atom/quark every thought is unique, every sunset I see, every sunrise.

every time i see the stars, that is unique, and unexperiancable in the exact the same way to anyone but me

so what compound can you take to feel what I feel?

13 year olds dealing with "chasing the dragon" type things with Autoerotic Asyphxiation /drugs because they think they are awesome ways to be "creative" like david carradine and all their celebreties? where does that fit into your "drugs make you smarter" theory?

Indeed, not sure if taking something that permanently changes my brain chemistry and opens me up to recurring bad trips years after is what someone should advocate for.

Beside Huxley's an over rated girly boy.

Spartak wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Y'all are weird as feth.

LOL, yeah I'm with Seaward on this one.

Same here. This thread is full of stoners .
I don't care about 'The experience,' I'm not gonna risk my life or health or mind trying to get high because I think my life isn't good enough as it is.