The just-think-of-the-children argument is a canard in the way you've put it. It's quite socially acceptable in New Zealand to say, drink more than would be wise if you had to drive a car at a barbecue when there are children around. Are you seriously saying the non-drinker who has a couple of tokes is some kind of monster
Are you implying that is acceptable to me as well?- because it wouldn't be, nor would drinking while looking after a child or doing something when required to be dependable. And no, I'm not calling them a monster, I'm giving a personal philosophical viewpoint. The "think of the children" point was in specific reference to a point about personal freedom.
And as for alcohol not "radically altering perception" ... tell that to the cops on a Friday night, anywhere. You seem to regard moderation as a given with alcohol and an impossibility in the case of any other intoxicant. That's just not rational. (Personally, I find moderating alcohol intake more challenging that taking it gently on any illicit substance I might occasionally imbibe at my advanced age. I'm sure I'm not alone.)
There's a tonne of information of the effects of varying levels of blood-alcohol and if I'm under the limit I'm hardly going to draw the attention of the cops. There is no such thing as a "standard joint" as far as I'm aware, similarly you cannot be sure of the exact composition of any narcotic or barbituate other than prescription. If anything that's very rational.
I'd also go so far as to say I wouldn't think as well if I hadn't, in the past, experienced different states of consciousness. Your mileage may vary, but that's not my problem
I would argue that fooling around with the chemistry of your brain centres is hardly adifferent state of consciousness any more than throwing all the pieces on the floor is a game of chess. And really when your stoned I hardly think the impressions you have "revelling in community" are - shall we say - objective. I'm sure most people have had the experience of being bored witless by some one high when they are not.
Otherwide, peace. in the spirit of robust debate
Ok TMI!! Eeeeew. But you can stop if you have to - you can't do that with drugs because there is no control over the effects.
Where I draw the line is "and drugs aren't for you either", especially when it involves authoritarian violations of one's freedom.
Perhaps, but I think anyone who drugs up when they're looking after kids or before operating heavy machinery are abusing their freedom.
Emma, if you can't talk coherently to someone while your masturbating, you're doing it wrong - although admittedly that doesn't come up often.
Craig, Harry Potter should be illegal - it's kiddie crack :)
Oh Craig - reading is still interracting with the author - if a little one way. It's hardly giggling at the curtains :)
It's not that bas Danielle - there's still sex :) And even I get excessively drunk from time to time - but not very often has that resulted in anything positive. I only sit on the top of columns and flagellate while magates eat my flesh on the weekdays.
Actually Kyle (by the way, I was at Otago with you) I don't see the thrill in playstations either - but I guess you can play with other people and it doesn't stop you interracting, or noticing the kitchen is on fire, or whatever. I'm not arguing the legality of drugs, I'm offering a moral and philisophical position on why I dislike them.
Ok Russell, perhaps a slight exaggeration, but not much - from experience I'd say one average strength joint probably has about the impact of three or four glasses of wine. And as I said, I place the utmost value on the clarity of perception. Drugs degrade your ability to interract with people in anything but a facile way because drugs ultimately are about what you experience, not how you interract with the world = solipsism = navel gazing = narcissism. As will drinking too much booze. One glass of wine does not turn you into a large paperweight. And cigarettes have no affect on the mind aside from a slight buzz. Brain chemistry is not a toy.
Call me a puritan, but I find "fun" that doesn't benefit others or engage with the broader world to be downright solipsistic, and thus revolting to me. At a deeply philosophical level to me I find that kind of self indulgence quite abhorrent.
I also hold the accurate perception of reality and rational reasoning as being core to what it means to be a human being. I distrust self indulgence and self delusion as having any merit, even if some people consider it "fun".
Danielle: love u long time - different world views, but as I see it there are two classes of people who like recreational chemistry: the dammaged who find it easier than sorting their shit out, and those who think the insides of their own heads are far more interesting than anything that could happen in the real world. I'm more than happy to be shown otherwise.
I'm not going to swallow the red herring about cigarettes and booze. cigarettes may give your cance but don't alter your perceptions drastically, and neither will a civilised glass or two of sav blanc. Everything else does - no one can deny that.