Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Drugs are for Everyone
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 1 of 45 (587783)
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


I was mulling over this topic the other day while i was having a coffee, smoking a cigarette, and doing lines of cocaine.
(Actually just the coffee part, but the second and third substances are going to act as supporting points.)
First of all, the human brain is the human brain, no questions asked. Im not bringing up an argument about mind/brain, so if you have qualms about this particular definition, please keep the debate relevant to the issue.
Intro-
It seems to me that humanity craves adjustments in mood/state of mind almost constantly. So called "hard" drugs are an obvious example of this, of course. Some people love to get high. These people clearly are trying to adjust their state of mind.
"Soft" drugs likewise point to some sort of dissatisfaction with the user's current state. In this argument, let soft drugs represent the substances currently on the line in terms of legality that are commonly used, but which generally can be used frequently without major damage.
The last tier of substance is the legal, commonplace, garden variety drug. Coffee, tobacco, alcohol, etc. The people who use and abuse these drug delivery systems are not partaking in their use for their taste, they are seeking a chemical change in their bodies and brains.
Argument-
Looking at the above three categories, i feel that drugs are all identical in one aspect: their primary use is to alter one's mind in a seemingly positive way. This is not an argument as to why hard drugs should be legal or considered good, this is an argument as to why soft and common drugs should be questioned. I find it troublesome that we constantly fiddle and tinker with our mindset.
The question is as follows: Why do we chase drugs?
From a fundie religious standpoint, why would we be dissatisfied with our minds so commonly that we seek substances? If we were to be created in god's image, why should so many people have seemingly imperfect minds?
From an evolutionary standpoint: does it stand to reason that as we evolve technologically and biologically, we will slowly lose the need to press buttons in our brains with chemicals?
@mod: im thinking Social Issues and C/E

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Nij, posted 10-21-2010 7:20 AM Damouse has replied
 Message 5 by Larni, posted 10-21-2010 7:55 AM Damouse has replied
 Message 8 by 1.61803, posted 10-21-2010 2:16 PM Damouse has not replied
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 10-21-2010 7:30 PM Damouse has not replied
 Message 21 by onifre, posted 10-21-2010 7:30 PM Damouse has not replied
 Message 42 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-27-2010 8:35 PM Damouse has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 2 of 45 (587871)
10-21-2010 6:42 AM


Thread Copied to Forum
Thread copied to the Drugs are for Everyone thread in the The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 3 of 45 (587874)
10-21-2010 6:45 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Drugs are for Everyone thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Nij
Member (Idle past 4889 days)
Posts: 239
From: New Zealand
Joined: 08-20-2010


Message 4 of 45 (587876)
10-21-2010 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Damouse
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


As I understand it (not being a biology major) they set off switches that make the brain go "more, more!'. This is not just restricted to drugs we stick in ourselves; it's how the machine works. Chemicals go in, other chemicals get blocked, receptors ping (or dont ping), more nerves fire off (or stop firing off), more chemicals get made to repeat the cycle somewhere else, or they don't get made and other chemicals start doing funky stuff themselves.
For example, caffeine: works by sitting on top of a receptor perfectly, but without the necessary bit to flick that receptor on. Like a key that's got the perfect set of teeth, but missing the sole necessary one to open the lock. As long as we have that receptor for the purpose of {whatever exactly is its job, but in general telling us to sleep} then caffeine will have the effect of blocking that receptor and prevent it doing its job.
From the natural standpoint: it's not something that really can be turned off. We physically cannot lose the ability to flip switches with drugs for as long as we have switches. Since those switches are a necessary part of the body, we will always have those switches.
From a technological standpoint: it's possible that one day we could get implanted with circuits and electronic gizmos to do stuff for us, to regulate a little more effectively or to make the controls.. controllable.
But at the end of the day, those fancy chips and doodahs are doing the exact same job that the receptors do now. They will necessarily run on similar pathways (e.g. measuring levels of stuff, having places which are/are not activated by certain chemicals) and so they will be susceptible to the same interruptive or accelerative effects we endure now.
As long as there are switches to be flipped and a brain that likes them flipped, we will use drugs.
Unless somebody figures out how to put a limiter on those switches. You'd make millions out of being able to stop addiction with a simple pretty frickin' complicated surgery or to turn hormones and glands on and off with a push of the remote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Damouse, posted 10-20-2010 6:39 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 1:48 PM Nij has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 5 of 45 (587878)
10-21-2010 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Damouse
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


I'm going to come at this from a cognitive behavioural perspective.
Anything that makes the organisms fell good will be attractive to the organism. Anything that makes them feel bad will be aversive.
We chase drugs (and all kinds of positive experience) because it makes us feel good.
I don't think that it is a case of absolute dissatisfaction with life that makes us chase drugs but it does help. If we are aware of an avenue of positive experience we will exploit it because our nervous system is geared to avoid aversive stimulous.
After all, we eat because we are hungry and being really hungry is not pleasent and begins to dominate our thoughts (just like the guy jonesing for that next hit, or smoke or drink).
As to evolving away from a need to press buttons, we would need an nervous system totally different from the one we have and said nervous system would not evolve because avoidance or aversive stimulous is what keeps us alive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Damouse, posted 10-20-2010 6:39 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 1:53 PM Larni has not replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 6 of 45 (587937)
10-21-2010 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Nij
10-21-2010 7:20 AM


From the natural standpoint: it's not something that really can be turned off. We physically cannot lose the ability to flip switches with drugs for as long as we have switches. Since those switches are a necessary part of the body, we will always have those switches.
There are plenty of drugs that dont cause a chemical dependence, however. Their use is solely for the effect.
Also, when you hear someone say "i need my coffee," i generally take it as a fix for being groggy, not an addict jonesing.
You are saying that all drug use is just an effect of addiction, as i understood it.
They will necessarily run on similar pathways (e.g. measuring levels of stuff, having places which are/are not activated by certain chemicals) and so they will be susceptible to the same interruptive or accelerative effects we endure now.
My point is that we all seem imperfect and dissatisfied, and from either end of the belief systems that seems at odds with basic premises.
The issue i take with it from an evolutionary standpoint is that our constant dependence on drugs seems to be a weakness. It should seem to follow that we could fix this weakness, either naturally or with technology.
You'd make millions out of being able to stop addiction with a simple pretty frickin' complicated surgery or to turn hormones and glands on and off with a push of the remote.
Im not talking about addiction. Im talking about fine tuning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Nij, posted 10-21-2010 7:20 AM Nij has not replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 7 of 45 (587939)
10-21-2010 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Larni
10-21-2010 7:55 AM


I don't think that it is a case of absolute dissatisfaction with life that makes us chase drugs but it does help. If we are aware of an avenue of positive experience we will exploit it because our nervous system is geared to avoid aversive stimulous.
This doesnt encompass all of what i was trying to say.
Take coffee, for an example. Most people drink coffee to "wake up." They cannot function in the morning, according to them, if they dont have their damn coffee.
I wouldnt say coffee gives a high like other drugs, so it's only purpose seems to be to correct morning grogginess. We dont like being groggy in the morning, so we rely on an external substance to counteract it.
As to evolving away from a need to press buttons, we would need an nervous system totally different from the one we have and said nervous system would not evolve because avoidance or aversive stimulous is what keeps us alive.
Im not sure what solutions i have for us other than the far-fetched sci-fi answer. Im not suggesting a full biological rework, but that does seem to be the only answer that addresses the issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Larni, posted 10-21-2010 7:55 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 2:39 PM Damouse has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 8 of 45 (587947)
10-21-2010 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Damouse
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


The question is as follows: Why do we chase drugs?
One reason is entertainment.
I believe there are other animals who enjoy altering their perception with fementing fruits as well. Birds, monkeys etc..
Bottom line is drugs are fun. They allow the user the oportunity to change they're perception of reality. Kind of like a small child who spins around in a circle and gets dizzy. In no time they are up and spinning again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Damouse, posted 10-20-2010 6:39 PM Damouse has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 2:48 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 9 of 45 (587952)
10-21-2010 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Damouse
10-21-2010 1:53 PM


Damouse writes:
Take coffee, for an example. Most people drink coffee to "wake up." They cannot function in the morning, according to them, if they dont have their damn coffee.
I wouldnt say coffee gives a high like other drugs, so it's only purpose seems to be to correct morning grogginess. We dont like being groggy in the morning, so we rely on an external substance to counteract it.
I do not think drugs like coffee and cigarettes actually give any high after a couple of weeks.
What they offer instead is a way to get back to their 'normal' state.
The reason people repeatedly take drugs like nicotine and caffeine is due to physical addiction and brainwashing.
Very few people can accurately describe drinking caffeinated coffee or smoking nicotine as pleasurable, except when describing the relief they feel from the symptons caused by the absence of the drug.
The reason most smokers enjoy their coffee/cigarette is because since their last coffee/cigarette they have been gradually feeling worse and worse as withdrawal takes effect.
First thing in the morning, people are likely to have abstained from drug taking (as they were asleep).
This makes the first coffee/cigarette of the day seem particularly nice as they are particularly far into withdrawal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 1:53 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 2:49 PM Panda has replied
 Message 12 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-21-2010 3:01 PM Panda has replied
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 10-21-2010 7:59 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 10 of 45 (587955)
10-21-2010 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by 1.61803
10-21-2010 2:16 PM


1.61803 writes:
I believe there are other animals who enjoy altering their perception with fementing fruits as well. Birds, monkeys etc..
Elephants, pentailed treeshrews, mountain gorillas, dogs, cows, snails, cats, horses, chinese deer, giraffes...and even politicians!
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by 1.61803, posted 10-21-2010 2:16 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 11 of 45 (587956)
10-21-2010 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Panda
10-21-2010 2:39 PM


I do not think drugs like coffee and cigarettes actually give any high after a couple of weeks.
What they offer instead is a way to get back to their 'normal' state.
Anecdotal evidence follows:
I suppose it depends on how much you drink/smoke. I got hooked on smoking for 2 months in my second year of college, against my better judgment. I smoked a pack or two a week, but i could still discern the high i got from a cigarette.
Coffee i drink when i need it. If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee. If i take a midday nap, i wake up and drink coffee to get back into it. I used to kill energy drinks before exams to do better. I felt like my entire body was going at 200% speed.
I, personally, drink coffee for the direct chemical effects and not because of a dependency issue. I drink it only a few times a week.
An example of drug use that is infrequent and fully utilitarian; use and abuse of adderall. Around exam time at my undergraduate university, illicit adderall sales go through the roof. A large group of people seek it out from those whom it was prescribed to to aid their productivity or to help them work through the night. The use isnt frequent enough to attribute its use to an addiction, and the majority of people who have used it (who dont have ADD) claim that it forces the person to be unnaturally productive.
Edited by Damouse, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 2:39 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 3:25 PM Damouse has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 12 of 45 (587960)
10-21-2010 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Panda
10-21-2010 2:39 PM


The reason most smokers enjoy their coffee/cigarette is because since their last coffee/cigarette they have been gradually feeling worse and worse as withdrawal takes effect.
Well, this is what we're told to think. But can it really be true?
"You genuinely enjoyed your first few cigarettes, I'll admit that. But you don't enjoy them any more, even though you think that you do. That's just your addiction talking."
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 2:39 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 3:29 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 13 of 45 (587968)
10-21-2010 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Damouse
10-21-2010 2:49 PM


In reverse order...
Damouse writes:
An example of drug use that is infrequent and fully utilitarian; use and abuse of adderall. Around exam time at my undergraduate university, illicit adderall sales go through the roof. A large group of people seek it out from those whom it was prescribed to to aid their productivity or to help them work through the night. The use isnt frequent enough to attribute its use to an addiction, and the majority of people who have used it (who dont have ADD) claim that it forces the person to be unnaturally productive.
Yes. Not all drugs are physically addictive (but there is always the possiblility of brainwashing though).
I smoked a lot of dope when at college. I decided to stop. So I stopped. Then I discovered I was addicted to nicotine.
Damouse writes:
Coffee i drink when i need it. If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee. If i take a midday nap, i wake up and drink coffee to get back into it.
I, personally, drink coffee for the direct chemical effects and not because of a dependency issue. I drink it only a few times a week.
I realise I don't actually know if it is true about you, but that is the kind of thing addicts will say.
"If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee." - why do people not then ask themselves: "Am I unwell that I wake up unable to be productive?"
Some of the effects of caffeine withdrawal include tireness and the inability to concentrate.
Reading back through this post it seems like it could look like an attack on you.
It is more meant to show that normal people give normal reasons to avoid seeing an addiction.
Cognitive dissonance is frequently responsible for the continued use of an addictive drug.
Sincerely, this is not meant to be interogatory.
If you think this is off-topic or too personal than just say and I will delete bits of this post and not mention it again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 2:49 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 3:41 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 14 of 45 (587969)
10-21-2010 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Dr Adequate
10-21-2010 3:01 PM


Dr Adequate writes:
Well, this is what we're told to think. But can it really be true?
It was for me (and the others that quit with me).
Dr Adequate writes:
"You genuinely enjoyed you first few cigarettes, I'll admit that. But you don't enjoy them any more, even though you think that you do. That's just your addiction talking."
I do not recall anyone enjoying their first few cigarettes.
Mostly people spend their time trying not to cough up a lung, during their first.
Can you really imagine a first-timer inhaling a big breath and exhaling gently with a look of pleasure on their face? Really?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-21-2010 3:01 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-21-2010 5:22 PM Panda has replied

  
Damouse
Member (Idle past 4905 days)
Posts: 215
From: Brookfield, Wisconsin
Joined: 12-18-2005


Message 15 of 45 (587971)
10-21-2010 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Panda
10-21-2010 3:25 PM


"If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee." - why do people not then ask themselves: "Am I unwell that I wake up unable to be productive?"
Some of the effects of caffeine withdrawal include tireness and the inability to concentrate.
Hahahah dont worry panda, im not at all offended. It's a justified string of questions.
I define addiction as being a pattern of actions that one is unable to easily stop. I was legitimately addicted to smoking, no doubt about it. But that doesn't invalidate that i could feel the buzz. Im not sure if i should look for something to cite or keep pounding the anecdotal drum. I felt bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, lightheaded, thoughtful, and calmed.
Yes. Not all drugs are physically addictive (but there is always the possiblility of brainwashing though).
My point in bringing forward the adderall abuse story was to show an example of a drug that is used directly and solely for it's effects, and not any sort of dependencies.
"If i wake up and i need to be productive, i drink coffee." - why do people not then ask themselves: "Am I unwell that I wake up unable to be productive?"
Some of the effects of caffeine withdrawal include tireness and the inability to concentrate.
Can one drink coffee without being addicted to it? If so, can we let this person be our subject?
This person, who drinks coffee only so she can stay up late or be awake early, seems to be dissatisfied with her biological functions. The use of drugs for this purpose is prevalent in all classes of society, and is my issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 3:25 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 4:08 PM Damouse has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024