Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Drugs are for Everyone
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 16 of 45 (587973)
10-21-2010 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Damouse
10-21-2010 3:41 PM


Damouse writes:
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.
If we are only talking about non-addictive mood-enhancing drugs, then I would posit that they are just an 'emergent property of technology'.
The body is designed to respond positively to feeling good - it is our 'carrot' (and pain is our 'stick').
Would you really go through all the hassle of dating if sex didn't feel good?
But as a species with a brain (which is big enough to get us into trouble) we discovered would could 'cheat' and get pleasure for little investment.
I think it is probably just another symptom of our culture/society being out-paced by technology.
-We suffer from weight-gain because technology reduced the amount of exercise we had to do, and also increased the amount of food available.
-We over-populate due to curing diseases but not restricting reproduction.
-We by-pass the natural causes of pleasure by using man-made drugs.
Culture/society/psychology seems to continually be two steps behind technology.
Edited by Panda, : tyop

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 3:41 PM Damouse has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Damouse, posted 10-21-2010 4:30 PM Panda has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 17 of 45 (587975)
10-21-2010 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Panda
10-21-2010 4:08 PM


Would you really go through all the hassle of dating if sex didn't feel good?
Yes, although less frequently. But that's a different topic of conversation
Culture/society/psychology seems to continually be two steps behind technology.
Good. Thats where i meant this thread to go.
I dream of a world when we move past this. Where our intellectual goals are no slave of chemical desires. I have absolutely no mechanism in mind with which to do that, but there you go.
I'm not saying stop being human, but our evolution (natural or technological) is far from over, imo. We may leave humanity behind us at some point.
Im still curious to hear from a creo on this. If there's no evolution past this and we will always be hooked on drugs as a species, doesnt it seem like we have a built in insufficiency?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 4:08 PM Panda has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 18 of 45 (587979)
10-21-2010 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Panda
10-21-2010 3:29 PM


I do not recall anyone enjoying their first few cigarettes.
I'm sorry, I thought that that was your point.
So ... according to you ... no-one enjoys cigarettes when they first try them ... and then they continue not to enjoy them when they become hooked on them?
Wow, their marketing must be really good.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 3:29 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 5:40 PM Dr Adequate has replied

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


Message 19 of 45 (587981)
10-21-2010 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Dr Adequate
10-21-2010 5:22 PM


Dr Adequate writes:
So ... according to you ... no-one enjoys cigarettes when they first try them ... and then they continue not to enjoy them when they become hooked on them?
Panda writes:
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.
As you see from what I said: people feel relief from withdrawal.
Relief from discomfort is often felt as pleasurable.
Have you never had to delay having a piss until it was painful and then felt the 'pleasure' from finally having a piss?
Dr Adequate writes:
Wow, their marketing must be really good.
You would have to be stupid to choose marketing over addiction and cigarette manufacturers are far from stupid: so they use both.
Ask a smoker to describe what they are feeling as they smoke. Ask them to pinpoint what exactly is pleasurable.
Is it the taste? - ask them to describe the taste.
Is it the smell? - ask them to describe the smell.
Is it the feeling? - ask them what it feels like.
Or is it the relief?
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-21-2010 5:22 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-22-2010 1:02 AM Panda has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 20 of 45 (587987)
10-21-2010 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Damouse
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


Drugs are great, mmkay
These people clearly are trying to adjust their state of mind.
Depending on the drug of course, but some users, esp. of psychedelic drugs, are trying to experience a different state of mind. They're not trying to adjust their mood, they're trying to experience a different reality.
Maybe this is the same thing as you were saying but it didn't seem right to me the way you wrote it.
"Soft" drugs likewise point to some sort of dissatisfaction with the user's current state.
Not at all. There is no dissatisfaction involved when you're at a Pink Floyd concert and having a great time. If you happen to smoke some pot while you're there it wasn't because you were dissatisfied; you just wanted to experience the concert in a different state of mind, but both equally satisfying.
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.
Enjoying a glass of wine and a cigar is partaking in their use for the taste, so not all people who use these products are in it for the chemical change.
The question is as follows: Why do we chase drugs?
Personally I like to experience different states of reality, some I like, some I don't care for. Its never had to do with being dissatisfied with a current state of mind, it's more of a curiousity as to what other state of mind are there.
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?
I sure hope not, sounds rather boring to me.
But really, you should be asking if there will ever come a time when humanity isn't going to have to work ridiculous amounts of hours just to get by, which forces them to form a dependency on coffee and cigs. Coffee to stay awake because their job is boring and would make anyone fall asleep, and cigs so they don't kill their co-workers.
End that insanity and you'll see a huge reduction in dependency.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

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

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 21 of 45 (587988)
10-21-2010 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Damouse
10-20-2010 6:39 PM


Drugs are great, mmkay
Double post
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

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

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 22 of 45 (587993)
10-21-2010 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Panda
10-21-2010 2:39 PM


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.
Have you ever heard of or been to a coffee tasting? Coffee isn't just coffee anymore. There are true, knowledgable aficionados in the coffee world who are ONLY in it for the taste.
The real reason people take "drugs" like nicotine and caffeine is because they work long hours, at boring jobs, are stressed out, and need a momentary outlet from the grind they're in.
Don't blame the coffee and the cigs, blame the shitty state of being most humans find themselves in.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : 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 23 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 9:05 PM onifre has replied

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


Message 23 of 45 (587998)
10-21-2010 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by onifre
10-21-2010 7:59 PM


Onifre writes:
The real reason people take "drugs" like nicotine and caffeine is because they work long hours, at boring jobs, are stressed out, and need a momentary outlet from the grind their in.
But my argument is that those particular drugs offer no relief from any drudgery in our lives.
Alcohol? Cannabis? Cocaine?
Yes - these drugs do have an effect other than withdrawal.
These do help people 'break away' from their day-to-day existence.
But caffeine and nicotine* offer little more than addiction.
Yes, there are a few coffee connoisseurs, but they are the exception.
I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs.
Anyway, this seems off-topic.
I'll have a think about requesting a new topic...Maybe I can think of something controversial enough to be interesting.
*This refers to western doses/strains. IIRC: American Indians used to smoke a tobacco that got them completely off their face.
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by onifre, posted 10-21-2010 7:59 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 10-21-2010 9:24 PM Panda has replied
 Message 25 by onifre, posted 10-22-2010 12:53 AM Panda has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 24 of 45 (588001)
10-21-2010 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Panda
10-21-2010 9:05 PM


But my argument is that those particular drugs offer no relief from any drudgery in our lives.
If they didn't offer relief people wouldn't take them.
But caffeine and nicotine* offer little more than addiction.
Completely wrong. Caffeine offers improved alertness, improved recollection, improved cognition, and improved sensation. (Nicotine offers weight loss, which I guess isn't exactly worth it.)
It's often posed to ethics students: "if you could take a drug with no side effects that would make you smarter, would you do it?" A certain kind of person always answers "no" as he takes a sip from a beverage that does exactly that.
Our brains run on drugs, Panda. None of these drugs could have any effect on your whatsoever if there weren't already receptors for them in your brain cells. Why are those receptors present? For your body's own natural drugs. The drugs it's using to make you do some things and not do others. The drugs it uses to make you want to eat. To make you want to have sex.
I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs.
quote:
Cigar Aficionado is an American magazine that is dedicated to the world of cigars. Published since September 1992, the magazine is known for its articles about different brands of cigars worldwide, and for the celebrities that have appeared on its cover. It is also noted for its opposition to the Cuban embargo. Subtitled as "The Good Life Magazine for Men", it is published by Marvin R. Shanken's M. Shanken Communications, who also publishes Wine Spectator magazine.
I don't understand how someone could survey the vast world of coffees, wines, cigars, even the underground culture of cannabis varieties, and conclude that every person who uses a drug for any purpose is just a strung-out junkie after nothing but a fix. That's like saying that everyone who has ever had sex is a slut.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 9:05 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Panda, posted 10-22-2010 5:27 AM crashfrog has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 25 of 45 (588020)
10-22-2010 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Panda
10-21-2010 9:05 PM


But caffeine and nicotine* offer little more than addiction.
But caffeine and nicotine are not the only things one gets from coffee and cigar products. Just like alcohol is not the only thing you get from wine.
Yes, there are a few coffee connoisseurs, but they are the exception.
Starbucks, just to name one giant in the coffee business, is all about the coffee experience. They don't sell coffee to a few connoisseurs, they sell to the majority of coffee drinkers. And they're NOT selling the caffeine to them, they're selling the taste of the brews and variety of different blends from all over the world.
You can have a negetaive opinion of caffeine as an addictive chemical, but not of the coffee.
I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs.
Connoisseurs for cigs? No. But most smokers smoke a prefered brand and blend because of the taste. Some cigarettes, depending on how much you want to spend, taste very nice, esp. with some nice after dinner Scotch, as I like it. I also know plenty of people that have a cigarette of one of the better tasting brands just once or twice a day after a meal or with a drink.
IIRC: American Indians used to smoke a tobacco that got them completely off their face.
They laced the tobacco with other things, it wasn't the tobacco itself.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 9:05 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Omnivorous, posted 10-22-2010 1:26 AM onifre has replied
 Message 30 by Panda, posted 10-22-2010 5:51 AM onifre has replied

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


Message 26 of 45 (588022)
10-22-2010 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Panda
10-21-2010 5:40 PM


Ask a smoker to describe what they are feeling as they smoke. Ask them to pinpoint what exactly is pleasurable.
Is it the taste? - ask them to describe the taste.
Is it the smell? - ask them to describe the smell.
Is it the feeling? - ask them what it feels like.
But a habitual drinker of pink lemonade would find such questions equally difficult to answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Panda, posted 10-21-2010 5:40 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Panda, posted 10-22-2010 5:56 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 27 of 45 (588023)
10-22-2010 1:26 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by onifre
10-22-2010 12:53 AM


Nicotiana
onifre writes:
it wasn't the tobacco itself
You were doing so well.
Some of the wild native varieties (like Nicotiana rustica) have multiples of "normal" smoking tobacco's nicotine content, definitely potent enough to elicit visions and cause unconsciousness.
You can buy seeds or live plants online.

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio
Real things always push back.
-William James

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by onifre, posted 10-22-2010 12:53 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by onifre, posted 10-22-2010 2:08 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 28 of 45 (588026)
10-22-2010 2:08 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Omnivorous
10-22-2010 1:26 AM


Re: Nicotiana
Some of the wild native varieties (like Nicotiana rustica) have multiples of "normal" smoking tobacco's nicotine content, definitely potent enough to elicit visions and cause unconsciousness.
I guess when you're only familiar with the habits of a few maybe you shouldn't talk like you know the habits of all. My bad.
Thanks Omni, I stand corrected on the native folk's wacky tobacky.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Omnivorous, posted 10-22-2010 1:26 AM Omnivorous has not replied

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


Message 29 of 45 (588059)
10-22-2010 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by crashfrog
10-21-2010 9:24 PM


crashfrog writes:
Completely wrong. Caffeine offers improved alertness, improved recollection, improved cognition, and improved sensation.
...and it offers fecal incontinence.
These effects are from single use. Tolerence to caffeine is rapid.
crashfrog writes:
(Nicotine offers weight loss, which I guess isn't exactly worth it.)
Are you saying that people enjoy smoking because of the weight loss?
Weight loss would be a reason to smoke, not a reason to enjoy smoking.
crashfrog writes:
It's often posed to ethics students: "if you could take a drug with no side effects that would make you smarter, would you do it?" A certain kind of person always answers "no" as he takes a sip from a beverage that does exactly that.
Our brains run on drugs, Panda. None of these drugs could have any effect on your whatsoever if there weren't already receptors for them in your brain cells. Why are those receptors present? For your body's own natural drugs. The drugs it's using to make you do some things and not do others. The drugs it uses to make you want to eat. To make you want to have sex.
This seems to be a rant aimed at me, but unconnected to anything I have said.
I can't even see what the point is you're trying to make.
crashfrog writes:
Panda writes:
I doubt if there are any cigarette connoisseurs.
quote:
Cigar Aficionado is an American magazine...
Do I really need to explain that cigarettes are not cigars?
They are not made the same; they don't contain the same ingredients and they are not even smoked the same.
crashfrog writes:
I don't understand how someone could survey the vast world of coffees, wines, cigars, even the underground culture of cannabis varieties, and conclude that every person who uses a drug for any purpose is just a strung-out junkie after nothing but a fix. That's like saying that everyone who has ever had sex is a slut.
I don't understand how someone could fail to read what was a fairly short and clear post. Please try again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by crashfrog, posted 10-21-2010 9:24 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 10-22-2010 12:39 PM Panda has not replied

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


Message 30 of 45 (588066)
10-22-2010 5:51 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by onifre
10-22-2010 12:53 AM


onifre writes:
But caffeine and nicotine are not the only things one gets from coffee and cigar products. Just like alcohol is not the only thing you get from wine.
Do I have to explain to you that cigars and cigarettes are not the same? Really?
If you were talking about cigarettes then you would be correct. They also contain/produce 599 other ingredients including:
quote:
Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide and ammonia
Could you please be specific about which 'things' you are referring to?
onifre writes:
Starbucks, just to name one giant in the coffee business, is all about the coffee experience. They don't sell coffee to a few connoisseurs, they sell to the majority of coffee drinkers. And they're NOT selling the caffeine to them, they're selling the taste of the brews and variety of different blends from all over the world.
You can have a negetaive opinion of caffeine as an addictive chemical, but not of the coffee.
So, businesses offers a coffee 'experience' with different flavours!
Marketing and addiction, eh? They are as clever as BAT.
onifre writes:
Connoisseurs for cigs? No. But most smokers smoke a prefered brand and blend because of the taste. Some cigarettes, depending on how much you want to spend, taste very nice, esp. with some nice after dinner Scotch, as I like it. I also know plenty of people that have a cigarette of one of the better tasting brands just once or twice a day after a meal or with a drink.
Better tasting brands? Not 'nice tasting', but 'better' tasting?
Preferred brand? Yes, based on which cigarettes taste the least offensive and/or have the best advertising.
onifre writes:
They laced the tobacco with other things, it wasn't the tobacco itself.
(Answered by Omnivorous)
Edited by Panda, : tpyo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by onifre, posted 10-22-2010 12:53 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by onifre, posted 10-22-2010 8:19 AM Panda 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