A Nation of Addicts and bad attitude toward it

Working class heroes

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

You are vastly oversimplifying.

People who drink coffee during the week at work but not at weekends can get mild withdrawal effects for example (headaches).

Well they are addicted to caffeine then.

ScumLord

Working class heroes wrote: »

No, I never said that I was questioning your nonsensical "a little bit addicted"comment.
You seem to be glamorising drugs.

You seem to be having a hysterical reaction to a comment. A little bit addicted is my way of saying recreational use.

You seem to be suggesting we would still be in the Stone Age if it weren't for ug and og getting stoned. Stop glamorising drugs. Artistic and scientific development was achieved in spite of not because of the influence of drugs.

I'm not glamorising drugs, you're being ridiculous.

I'm not suggesting we would still be in the stone age without drugs. Other more educated people suggested it based on the evidence of drug use down the ages. Early religions and current tribal religions use drugs heavily, they created sites that intensified the experience. If the people making art and scientific breakthroughs say drugs helped them, then who are you to argue with them? Art and drugs are and have always been linked together whether you like it or not.

Working class heroes

ScumLord wrote: »

You seem to be having a hysterical reaction to a comment. A little bit addicted is my way of saying recreational use.

I'm not glamorising drugs, you're being ridiculous.

I'm not suggesting we would still be in the stone age without drugs. Other more educated people suggested it based on the evidence of drug use down the ages. Early religions and current tribal religions use drugs heavily, they created sites that intensified the experience. If the people making art and scientific breakthroughs say drugs helped them, then who are you to argue with them? Art and drugs are and have always been linked together whether you like it or not.

Fair enough recreational use it is then.
I'll take your word on the religion thing.
Scientific breakthrough? Well if they said it(I doubt they did) fair enough.
Look at all the artists we have lost to substance abuse. Imagine what could have been. Overall I think drugs have been a significant negative on "The Arts" we have lost more than we gained, imo.

Ferrari3600

Working class heroes wrote: »

Look at all the artists we have lost to substance abuse. Imagine what could have been. Overall I think drugs have been a significant negative on "The Arts" we have lost more than we gained, imo.

Agreed here.

Maximus Alexander

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Might as well face it

You're addicted to love?

RDM_83 again

ScumLord wrote: »

So people who drink alcohol are either addicts or tea totallers?

If drugs aren't an experience what are they? There are thousands of artworks and even scientific breakthroughs made under the influence of some drug or another. Most ages of enlightenment also included drug use. Hell even most music scenes we know today are linked to a specific drug.

What scientific breakthroughs have been made because of the influence of drugs specifically the "enlightening" ones?
Historically/archaeologically I would say alcohol might be one but alcohol isn't like any other drugs AFAIK, its a source of calories, its a preservative, it makes water safe.
In more modern times maybe "uppers" have had an influence in terms of productivity and war but nobody does a ton of amphetamines and has an enlightening experience, it simply keeps you buzzed and going for 20 hours straight it doesnt change your thinking at all in my experience.

In terms of art I think we could make as good an argument about the influence of mental illness as we can drugs.

harry Bailey esq

ED E wrote: »

The irony of your username.

Starts lots of threads too,but kneemos he certainly is not.For the record junkies don't bother me,ive grown up around them all my life and still consider old friends who ended up on the gear old friends.Thats just a product of geography for you mind,if you didnt see junkies everyday they'd probably be a problem for you.As for stonedpilots op,(are we a nation of addicts)its a bit of a silly ask,for me at least.With all bases covered,everyone is an addict of some kind,just the same as everyone else in the world.

ScumLord

Working class heroes wrote: »

Look at all the artists we have lost to substance abuse. Imagine what could have been. Overall I think drugs have been a significant negative on "The Arts" we have lost more than we gained, imo.

It could be argued that they wouldn't have produced the same quality of work without the drugs, and we wouldn't have heard of them so would have lost nothing. Art is often about getting incite into another persons perception. Drugs alter perception, so I don't understand why people would find it unusual that drugs and art go hand in hand.

Now obviously I'm not saying drugs are a requirement for making great art, but in the right mind they can open up new avenues of thought that they wouldn't have experienced without the drug.

In fact I'd say that abusing drugs diminishes that effect, it makes it mundane and tips the balance in favour of fantasy rather than a merging of reality and the human brain's ability to image pretty much anything.

RDM_83 again wrote: »

What scientific breakthroughs have been made because of the influence of drugs specifically the "enlightening" ones?

Francis Crick came up with the double Helix while on an LSD trip.

http://www.cracked.com/article_16532_the-5-greatest-things-ever-accomplished-while-high.html

The psychedelics can be used as a tool, it can turn your mind into a controllable simulator where your experience collides with a world where anything is possible. It does require education to work. If you know nothing going in you'll come out just as stupid. But it highlights the fact your perception of reality is very narrow, and in reality it is. Your eyes only see a small spectrum of light, your ears only hear a certain range of sound and your brain acts like a filter letting you ignore things that it deems unimportant to your survival. Everyone has experience times when something might be right in front of their face yet somehow they didn't notice it there, that's because your internal perception of reality is basically what your brain imagines the outside world is like based on some flimsy input. Drugs allow you to turn those filters off, everything you brain has deemed unimportant up to now shares the same importance as anything else.

RDM_83 again

The Double Helix/LSD thing is bullsh+t

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSD/comments/2b0lek/franics_crick_was_high_on_lsd_when_he_discovered/

http://realitysandwich.com/314873/francis-crick-dna-lsd/

Art I can buy the influence of drugs on, science and human advancement I can't (apart from maybe amphetamines which most people don't really think about when they talk about the positive impacts of drugs)

Working class heroes

ScumLord wrote: »

It could be argued that they wouldn't have produced the same quality of work without the drugs, and we wouldn't have heard of them so would have lost nothing. Art is often about getting incite into another persons perception. Drugs alter perception, so I don't understand why people would find it unusual that drugs and art go hand in hand.

Now obviously I'm not saying drugs are a requirement for making great art, but in the right mind they can open up new avenues of thought that they wouldn't have experienced without the drug.

In fact I'd say that abusing drugs diminishes that effect, it makes it mundane and tips the balance in favour of fantasy rather than a merging of reality and the human brain's ability to image pretty much anything.



Francis Crick came up with the double Helix while on an LSD trip.

http://www.cracked.com/article_16532_the-5-greatest-things-ever-accomplished-while-high.html

The psychedelics can be used as a tool, it can turn your mind into a controllable simulator where your experience collides with a world where anything is possible. It does require education to work. If you know nothing going in you'll come out just as stupid. But it highlights the fact your perception of reality is very narrow, and in reality it is. Your eyes only see a small spectrum of light, your ears only hear a certain range of sound and your brain acts like a filter letting you ignore things that it deems unimportant to your survival. Everyone has experience times when something might be right in front of their face yet somehow they didn't notice it there, that's because your internal perception of reality is basically what your brain imagines the outside world is like based on some flimsy input. Drugs allow you to turn those filters off, everything you brain has deemed unimportant up to now shares the same importance as anything else.

And you called me ridiculous. If you believe all this nonsense.....well I'll leave it with so.

laugh

All mad for tea father.

ScumLord

RDM_83 again wrote: »

The Double Helix/LSD thing is bullsh+t

https://www.reddit.com/r/LSD/comments/2b0lek/franics_crick_was_high_on_lsd_when_he_discovered/

http://realitysandwich.com/314873/francis-crick-dna-lsd/

Art I can buy the influence of drugs on, science and human advancement I can't (apart from maybe amphetamines which most people don't really think about when they talk about the positive impacts of drugs)

It says LSD wasn't invented by the time he came up with the double helix, he was still a drug user.

Here's a list of some more influential people that have used drugs.

http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-and-geniuses-who-used-drugs-2013-8?IR=T

Although this one also starts with Crick one, but goes on to list people like Bill gates.

The thing you have to remember is that drugs only became illegal in the last century. Before that anyone could use any drug they could get they're hands on, drugs like cocaine were prescribed for the common cold.

When it comes to any historical figure, unless they expressly state they don't use any drugs, it's very possible they used drugs. Stories and legends that in any way mention magic or demons could just as easily be descriptions of a psychedelic trip, especially when some ancient cultures wouldn't have made a distinction between reality and what they saw on trips.

We have an unhealthy relationship with drugs now because of religious puritans imposing their moral code onto people. They changed the relationship from using drugs to discover yourself under the supervision of an experienced elder, into addiction, stigma, hate and violence.

Stonedpilot

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

Agreed here.

Guess they didn't know how to moderate.

Ferrari3600

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sE4OG-TRTQ&list=RD2sE4OG-TRTQ#t=0

JupiterKid

LSD was discovered/synthesised in 1943 in Switzerland by Albert Hoffman. Crick and Watson unravelled the double helix structure of DNA in 1953, 10 years later. But LSD as a widely available recreational drug didn't happen until the mid 1960s.

Anywho, Crick and Watson owe their discovery hugely to a relatively obscure woman scientist who took X-ray microscope images of DNA. It's highly unlikely the pair were tripping on acid when they made their historic discovery.

darkpagandeath

ScumLord wrote: »

Are you by any chance calling anyone who uses any drug an addict? You don't seem to have a cut off for recreational use.

Maybe having a little bit of an addiction isn't a bad thing? It only really seems to be a problem if you're poor and can't afford the drugs.

Life is for living, drugs are an experience, and elevating experience to some. I honestly don't think the human race would be were it is today without the influence of drugs.

Beer built civilisation.

hatrickpatrick

To be fair, the word "junkie" usually doesn't refer simply to addicts, it refers to addicts who engage in nuisance making. Big difference. The person who gets blazed and lies out on a seat on the Liffey boardwalk minding their own business is a very different kettle of fish to the person who gets blazed and then hurls totally unprovoked abuse (What da fuq are yewwwwwww lookin' ah?!) at anyone who walks past. The former is an addict, the latter is a junkie.

That's how I've always understood it anyway.

Unfortunately, in Dublin, the venn diagram of addicts and scumbags has a large area of intersection, which is why a lot of non-scumbag addicts get unfairly judged. I agree that this is moronic and prejudiced, but I personally lay the blame for that on our judiciary for tolerating such public harassment and general bullsh!t when it comes up in court.

Wanderer78

hatrickpatrick wrote:

Unfortunately, in Dublin, the venn diagram of addicts and scumbags has a large area of intersection, which is why a lot of non-scumbag addicts get unfairly judged. I agree that this is moronic and prejudiced, but I personally lay the blame for that on our judiciary for tolerating such public harassment and general bullsh!t when it comes up in court.

It's a lot more complicated than that, yes we have a fairly serious problem with mental health issues and its subsequent close brother, I.e. addiction problems, in this country. Sadly these issues are further compounded by our health and judiciary services, badly dealing with these issues, these services are seriously under funded and under resourced in trying to deal with these issues. In many cases it's just a merry go round for those afflicted with these issues

The J Stands for Jay

Ferrari3600 wrote: »

You are vastly oversimplifying.

People who drink coffee during the week at work but not at weekends can get mild withdrawal effects for example (headaches).

If people stopped abusing coffee, the world would be a better place. Think of all the third world suffering that would stop and the increase in productivity in the first world.

Stonedpilot

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To be fair, the word "junkie" usually doesn't refer simply to addicts, it refers to addicts who engage in nuisance making. Big difference. The person who gets blazed and lies out on a seat on the Liffey boardwalk minding their own business is a very different kettle of fish to the person who gets blazed and then hurls totally unprovoked abuse (What da fuq are yewwwwwww lookin' ah?!) at anyone who walks past. The former is an addict, the latter is a junkie.

That's how I've always understood it anyway.

Unfortunately, in Dublin, the venn diagram of addicts and scumbags has a large area of intersection, which is why a lot of non-scumbag addicts get unfairly judged. I agree that this is moronic and prejudiced, but I personally lay the blame for that on our judiciary for tolerating such public harassment and general bullsh!t when it comes up in court.

OK so a junkie deliberately upsets people?. How does that help them though labelling them, just say addict. The term junkie is awful, like a sub human or something. Always felt those who use this term have notions of themselves as it's such a dismissive term and should be gotten rid off.

BackToWinnipeg

1 minute 35 seconds in.

Hammer89

The world would be a better place if there was more people like OP and I mean that sincerely, without a hint of sarcasm. In my experience, there's usually a pretty sad story behind any person's addiction and they're often a victim themselves. I know that sort of 'mollycoddling' goes down like a lead balloon to some people, who reject it in the notion that addicts are just weak-minded, selfish arseholes, but it's true and I think the world would be that bit less unpleasant if we gave them the compassion that they can't give themselves.

DEFTLEFTHAND

A 4 pack of Lech in Poznan translates to 70c in Euro.

But yet the Polish don't have a problem with vicious alcohol abuse and alcohol related social issues. There's something not right about us as a people, I think we've lost our way.

Morals are ****ed in this country.

Wanderer78

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

A 4 pack of Lech in Poznan translates to 70c in Euro.

But yet the Polish don't have a problem with vicious alcohol abuse and alcohol related social issues. There's something not right about us as a people, I think we've lost our way.

Morals are ****ed in this country.

you must be mixing with different polish than me! plenty of alcohol and drug abuse there

wakka12

What in the world would make you think this is unique to Ireland? Addictions of all kinds are huge problems in every country, as the subtances/activities are addicting, humans are prone to addiction for this reason. Addiction is a human problem not an irish one and serious addictions are frowned upon and not dealt with well in any society on earth really

DEFTLEFTHAND

Wanderer78 wrote: »

you must be mixing with different polish than me! plenty of alcohol and drug abuse there

We have Polish in the family, my younger sister is married to.

He's a cool guy, we've spent many a night out in Poznan drinking 8 zloty Tyskie or getting an old 4 pack of Lech to bring back to the family at the end of the night.

Good Catholic people, better than we are.

hatrickpatrick

Stonedpilot wrote: »

OK so a junkie deliberately upsets people?. How does that help them though labelling them, just say addict. The term junkie is awful, like a sub human or something. Always felt those who use this term have notions of themselves as it's such a dismissive term and should be gotten rid off.

So you're saying that you have a problem with using a pejorative term to describe those who deliberately act like assholes towards random passers by?

hatrickpatrick

Hammer89 wrote: »

The world would be a better place if there was more people like OP and I mean that sincerely, without a hint of sarcasm. In my experience, there's usually a pretty sad story behind any person's addiction and they're often a victim themselves. I know that sort of 'mollycoddling' goes down like a lead balloon to some people, who reject it in the notion that addicts are just weak-minded, selfish arseholes, but it's true and I think the world would be that bit less unpleasant if we gave them the compassion that they can't give themselves.

I agree with you regarding addicts. I do not agree regarding those who engage in pointless antisocial behaviour. I'm not even talking about those who steal to feed their habit, I'm talking about those who shout abuse, start fights, and harass random pedestrians in public for absolutely no reason whatsoever. Those people are scumbags, plain and simple, and should not be allowed to freely roam the streets.

Many addicts do not engage in such nastiness, so for anyone to suggest that being an asshole is caused by addiction is demonstrably false.

Realt Dearg Sec

There's none more pure than a reformed hoor.

Realt Dearg Sec

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

A 4 pack of Lech in Poznan translates to 70c in Euro.

But yet the Polish don't have a problem with vicious alcohol abuse and alcohol related social issues. There's something not right about us as a people, I think we've lost our way.

Morals are ****ed in this country.

Ahahahahahahaha, yeah the polish, no alcohol issues there. Brilliant stuff.