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).
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 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.
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.
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.
The Backwards Man wrote: » Might as well face it
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.
ED E wrote: » The irony of your username.
RDM_83 again wrote: » What scientific breakthroughs have been made because of the influence of drugs specifically the "enlightening" ones?
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.
RDM_83 again wrote: » The Double Helix/LSD thing is bullsh+thttps://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)
http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-and-geniuses-who-used-drugs-2013-8?IR=T
Ferrari3600 wrote: » Agreed here.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wanderer78 wrote: » you must be mixing with different polish than me! plenty of alcohol and drug abuse there
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.
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.
