quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I don't really understand the pleasures of drinking alcohol, personally. When one first tries it, it tastes bad. It is an acquired taste. The buzz it gives is not really pleasant, and quite often it makes a person feel bad afterward.
Not that most people here have expressed the sentiment, but there are, of course, quite a lot of people out there who do enjoy the buzz, else it wouldn't be quite so popular a pastime in college settings especially.
Posts: 609 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And a lot of people like the taste. The folks that make the stuff spend a lot of time and effort on creating products that are pleasing to taste for many people.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not to mention that there isn't one single alcohol taste. For many people beer tastes horrible, while very few people don't like the taste of, say, peppermint schnapps which is pretty much like liquid candy. Saying that alcohol is an acquired taste is like calling juice an acquired taste because you tried prune juice once and it tasted bad to you.
I've never been a big drinker, and haven't had a drink in many years, but I have tasted a few dozen different forms of alcohol and beer is the only one that really didn't taste good to me the first time I tried it.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, it doesn't necessarily "cost(s) a whole lot." A large component of alcohol in many jurisdictions is due to sin tax, for example in Ontario there is a provincially mandated minimum price per unit of alcohol in order to regulate alcohol consumption. In jurisdictions without this, beer can often be cheaper than bottled water or juice.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I appreciate what you're trying to do, Tatiana, but in my opinion the particular sort of social pressure that paints popular activities as trashy, unpleasant, or unequivocally stupid can actually turn out to be counter productive.
The fact is that beer can be, to my palate, incredibly delicious. It's like combining the best attributes of artisan bread and cool sparkling water. I also enjoy the effects of the alcohol. I don't like all alcoholic drinks, but there isn't a category that I find completely repulsive (except maybe schnapps ).
The thing is, that some people like alcohol is not a secret. And you can't hide that fact. So, the curious and rebellious ones will always seek to find out what it is like. And if they like it, they will discredit any assertion they ever heard that it is a yucky, unpleasant thing. And any truth that was in that message might get ignored too.
I have a similar opinion about a lot of anti-drug rhetoric. The risks and impacts of some mild drugs are exaggerated, and the disparity between the rhetoric and what people observe around them, and experience when they inevitably experiment, convinces them that the rhetoric is a lie. And then they toss the baby out with the bath water.
It's not a simple matter, of course, because adolescents are sure to underestimate their personal risk when confronted with bare facts. But I don't think the answer lies in exaggeration, or in contradicting apparent reality.
I think it's very wise to point out the risks that come with alcohol use. And it's great to point out that not everyone even likes it. But I don't think it's a great idea to try to convince people that there's nothing appealing about it.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can remember the exact day my attitude about homosexuality changed completely. I was raised Christian, church was my social life, and I "thought" homosexuality was a sin but didn't really care. I also spent too much time on the Internet where I developed the political opinions I largely hold today, roughly libertarian, certainly highly in favor of free speech. So being an immature, insensitive 17 year old, I enjoyed using the word f----- as an insult, or calling something gay when I meant it sucked. A girl in one of my classes confronted me about it, and I gave her some bullshit about the First Amendment.
I kept using those slurs for a few days after that, using religion as an excuse but not a reason, because I didn't actually care all that much about who wanted to sleep with whom... and then learned that a friend of mine was gay.
I felt like shit, like a worm. Years later I still cringe just writing about it.
I have never since used those words (as expletives).
I do think there is an interesting parallel between GBLT orientations and psychoactive use, though. I mean, let's face it, you can look at the stats and they will show higher rates of AIDS, more alienation from society, etc. for either category. Lots of people say it is wrong on moral or religious grounds, despite the fact that neither they nor any other non-consenting party are harmed in a quantifiable sense by two men kissing each other or some college kids popping E. But it goes beyond that. I am going to use myself as an example, because I don't want to type about anyone else's use in any detail without prior permission, I have necessarily observed myself for a longer period than anyone else I could use for the purpose.
I drink most days. Don't necessarily get drunk, mind you, but I do drink pretty much daily. I use or have tried and discarded most illegal drugs as well as a few that are so new the DEA hasn't gotten around to making them illegal yet. Some of them I no longer use, or only tried once, because I disliked more aspects than I enjoyed. I smoke entirely too many cigarettes, because I enjoy them (the buzz got milder after a couple months, but it's showing no signs of leaving). About two thirds of the time I drink, I do get drunk, and it is almost always intentional. Not saying it has never happened unintentionally, but quite rarely, and in the US new drinkers pretty much have to figure out their limits for themselves, moreso than Europe, Canada, etc. Unfortunately the use of other drugs does not have the rich palette of words that alcohol has to describe different levels of intoxication.
I imagine most of the people on this board would describe my substance use as heavy, but I disagree. It is moderate. Heavy was two or three years ago for me. I knew and know people who used significantly more than I did at my highest period. Not to go into too much detail, but I drank at least twice as much, and used cocaine several times a week for about two and a half years, two or three months of which were daily. Medically, I am sure I came within the criteria for substance abuse and alcoholism. Probably still do, but... I don't care.
The following paragraph is an account of my own experiences. It is not intended as advice to anyone suffering from any mental health problem. In fact, I specifically advise against using my methods. They worked for me, but it was an unintentional (albeit lucky) side effect. Everyone's brain chemistry has different nuances. YMMV
I mentioned alcohol and cocaine specifically because they have had specific, measurable benefits that would have been impossible or at the least much more difficult (for me) to have obtained without them. Cocaine significantly alleviated the depression I had been experiencieng since I was 19 until I was 23. Not directly (well, directly too, but that wasn't permanent.) And while I was certainly depressed, I never got a medical diagnosis, nor was it severe compared to several people I know. The comedowns were like the depression times ten... but I knew they would end, so I could deal with them. And after dealing with the comedowns the depression was nothing. I've only used cocaine three or four times over the past two years because I got bored with it, but I will always be grateful. Let me repeat that this is not intended as advice of a medical or any other nature. If you want to be medicated for depression, go to a psychiatrist. (The reason I didn't see one myself is that s/he probably would have wanted me to quit using illicit substances, and I was not willing to do so.)
Alcohol quite simply kept me from killing myself in the darkest (mercifully brief) period of my life. I don't claim that I've had a particularly hard life. I haven't. I know why I was having a rough time then, but then or now I don't know why it was that rough. (It was distinct from the depression. Started after, left quite a bit sooner.) Cocaine fixed a problem; alcohol just let me ignore it until the inexplicable portion just disappeared on its own and an excellent lawyer took care of the rest. I have since spoken with several people who have used alcohol for the same purpose, obviously successfully.
Don't get the wrong idea from those two tales. The vast majority of my drug and alcohol use is not therapeutic in intention or effect. I try new drugs because I am curious, and if I feel their positive outweighs the negative then I continue to use them for fun and work. I have a few regrets... but they are very few. Most of those are not intrinsic to the drugs per se, but arise from our drug laws. I realize the choices I make are not the ones most people would be happy with... although you would be surprised at how many people you meet whom would never have pegged as a user... but I am ultimately responsible only for my own happiness and fulfillment. If I am satisfied, those who care about me should be. Certainly I don't want my family and my friends, to worry for me, but while I owe my family a great deal I do not owe them my being, and most of my friends share my attitudes about drug use if not my tastes.
I think drug use is in some ways where the gay rights movement was in the middle of the last century. Further along socially, perhaps, although it's hard for me to get an accurate picture of public opinion as most of my acquaintances and all my friends don't care, but politically it is at least as much of a wedge. More parties have a direct personal, political, and/or financial stake in the outcome.
But you shouldn't need drugs to feel good, have fun, or unlock parts of your mind you never knew were there! The sex drive is fundamental, right? Yes, but so is the drive to intoxication, to alter one's mood or mind. (Don't have time to look up sources right now but I'll try to come back to the library tomorrow.)
I and those with similar views are just making excuses for our addictions? No. First, I make no excuses. I took responsibility when I researched the drugs I've used, learning as much as is possible for a reasonably intelligent layman with a limited amount of time and patience. There are some drugs I have turned down due to what I learned. I get lots of questions from people who do not understand how to read the back of a pill bottle and use the Internet, but I always am happy to answer if I can or direct them to a place that can. I did get a DUI, which was wrong and irresponsible. Fine. That is why I do not drive any more, even though I have my license. It was wrong, it was stupid, but there was no wreck, my taxes pay for the roads too, and everyone's done stuff that was almost or sometimes more dangerous. I don't claim to be perfect, but I did alter my behavior after that, immediately. I make no excuses for that, and I need no excuse for any other action of mine related to drug or alcohol use. I learned quickly that I was not cut out to sell them, because I hate being bothered at all hours, but when I dabbled in it years ago (with a drug that was legal at the time - really) I made certain to tell my customers of the dangers. If I afford to get a substance I do not and have never stolen or committed any crime worthy of being called a crime. As a matter of fact, other than the laws I have to break to obtain and use drugs I am more law-abiding than most people I know. (Yeah, yeah, I don't have to break them... just like gay couples didn't have to break sodomy laws not so very long ago.) I don't make excuses...
...and I resent the words addiction, addict, and alcoholic. I am dead serious when I say that when I hear people refer to someone (other than themselves) as addict or alcoholic or substance abuser I begin to realize how my friend probably felt in high school. The entire concept of addiction as a disease, or really addiction at all, is offensive, patronizing, and insulting when referring to a person other than the speaker, and an attempt to evade responsibility for one's own choices, actions, and character if referring to oneself. I am aware of the various diagnoses in the medical and psychiatric sphere. Homosexuality was considered a psychiatric disorder in, what, DSM III? (I'm not looking that one up either.)
I am not referring to tolerance or physical dependence. Those do exist; they are easy enough to monitor if one cares to; they do not issue their sufferers a permit to steal, lie to anyone they shouldn't, murder, etc.
Drugs are chemicals. They possess neither will nor intelligence. They are incapable of dominating a person's moral faculties, free will, whatever you care to call it. Excessive doses of some (though not all) can cause effects intense enough to render a person temporarily irrational or incapable of adequate motor control, but if you chose to ingest them you are ultimately at fault anyway... and as soon as they begin to wear off to a reasonable level then whatever excuse one may have possessed is gone. No one is hooked from the first time. They just like the effect a lot, they make a decision as to what priority they will assign to keeping it, they make a judgment according to their values as to what part it will have in their life. Neither the effect, the priority, nor the values are immutable. As humans are fallible and shortsighted, not to mention selfish, sometimes the user or another wishes they had made different choices, but that is their moral burden, and it cannot be thrust upon the drug.
I don't care how many users say otherwise. I've met lots of people who say they are addicted. Hell, I've said it before. Sometimes they are trying to evade personal responsibility. Other times, at least as often, it is a kind of short hand. I say that I am addicted to tobacco. Certainly I fiend when I don't get my smoke break, but by addicted I mean, "I still enjoy it a lot and I am not willing to quit, even though I know it is bad for my physical health." You can hold an intervention and label someone an alcoholic, but if they really want to drink they'll pull out Step 1, claim to be powerless, and keep drinking. "But he wouldn't do that, it's not him." Yes, it is. Sorry, but not every human is a saint, and some are cruel, selfish, and even evil. Whatever he did, it was already in him.
Psychoactive drugs create their immediate effects either by mimicking a neurotransmitter (THC, opiates), releasing a neurotransmitter(amphetamine, MDMA), blocking its reuptake (cocaine, Ritalin), or some combination thereof. They might affect a different combination of receptors than before, or to a different degree, and some of them will do permanent changes or damage, but the stuff that comes out when one is high was already somewhere inside you. No one can say with complete confidence what the mind is or where the brain stops and the mind begins, but I can say with certainty drugs are nothing but chemicals.
Not that I haven't blamed things on drugs that weren't them. It's so easy to blame hurtful words or actions on a chemical when talking to others, but it's usually a lie. The drugs didn't cause the action, they just provided me with (and many, many others) a convenient scapegoat. Just like SSM provides a convenient scapegoat for the problems traditional marriage and families are facing.
I am fairly open about my use, both online and in real life. I know I am taking some risks, but how else is anything going to change? If I really had balls I'd be going to gay rights activists, work for them while studying, evaluating, and hopefully improving their methods... but goddamn, I might want to be high all day but that doesn't mean I want to have nothing else in my life but drugs. What's the point of being drunk or high if you're serious all the time? I possess neither the moral courage nor the single-mindedness necessary to be an effective activist. Sometimes I wish it was otherwise, but while activists can be very admirable characters I doubt they have that much fun. It took me a lot of time to let go of most of the rage I had at various institutions I held (and still hold) responsible for the situation. If I were to take a more active role in trying to change things, I think I would get a lot of it back and I'm just not willing to do so. At least I tell truth to anyone short of police and other figures in a position to immediately harm me.
*************************
I've always wanted to write something like this; I've been playing around with the idea for a long time. I think if I put the time and effort in I could write a longer, more polished essay on the same topic; I know the stuff about my personal life needs to be tightened up but I'm tired of thinking about this topic and the library chair is making my back hurt. Hopefully I'll be able to check the replies tomorrow.
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you so much for sharing that, Danzig. I'm going to be thinking about what you said for a long time.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed it's something to take significant note of. Perhaps even perspective changing, to some small degree.
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may have been offline for about a month, but the humor of a topic about homosexuality with a pseudo-literate troll named Clive Candy is pretty apparent and laughable.
I mean really, "Clive Candy" sounds like a poorly contrived male stripper name.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Pseudo-literate' is a bit harsh. Comrade Candy is clearly capable of crafting competent carillons to conservatism.
Ok, by 'clearly' I noticed the alliteration and got a bit carried away. My point is, his grammar and spelling seem quite reasonable and he makes paragraph breaks in sensible places. I agree that he is really terrible at actual argument, but he is well above the Internet average in just writing skills.
Edit: Corrected spelling error.
[ November 16, 2009, 12:40 PM: Message edited by: King of Men ]
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: I may have been offline for about a month, but the humor of a topic about homosexuality with a pseudo-literate troll named Clive Candy is pretty apparent and laughable.
I mean really, "Clive Candy" sounds like a poorly contrived male stripper name.
Well if its spelt instead as Clive Kandhi it sounds Somalian.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: I may have been offline for about a month, but the humor of a topic about homosexuality with a pseudo-literate troll named Clive Candy is pretty apparent and laughable.
I mean really, "Clive Candy" sounds like a poorly contrived male stripper name.
He's fairly entertaining, I'll give him that. And that's all.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about you admit I was right about poor nutrition and crooked teeth? Also, that book that I asked you to mail back to me? If you won't comply with my first request in the post, then please shove said tome up your rear.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel moderately convinced that your suggested course of action would not be an improvement to my diet.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Also, this isn't a nutrition thread. Some might be annoyed if we derail it.
Also, the issue isn't "what diet should King of Men eat?" That's so individual and circumstantial that it's almost a different question, at least in some cases. The issue is, "Is poor nutrition the main cause of crooked teeth in humans, particularly lack of vitamin D-3, vitamin K-2, and calcium?" And let's not derail.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, it's now apparently a thread about the perceived personal qualities of posters, and I feel moderately convinced nobody will object if we derail that. However, as noted, your entertainment value is very limited, so I think I shall say "Good day to you, sir."
Good day to you, sir.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I want to thank you, Danzig, for your honest words. I'm giving them a great deal of thought. I do know that drugs and alcohol are often used by people with depression and other brain chemistry problems as a way of self medication. I think a lot of the people in my family, and a lot of my friends who've died, etc. were doing just that.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I feel moderately convinced that your suggested course of action would not be an improvement to my diet.
Only moderately?
I'm afraid to ask what your current diet is like. So I won't.
I must admit that hedging adjectives are a weakness of mine, even where they're not that appropriate. Comes of working in academia. 'Moderately convinced', in this case, should be taken as meaning 'quite certain'. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, wait, I get it. By "course of action", you meant the anal insertion of my book. I usually put my food in the other end, but, you know, whatever.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tatiana, I see no moral distinction between self-medicating with illegal drugs and antidepressants. Indeed Wellbutrin and cocaine are both dopamine reuptake inhibitors, as is the ADHD drug Ritalin. But I want to emphasize that I used and use for other reasons much more often, some functional, some recreational. I am in a much better place mentally and emotionally now than a few years ago, and have been for some time, but that doesn't mean I don't want to turn a good mood or attitude into a great one. I also believe that my success in self-medicating (which was at least somewhat an unconscious action) was due in large part to the time I spent researching drugs in general, as I had the knowledge to make safer, more effective decisions regarding my use. Knowledge is power.
Tom, I had read quite a bit about its effects, risks, benefits, etc. and decided that most of the dangers, while valid enough, were grossly overemphasized, and I knew already that no drug could ever destroy my free agency. The experience of several friends (most of whom I am still friends with, two of them quite close) confirmed my opinion. You hear lots about people who steal or prostitute themselves or OD, but very little about the far greater majority who lead reasonably happy and successful lives. I admit the risk of negative consequences goes up the more frequently one uses it, but that is due much more to the risk of arrest than to the direct effects of cocaine (or any other drug) on your mind or body. Someone else with different values and goals could start with the same initial data and reach another conclusion, which would be entirely valid for them but not for me. In my case, my curiosity outweighed the risks.
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Danzig, how old are you? It is an old and good maxim to praise no man's happiness until his death.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Oh, wait, I get it. By "course of action", you meant the anal insertion of my book. I usually put my food in the other end, but, you know, whatever.
Your digestion, nevertheless, takes place closer to the end that's not your mouth, but where you apparently keep your brain. And since it's the digestive action that's important for the diet, there you go.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Oh, wait, I get it. By "course of action", you meant the anal insertion of my book. I usually put my food in the other end, but, you know, whatever.
Your digestion, nevertheless, takes place closer to the end that's not your mouth, but where you apparently keep your brain. And since it's the digestive action that's important for the diet, there you go.
Dude, I have no desire to fight with you. If I am publicly disagreeing with you, it's because I am certain you are wrong, and I am right, and I am telling you so. Otherwise, I have decided you are either trolling, too stupid to be worth trying to help, or actually right (which does happen sometimes, but then again, so do the other two). I have decided that you are a sociopath, and incapable of actually caring about other human beings. It's hard to invest in you emotionally when I'm pretty sure you are not capable of investing in me. Therefore, I do not fight with you. I tell when I think you are wrong, or I simply say nothing to you.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see. And when you tell someone they are wrong, do you usually instruct them to insert books in places where books do not usually go? Or is that merely a point where I am wrong and you are right?
I think, perhaps, it is a little late for you to try claiming the high moral ground in this discussion.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I see. And when you tell someone they are wrong, do you usually instruct them to insert books in places where books do not usually go? Or is that merely a point where I am wrong and you are right?
I think, perhaps, it is a little late for you to try claiming the high moral ground in this discussion.
So let's get to the heart of it, KoM. You
a. think you're so superior to me that you co not consider me human, and cannot, therefore, care about me
b. are a sociopath, which is fine, I accept that sociopaths are a naturally occurring fact, and hating them is like hating thunderstorms
c. are actually doing an incredibly good impression of either a or b.
And, see, I don't even care. This discussion is boring. Say something factual I can correct or ignore.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's hard to invest in you emotionally when I'm pretty sure you are not capable of investing in me.
I dont believe emotions have anything to do with a conversation about the insertion of a book into ones rectum. Honestly, you two were having a perfectly entertaining argument for a while there. Its just the internet, dont get so huffy.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
KoM, I am twenty-five. As far as happiness goes, I've found that keeping a positive attitude matters much more than anything else. At least for me.
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree to an extent; my experience is that people are happy or unhappy according to their personalities, rather than their circumstances. (Within limits.) I think you've got the causality backwards, though: It's not a question of consciously keeping a positive attitude; you cannot choose these things. Rather, happy people have a positive attitude in almost any circumstances. This is possibly the only part of the design of the human brain which is even more unfair than the already monstrous disparities in general intelligence.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, you certainly have to work with what you are given, but I do believe that it is possible to consciously develop one's personality towards a particular goal. My perspective is quite cynical in many ways, and probably always will be, but that does not stop me from making the best of any situation. The universe might suck. I refuse to let it get me down.
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I don't really understand the pleasures of drinking alcohol, personally. When one first tries it, it tastes bad. It is an acquired taste. The buzz it gives is not really pleasant, and quite often it makes a person feel bad afterward.
QFT. I don't like wine, hard stuff feels like self-punishment, and beer is just gross. I never have and never will understand the draw.
Humans and their wacky chemicals...
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi all, I think that you're forgetting or downplaying the role of the younger generation. For us, it is socially acceptable. Pretty much everyone I know under the age of 30 is pro-SSM. And while where I live (Northeast) probably influences that, I still think that there's a definite and insurmountable trend of the relatively young generation towards increasing liberal social standpoints. Where I go to school, gay is accepted by most as a derogatory term. And at the same time, most are pro-SSM. It seems counter-intuitive, and to me it doesn't quite match up, but I think that it's a form of cultural acceptance, and I think that the trend is definitely changing.
As to Danzig's post, I think that his attitude is also one that's becoming more and more prevalent. To me, it's all about self control. I've seen plenty of kids abuse drugs from advil (a friend of a friend managed to get himself psychologically addicted) to weed to crack and heroin. I think that some drugs, like cocaine and heroin, are too addictive to be used rationally. But I know counselors who would rather see kids on weed than using alcohol regularly.
It's really about what's acceptable in society, and that's determined by who and what we interact with. The way I see it, by the time we're in high school, we can think pretty analytically. And yet the majority of my classmates will do whatever someone who presents himself confidently encourages. And in my experience, adults aren't that different.
Posts: 14 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do believe that it is possible to consciously develop one's personality towards a particular goal.
I think you are just plain mistaken here, and I support this position by reference to happiness studies on people who lose limbs in accidents. About six months after the accident, they report being roughly as happy as they were before. You can't tell me they're all consciously trying for a cheerful demeanour; no, they've got some particular set point for their happiness, and in the long run they stay there no matter what happens.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I agree to an extent; my experience is that people are happy or unhappy according to their personalities, rather than their circumstances. (Within limits.) I think you've got the causality backwards, though: It's not a question of consciously keeping a positive attitude; you cannot choose these things. Rather, happy people have a positive attitude in almost any circumstances. This is possibly the only part of the design of the human brain which is even more unfair than the already monstrous disparities in general intelligence.
I disagree, in a limited sense. I think it's possible over relatively long stretches of time to adopt patterns of thought and behaviors that will make yourself happier. Some people will do so more naturally than others, but most people are capable of it.
ETA:
quote:ou can't tell me they're all consciously trying for a cheerful demeanour; no, they've got some particular set point for their happiness, and in the long run they stay there no matter what happens.
Or, the loss of a limb does not significantly alter one's ability to choose behaviors that produce happiness.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Danzig, my mom's close friend's son died in his 30s of a cocaine overdose. He was a successful businessperson at the time. We grew up together sort of like cousins, so I knew he was into drugs since high school. There's no particular reason for you to listen to me or for me to worry about you but I do.
The reason medical drugs are prescribed for depression and suicidal ideation and so on is because they're less dangerous and have fewer side effects than street drugs. Street drugs really could be anything. There's no quality guarantee or inspection. You're putting your faith in a whole string of people who might be anyone from the Taliban to mobsters to your corner dealer when you ingest that stuff into your body. It's hard enough to keep the whole pathway from manufacture to delivery clear for legal drugs. My father died of a bad batch of Heparin, for instance. But even those have SOME inspection, some quality checks, sterility, etc. Illegal drugs, of course, have none.
Next, you're putting yourself at risk just by hanging around the people who deal drugs. As I'm sure you know, the mob controls distribution of street drugs. They kill people who don't pay them, and they require the end seller, who is just some guy somewhere, to bear all the risks for them. I knew a guy in high school who sold pot out of his mobile home. (The end-dealers never get rich, you know? It's the mobsters who make the money.) Anyway, the cops arrested him one day and confiscated his latest kilo. His mob bosses when he got out of jail and wanted to go clean, threatened him with bodily harm if he didn't pay them for the drugs the cops took. So he began dealing again to be able to pay. Then his wife left him and took the kids, because she by that time was fed up with the drug-dealing way of life for her family. And that was only pot.
Anyway, say you were there one afternoon enjoying sharing a fat blunt with your host. Suppose his bosses show up to take retribution for non-payment. Do you think they'll just shoot him and let you leave peacefully? Have you thought about what kinds of friends and business associates your dealer buddy has? Are they good people to know? Would you want to expose your family to their attentions?
Not to mention the fact that you're risking jail, with all that jail entails. You're risking your future career. You're setting the bar for yourself very low. Please think about these things. Decide if your use of these drugs are helping your family thrive and prosper. Are they building you up as a person or gradually tearing you down? Which direction do you want to head in your life?
I think you're intelligent and have a high quality mind and heart. I think you can aim higher than you're currently aiming. I wish you the best, and I'm glad for your truthfulness. I know I have no personal influence over you and there's no reason for you to listen to me at all. I want you to look at things truthfully and make your decisions using your own wisdom and intelligence.
You don't have the lifetime of watching drug users that I have. You may not have cousins and friends, as I do, who have died or just wasted away. You didn't know people when they were young and hopeful and full of life later go down desperate paths to early deaths. You haven't seen the sorrow eat into the faces of those you love. I can't give you these experiences. Me just telling you about them doesn't make an impression the way you living them does. But once you're old enough to have seen this yourself, a lot of opportunities may have passed you by. A lot of joy and life that could have been yours might be gone forever. So that's why I say this to you, in the faint hope that you can figure things out a week earlier, or something, than you would have naturally in the course of life. The choice is entirely yours, as it should be. The consequences will stretch way beyond you to all those who love you, and those who love them, and so on. The consequences can last for generations.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
I do know some adults that are refusing to get married till homosexuals can also marry, but I've never been made aware of someone so young taking a stand.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tatiana, we're going to run into the same problem we always run into in these conversations, namely that each of us are relating personal anecdotes. Each of us can tell a story about the drug user whose life went horribly wrong, or the person who did drugs but who went on to lead a happy and successful life, or the person who still does drugs and is a perfectly responsible and productive adult. Just as it's important to hear and be aware of the horror stories, it's important to hear the success stories(that's a bad term for it though). Espousing any extreme probably does the conversation no good(not to say you were being extreme!).
I'll just comment on two aspects of your post. I don't think we should make any causal statements about the person who wastes their life away using drugs. Is it really objectively any different from the person who wastes their life away playing video games, or watching television, or playing on the internet for that matter! I think more importantly we should be asking ourselves what is going on in society that a large number of people have no interest or motivation in being more active in their lives.
Let me give a related personal example. I have often throughout life used books and reading as an excuse to not do something else I should have been doing. Reading became a form of procrastination and neglect of either specific work that needed to be done, or more general productivity. It just so happens that my chosen form of neglect was something many people consider to be a positive thing(and i would always receive praise about how well read and studious I was), but there was nothing from my point of view that was vastly different about it. In fact, it was even worse in the sense that had I chosen to play video games to distract myself from my responsibilities at least I couldn't lie to myself about what I was doing, but when it's a book, I can confabulate an excuse around the fact that I'm reading and learning and expanding my mind and all that.
If there wasn't a book around would I have suddenly become a more productive person and done all those things I wanted to do? Probably not. I would've found something else to distract myself. So do we blame my use of books for not doing well in school or being more successful? Or do we try to analyze why I look for distractions in the first place?
Second, you make a valid point about thinking about the source of the drugs that the user ends up purchasing. Though I think that's only a valid argument if the person making it also abides by the same standard of conduct in all their purchases, be it food or clothes or electronics. Not in relation to the mob, but in relation to ethical considerations in general. But towards that end, I actually made a conscious choice in my drug use(pot) to try to be aware of where my purchases are coming from. We now deal with someone who buys directly from a grower in upstate new york. He drives up there himself, putting us one removed from the source. Before that we had a connection for something that was home grown in state. Not everyone has the luxury of doing this, but I would still question the picture of the drug trade you paint. At least in regards to marijuana. Do you have any figures or data that would indicate the majority of the pot trade is mob run? Is there a way to break down those statistics for different types of marijuana? I know I've talked to some people who mostly buy the street corner variety of pot, which might as well have a different name altogether from what most people I know smoke.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I'd still like to know what led Danzig to decide that cocaine was worth the risk.
Tom, I can't answer for Danzig, but I can answer for myself. I certainly didn't use cocaine to the extent that Danzig did. I tried it a grand total of two times, decided it was not for me, and never tried it again. How did I view the risks? To me the only risk would be a possible overdose. I wasn't worried about the risk of addiction, I know myself too well to view that as a realistic possibility. And the risk of overdose was equally unrealistic. People make risky decisions every day. They bungee jump, or sky dive, or get in a car, or fly on a plane. Every one of these acts carries a risk along with it, but the people who choose to do these things apparently decide that the risk is worth it.
I knew many people that used cocaine throughout college. I never tried it during any of those years. Cocaine has SUCH a negative view as a hard drug that I had a very strong natural aversion to it. It also seemed like an expensive habit and I'd personally witnessed many an all night coke binge that really turned me off to the drug. I do value new experiences though, and have always had an interest in different states of consciousness. So in my mid twenties I had to admit to myself that I was curious about the effects of the drug, that I knew the chances of an adverse reaction were very small, and what was really the harm in trying it out? I was holding out mostly out of stubbornness, out of the idea that I had always told friends I would never try coke and I didn't want to be a person who had. So I tried it. Like I said, the effects weren't really that pleasing to me. I now have that experience behind me, and I no longer have to be curious about it.
Can I ask you what exactly you view the risks to be that would keep you from doing cocaine? I'm not saying I think you should try the drug, but your question to Danzig implies a different point of view so I'm curious to hear it. To me it's not the risks associated with coke that turn me off to it as much as the state of the people when they are in the middle of abusing it. I make the distinction of "abuse" to indicate all night coke binges as opposed to someone using a small amount. No offense Danzig! But I just can't stand to be around that, they're welcome to it though.
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I don't really understand the pleasures of drinking alcohol, personally. When one first tries it, it tastes bad. It is an acquired taste. The buzz it gives is not really pleasant, and quite often it makes a person feel bad afterward.
QFT. I don't like wine, hard stuff feels like self-punishment, and beer is just gross. I never have and never will understand the draw.
Humans and their wacky chemicals...
Well, I can certainly agree about beer. I've never developed a taste for beer and don't drink it. But certain wines taste really great, and while I don't enjoy the taste of straight hard liquor, there are many mixed drinks that are just fantastic. A white russian being an example of quite possibly the tastiest thing ever created!
quote:I know myself too well to view that as a realistic possibility.
What kind of self-knowledge do you have that made you certain you wouldn't be biologically predisposed to a physical addiction to cocaine?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, I grant you there was a possibility that addiction would result from my trying cocaine. I viewed it as an acceptable risk. But seriously Tom, you might as well say I shouldn't ever try chocolate because I might be biologically predisposed to a physical addiction. The risk of addiction exists for any human action or behavior. I view myself as too moderate in my predilections and too over-analyzing in my behavior to become an addict of anything. But maybe I give myself too much credit, maybe that's what everyone who becomes addicted to a drug thinks beforehand. But I'd warrant a guess that most people don't get addicted immediately to something. I imagine it's a slow process and the addiction sneaks up on them. I think I'm too reflective to let something like that happen.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You didn't answer my question though, unless your question was the answer? Do you view the risk of physical addiction too great in relation to any perceived positive effects?
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I do believe that it is possible to consciously develop one's personality towards a particular goal.
I think you are just plain mistaken here, and I support this position by reference to happiness studies on people who lose limbs in accidents. About six months after the accident, they report being roughly as happy as they were before. You can't tell me they're all consciously trying for a cheerful demeanour; no, they've got some particular set point for their happiness, and in the long run they stay there no matter what happens.
Not surprisingly, the research into people's happiness is more extensive than just these studies. It a large and often seemingly contradictory topic. The indication is that both inherent dispositional factors and a person's perspective and cognitive strategies contribute to their sense of happiness.
The research is pretty clear that it is definitely possible for many people to change their sense of happiness.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Okay, I grant you there was a possibility that addiction would result from my trying cocaine. I viewed it as an acceptable risk. But seriously Tom, you might as well say I shouldn't ever try chocolate because I might be biologically predisposed to a physical addiction.
I'm sure you're aware of the significant differences in chemical interaction with the body between cocaine and chocolate.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course, I'm making a more general point that I'm sure we all as individuals don't do our due diligence to 100% efficiency in researching what might be our potentials for addiction based on our physiology and psychology in all aspects of life, not just drug related. I simply answered Tom's question as to what made me decide it was worth the risk in that particular situation. It was a necessary brief account. In the end I made a judgement call, many of you would not make the same one.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The issue on the whole (besides a general equivalency argument between the potency of cocaine and chocolate) is that for all the intent and logic behind assuming that one is above being 'taken' by a drug's addiction (in your case, 'too self reflective'), biology can easily short-circuit people's assumed resilience to addiction and leave them as the world's latest casualty to a drug they were positive they had the mental fortitude to resist addiction to.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
). ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
