Advertisement
The UK Chief Scientific Adviser is big-upping drugs to make people smarter etc:
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspap...,00.html
But note the worrying two-facedness, in the light of the ban of psylocybin-carrying fungi and the continuing "war" being raged against all things smokable (includng tobacco). Apparently it's OK to take drugs that make you more *productive*, but not OK to take drugs that, for want of a better phrase, "expand the mind" - even in controlled circumstances. Drugs that make you think faster vs Drugs that make you think *differently*.
The more I think about this, the more mad I get. What David King is effectively saying is "You can take drugs so long as they help you to be 'productive'. We don't want drugs that are *truly* recreational" (despite reference to the term at the start of the article). Pretty much all drugs have a side effect of 7, yet the ability to work more probably outweighs these.
Bah, I'm annoyed now. Fuck 'em.
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspap...,00.html
But note the worrying two-facedness, in the light of the ban of psylocybin-carrying fungi and the continuing "war" being raged against all things smokable (includng tobacco). Apparently it's OK to take drugs that make you more *productive*, but not OK to take drugs that, for want of a better phrase, "expand the mind" - even in controlled circumstances. Drugs that make you think faster vs Drugs that make you think *differently*.
The more I think about this, the more mad I get. What David King is effectively saying is "You can take drugs so long as they help you to be 'productive'. We don't want drugs that are *truly* recreational" (despite reference to the term at the start of the article). Pretty much all drugs have a side effect of 7, yet the ability to work more probably outweighs these.
Bah, I'm annoyed now. Fuck 'em.
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Who chooses the drugs?
Mon, June 5, 2006 - 11:53 PMOutland. Sean Connory. 1979? It has always been the case that drugs that make workers more productive *coffee* are pushed to the maximum, made legal and acceptable...while drugs that make you relaxed and less "productive" are thought of as nusiances. The thing, I can see the logic of your point.
It is very odd that only productivity drugs are to be legal yet drugs that might make one imagine a more productive system or world or might lead to a change in one's outlook on life are banned, banned, banned! -
-
Re: Who chooses the drugs?
Tue, June 6, 2006 - 2:57 AMYup, good points. I think there are 3 main threads, of which this is one. Each drug usage needs to be considered in 3 lights:
1. Does it make you work "better"? (Read "more")
2. Will it kill you?
3. Are the/a production company making money from it?
Legality = a mix of these 3.
Also New Scientist has a related article on the rise (at least on the internet) of unintended use of prescription drugs, e.g. through crushing, extraction, etc:
www.newscientist.com/article...pes.html
(via MindHacks: www.mindhacks.com/)
-
-
Re: Who chooses the drugs?
Thu, June 22, 2006 - 7:59 AMI suppose alcohol is the exception. -
-
Re: Who chooses the drugs?
Sun, June 25, 2006 - 2:17 AMAh, but see question 3 above... Alcohol is only legal when licensed.
-
