Freedomain Radio

After the Sep. 16, '07 podcast, I've had a great deal of trouble resolving the following issue:

Musical taste is subjective.  It's an opinion; a preference.  Therefore, if I take drugs and produce music that is preferred by more people than the music I produce without drugs, are drugs not a useful professional tool?  We'll assume complete empiricism here--that the listeners have no idea that the artist was on drugs during the creation of either of the two works.

 

Edit:

Also, if drugs are a tool (Stefan calls them a "crutch"), then must we really get rid of them?  Should ancient man have eliminated his stone tools?  What about a writer's pen?  A musician's instrument?  None of these things are native to the body, but they are all important to our lives.  Also, caffeine is very much a mind altering substance--in fact, it is remarkably similar to cocaine, with a lower maximum-effect ceiling.

Pens, axes and violins don't disrupt your ability to process reality, and neither does a cup of tea.

No one 'has' to get rid of mind-altering drugs of course. They should be perfectly legal, and no one should take them.

Problems should be faced head-on, without self-drugging.

I say this having spent 18 months with terrible insomnia, and without a single sleeping pill.

If I had drugged myself instead of going through gruelling therapy, FDR would never have happened.

Also, if drugs are a tool (Stefan calls them a "crutch"), then must we really get rid of them?

Well they arent a tool you can rely on for long before they are going to have a permanent affect on your mental capabilities, so they are a very limited and dangerous tool. I think the arguement is all the great music that came out of the 60s, 70s. But im sure you can point to lots of artists that were great in that era who are now paying for it with massively decreased ability, ie ozzie ozborn.

So basically, as you mentioned in the same podcast I mentioned above, you're saying drugs are not morally wrong, but you choose not to use them as a tool.  Is that an accurate rephrasing?  I mean, that's fine--like an artist that chooses to use fingerpaints over brushes or digital media, that's a personal choice, and the gain or loss in artistic attractiveness is subjective to the psyche and preferences of the consumer.

Sure, taking drugs is not morally wrong, any more than an all-fat diet is morally wrong.

It's just really, really bad for you.

Okay, I can agree with that.

I agree with Stef's video, but I consider it an incomplete analysis.  Drugs are not inherently the creation of fraudulent realities into which we escape.  I'll explain...

I appreciated the experience of Psilocybe Cubensis.  A lot of problems you mentioned in your video, Stefbot, I don't think apply necessarily to responsible users.  I also think you've generalized and exaggerated the harm they do.  Different drugs do different things, and affect you in different ways.

I don't use them with the delusion that I'm going to create a shortcut to gaining knowledge and I don't think any reality oriented individual could. I've never defended their use appealing to revelation because it's an emotional indulgence.  I don't use it as an evasive form of flight from reality, or to run from my problems.  It's a -tickle your fancy- form of leisurely activity that I think must be handled responsibly no question about it.  I don't have to worry about ingesting foreign substances.

I'll preface my explanation of the value I find in them by explaining something similar.

In intellectual pursuits when one finally makes a kind of breakthrough in a field of study or overcomes a hurdle and finally grasps something one's been attempting to grasp for a while, one experiences a very inspiring form of eureka.  I'll no go into attempting to describe the feeling because I know you've experienced it.  The act of understanding.  I find that the very actions of thinking, pondering, studying are a wonderful feeling because of the positive reinforcement I've received when I do experience intellectual breakthroughs (I call it the experience of eureka) and the impact implementing that knowledge has on my life.  You have a section on the forum I think highlights how everyone values this experience in the, "Fatal Attraction: What Was Your Conversion Experience?" section.  The object of fixation is the emotion itself, eureka, euphoria... etc... because this represents psychological accomplishment, an increase in self-esteem etc... the achievement of a infinitely valuable piece of knowledge, or "teaching the man to fish" because the knowledge will benefit you for a lifetime.

Because using the drug is a form of leisurely activity, approached as such under no false pretenses, the time available for doing it is limited to leisure (which takes responsibility an individual ought to have before getting involved with substances)... We all either schedule time for leisure... or end up coming to it through exhaustion.  If you find yourself making leisure time because you know that's your gateway to accessing any drug, you've obviously got an addiction problem.  However one often schedules certain leisurely activities months in advance, vacations, cruse ships, road trips... or whatever... so planning leisure is not necessarily bad if the action in leisure is the consumption of a drug just because you planned for it.  So the point is that leisurely activity is not wrong because it is leisure, nor is it wrong if the activity is the consumption of a drug.

Tying the two together, I don't believe a person can experience eureka "too much" in their lifetime to ever become "tired of it" because intellectual pursuits and the rewards they yield are continuous throughout one's life.  The motivation is always going to be there and the results will always be the object of value.  This assumes that the individual explicitly acknowledges that the pursuit of knowledge is to achieve the benefit it brings in reality, and recognizes that the conception of drugs bring no concrete benefits in reality - thus differentiating the intentions between drug use and intellectual pursuits.

So, I use cubensis sometimes when planning vacations because I enjoy the feeling of eureka.  On a trip the most mundane of ideas, as you've pointed out in your video, seem like revelations to the person experiencing them... it FEELS like you've just had one of those intellectual breakthroughs and everything seems so clear, even though such is not the case... the feeling of eureka remains... and as fast as your mind can race, by the millisecond wave after wave of the most intense eureka sweeps over you.

I describe it as achieving the rewards of rigorous intellectual pursuits (eureka), without having to go through the discipline of working toward gaining actual knowledge (study, pondering, research, learning etc...).  And, as justice has it, you don't achieve any new actual knowledge with the consumption of cubensis and I wouldn't have it any other way.  I find it one excellent alternative, among millions of other excellent alternatives, in planning leisurely activity because this (to me) allows a veneration for my respect for my intellectual pursuits when I'm not intellectually pursuing anything.  It allows me to celebrate in explicit terms, how much I enjoy the feeling of thinking by exalting it's object (eureka) to the forefront of my consciousness, and relishing it.  If I had to hypothetically theorize a real-world benefit for this, it would be providing myself with motivation for intellectual pursuits by bringing the sense of accomplishment into my immediate grasp... reinforcing how much I enjoy achieving it.  That's entirely speculative however, and I don't think my drive and enthusiasm could be any higher at this point about my intellectual pursuits.

I don't think anyone should experiment with these substances without first educating yourself about their consequences and effects.  I studied cubensis (not exclusively) for five solid months before I decided to go for it.  I didn't even drink alcohol (by my own choice) until I was 22, I didn't get into cubensis until I was 23.  I have no kids (I agree with you about parents who take drugs being a completely different story.)

So, that's just me. 

That's very interesting. I can tell you, though, that if you continue to study and work hard, you will get your "moments of illumination" many times a day, without having to force them on your system artificially.

I am also concerned about a general psychological habit that we all have, which is that if we can get a benefit without the work, we slowly stop doing the work.

I also wonder if you can tell us some of the genuine "Eureka" insights that you have had that you have validated rationally or empirically.

Thanks! 

Spaghettim0nst3r:

A lot of problems you mentioned in your video, Stefbot, I don't think apply necessarily to responsible users.

The possibility of responsible use (and that recreational use isn't necessarily abuse) hasn't yet been acknowledged on this board.

hippy:

Spaghettim0nst3r:

A lot of problems you mentioned in your video, Stefbot, I don't think apply necessarily to responsible users.

The possibility of responsible use (and that recreational use isn't necessarily abuse) hasn't yet been acknowledged on this board.

I don't think it's been defined yet.  How much is responsible?

Charlie:

How much is responsible?

That a 5 minute babysat couch trip could cause such moral condemnation in our salvia thread suggests zero tolerance to me.  Ie, the impression i get from this board is that there is no such thing as responsible recreational use.

hippy:

Charlie:

How much is responsible?

That a 5 minute babysat couch trip could cause such moral condemnation in our salvia thread suggests zero tolerance to me.  Ie, the impression i get from this board is that there is no such thing as responsible recreational use.

Sorry, I was wondering what your definition of responsible recreational use is.

if you continue to study and work hard, you will get your "moments of illumination" many times a day

Absolutely, and I love every one of them!

if we can get a benefit without the work, we slowly stop doing the work

You couldn't really call that responsible use if you're irrationally equating an emotional experience with the fruits of labor, because they are far from the same thing.  The benefit of productive work goes beyond the emotional experience of eureka, which is why one must not confuse a simulated emotional experience with actual benefits.  It's an emotional reward only, it will not fill your wallet or your stomach and it will rarely if ever lead you to any real world knowledge.  Just like when daydreaming, when you envision the long term plans you've made for your future having been accomplished... you experience a simulated feeling of accomplishment in envisioning the attainment of a goal, the feeling of, "MAN! this is going to be fantastic when this project is complete!" this doesn't discourage you from continuing to pursue the end... it encourages you by reinforcing your belief that the payoff will be worth it.  The moment responsible use turns into irresponsible use, is when that lines becomes blurred and one fools oneself into thinking this is the actual payoff.  Daydreams are not payoffs, but daydreams are immensely valuable.

I also wonder if you can tell us some of the genuine "Eureka" insights that you have had that you have validated rationally or empirically

This makes me question whether or not you actually read what I wrote. 

I did not claim that I gained insights under the influence of cubensis.  One experiences the emotion of eureka without gaining any knowledge whatsoever, without any insights.

As I said, straight forwardly, throughout the experience under the influence of the drug the object is not validation or gaining knowledge, the object of experience is the emotion.  When one fools oneself into thinking it's actually useful as a cognitive activity knowledge, one gets into trouble.

This was one of the points I agreed with you in your video about, because one does not gain any insights or any knowledge throughout the experience.  It only feels like it, I've explained the feeling and it's purpose for me.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but It seems you have difficulty dissolving the notion that people necessarily use hallucinogenics in an attempt to bypass intellectual work, to achieve some form of revelation.  That is a response I often get from people, just as you described, but don't seek revelation and I don't attempt bypassing intellectual work.

@Charlie

I don't think it's been defined yet.  How much is responsible?

Defining responsible use in terms of quantity won't get you a universal amount that you can sweep across the board for all drugs, and defining it per drug won't give you an amount which you can apply consistently from one individual to the next because too many variables exist.  So the question "How Much?" is inapplicable.  Responsible use has very little to do with quantity and much more to do with the expectations the individual has of the drugs function.  Insofar as quantity is concerned, Obviously if you're consuming so much of the drug that you put your health at severe risk, you've gone too far.  If you become physically addicted (which a lot of drugs can do instantly) you've got a big problem.  Marijuana and Cubensis are not physically addictive, and you cannot overdose on them (these are the only two drugs I use recreationally). I think this is what separates a good drug from a bad drug, it's ability to be physically addicting.  Psychological addictions exist in all aspects of life, if you're the kind of person that becomes psychologically addicted to things (tv shows! - gambling - online forums) it might not be a good idea for you.  Point is that the potential for a psychological addiction (which marijuana and cubensis probably are) is an invalid index because that potential exists all around us... it's the individuals choice to confront that kind of addiction not the fault of the drug.

Insofar as the expectations of the individual go, if you're using the drug as an evasive flight from reality or to run away from your problems you've got a problem.  If you expect the drug to create a shortcut to knowledge, all you've really done is short circuit your efforts at gaining knowledge (it's as destructive as faith).  If you believe that the drugs make you more creative, I can think of no problem with that unless one believes his creative potential is entirely dependant upon the influence of the drug.

I was wondering what your definition of responsible recreational use is

The problem is that you're asking for a definition that is heavily dependent on the individual in question. 

Ex:  How many Boat Rides should an individual take per year?  How many vacations percentage wise should a person dedicated to riding his boat around a lake?  Some people are boating enthusiasts, some people hate the water.  Are the people who hate the water prepared to ask the boating enthusiasts for a "definition of responsible recreational boating."  I think you get the picture...

What we can say, is that responsible recreational boating does not include skipping school or work in order to go boating (sacrificing a higher value for a lesser value -pardon the randspeak-).  It does not include skipping marriage counseling in order to go boating (running from your problems).  It does not include forfeiting priorities for leisure.  Essentially, it does not involve sacrificing reality to imaginative non-existence.  Only the correct orientation to reality, philosophically, can ensure one's ability to manage responsible recreational boating to make it an enjoyable, relaxing, and beneficial experience.

I also wonder if you can tell us some of the genuine "Eureka" insights that you have had that you have validated rationally or empirically

This makes me question whether or not you actually read what I wrote. 

I most certainly did - that's why I used the word "genuine." You said that you had real epiphanies, and fake drug ones.

I asked for a rational/empirical validation of your real ones, so that I can understand how you differentiate between the two.

You said that you had real epiphanies, and fake drug ones

No, I did not.  The language here must be precise, and I did not use the word Epiphany, nor would I.  An epiphany is a sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into reality (much like revelation), and I explicitly laid out how that does not characterize the experience or it's intention.

I did, however, say that I experience the emotion of eureka both on and off.