Drugs for mental/spiritual exploration

[VinceZeb]

It's the truth. As a Christian, I want to help people out and get them out of that rut of drugs. Had to witness what it does to people at a VERY young age. Not pretty. But when it comes to the govt, it should not steal our money to help people out that will just go and get fucked up again and again. The govts job is not to correct fuck ups. That is for the person who fucked up to do. Anyone else wants to help, they should and I encourage that, but do not force people to.

No one sticks a joint in your mouth, a pill down your throat, spoon to your nose, or a needle in your arm. YOU have to make that choice.

[Vibecrewangel]

That I agree with.

[Protoclown]

Originally Posted by VinceZeb

A lot of posts has nothing to do with the quanity of time spent on a board.

Did you mean "quality" or "quantity"? You said neither and now I'm unclear on what the hell you meant.

[Vibecrewangel]

Combination of the 2 maybe?

[theapportioner]

General question, tossed up for anyone to grab:

What about drugs to treat depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia... Alzheimers?

[Vibecrewangel]

For some people they are fantastic though the side effects are harsh.


Prozac for me was worse than the depression it was supposed to fight. I'd also like to add that I wanted someone to talk too. Not a drug pusher who spent 15 min a month with me talking about nothing but how the dosage was working.

[Protoclown]

Originally Posted by theapportioner

General question, tossed up for anyone to grab:

What about drugs to treat depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia... Alzheimers?

They're certainly right for some people, not so right for others. I guess it depends on the situation and where their brain is chemically.

There's no doubt that there are plenty of drugs out there that many people benefit from in medical use.

[theapportioner]

What about these drugs in relation to your ethics on illegal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco i.e. regarding them as crutches?

[Protoclown]

Well, to be clear, it's not really an ethical matter to me so much as it is a matter of common sense and survival. I personally don't see the wisdom in engaging in willfully self-destructive behavior, but you see people participating in it all the time.

It seems rather counter-productive to survival (or continued well-being if you don't want to go that far) to purposely take drugs that harm your body, or debilitate you to the point that you cannot take care of or defend yourself under the influence. Frankly, I don't see the appeal. Never have, and probably never will.

As for those other drugs that are doctor prescribed, the main difference as I see it is that those drugs are almost necessary for certain people to get by and function normally in day-to-day life. So in some cases, taking drugs IS conducive to their continued well-being. In other cases it's not (and some doctors seem all too eager to fill out a prescription as an 'easy fix' to ailments), but I suppose that depends on the individual situation.

In my mind that is quite a different beast from people who take drugs recreationally for the express purpose of getting "fucked up beyond belief" or those who want to run away from whatever problems they have and take the drugs to forget or cope.

Perhaps the term "crutches" isn't really the best to use here, since an actual crutch IS in all likelihood necessary for someone who has broken a leg to get around. Whereas when I speak of it in a drug sense, I am talking about almost quite the opposite...something that ISN'T necessary by any means, but is used as a means of avoiding the problem and running away.

[Vibecrewangel]

Proto, can I asume that also applys to people who abuse legal perscritpion drugs?
















Or eat themselves into oblivion in the bottom of a quart of cookie dough ice cream.......

[Protoclown]

Well, yes. Of course. At least for the first part.

The second bit, it seems that you're half joking, but there's still a valid point you raise there. I do see the second example as a sign of personal weakness (and we all have those, so I'm not trying to sound as if I'm expressing disapproval here), but it's not something that has potentially serious and harmful consequences, unless one engages in that sort of behavior often enough for it to become a health issue.

It's still a coping mechanism, however, though without the same immediate harming (and addictive, though one could get addicted to the behavior) potential. This really branches into a totally different discussion here, but running away from problems (by whatever method) is no good way to live. We're all guilty of it to some degree, I'm sure, but I think it's important to strive to better ourselves and overcome these types of things. I just can't even fathom the idea of going through life without trying to constantly improve myself.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

If you want to see a good movie that sums up a lot of the inate understanding concept see Pi.

In the book Keys To Infinity, Clifford Pickover states that running out the value of Pi more than six decimals or so is of no scientific value, really, as it doesn't have a lot of practical use past that point and serves as more of a scientific curriosity. The goal at that point is more of a mathematical "one ups manship" on the part of mathemeticians. That being said, what does that say of drugs in relation to the arts? Is there a point where one just has to say "Enough!" ?

[Protoclown]

What the hell does that have to do with the movie "Pi"?

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Protoclown

What the hell does that have to do with the movie "Pi"?

Here is part of review about the movie "Pi":

The film follows Max, a brilliant but troubled soul who crunches numbers to predict the order of nature. He follows the stock market religiously, not for financial gain but to prove there is a predictable order to the system. Max's reclusive lifestyle and antisocial behavior keeps almost everyone away, and his only friend is a former teacher, Sol.

In his search for a predictable order to the universe, Max stumbles across a 216-digit number that some Jewish scholars believe is the name of God. Sol warns Max to forget what he saw and concentrate on other pursuits, but his discovery becomes an obsession that could destroy him.

Besides the Jewish community pursuing him for his discovery, a Wall Street analysis firm relentlessly chases Max for his accurate stock market predictions. Between the two, the reclusive Max is forced into the public eye and to the brink of insanity.

My point is that certain pursuits render themselves meaningless after a while when they lead to just plain obsession with no practical benefits forthcoming. What practical purpose does it serve using drugs to chase the "art rainbow", so to speak, when no one understands your meaning or even to point where your art is not even aesthetically pleasing anymore but just plain disturbing, disgusting, or whatever. I'm just asking here.

[Vibecrewangel]

Kelly -

I was reffering to a subplot of the movie.

Max has inate ability to see everything in the world mathmatically.
There is a scene where he is looking at the trees and sees them as a fractal.

[Protoclown]

I've seen "Pi", Kelly. I just didn't see how your post related to the movie. Didn't see the point you were trying to make. Right! Carry on then!

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Protoclown

I've seen "Pi", Kelly. I just didn't see how your post related to the movie. Didn't see the point you were trying to make. Right! Carry on then!

:chuckle I guess that it's having multiple layers is part of what makes it a good movie. Both Vibe and myself were both using the movie to make a certain point but were both on completely different tangents. I guess that I could have made my point more clearly but I thought that I was going along the same track that Vibe was. :/ I guess I got derailed ... the mind's a fractal thing as well.

[Protoclown]

I'm not sure it's that you were unclear so much as I probably just missed the point.

[ziggytrix]

I think there is clearly a point at which one says "enough". It's the point at which you begin to destroy yourself. Moderation and responsibility are the keys to knowing that point.

Drugs are not for children.

[mburbank]

Except for Riddlin which should be over the counter and eaten like Pez.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

Kelly -

I was reffering to a subplot of the movie.

Max has inate ability to see everything in the world mathmatically.
There is a scene where he is looking at the trees and sees them as a fractal.

Indeed. According to my interpretation, not only did he see the whole world mathematically, he thought that even the future was predestined occording to a mathetical model and could be fortold. Not really a new concept really. Isaac Newton thought he could do the same using calculus and classical physics. That works well for certain fields of physics such as astrology but not so well in certain micro-fields such an fluid dynamics and subatomic theory where chaos theory reigns supreme. Perhaps there will someday be a reconciliation of the two, such as String Theory, that will serve as an adequate mathematical model of nature in the future. Until then ...

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

Combination of the 2 maybe?

It's funny that you guys mention the idea of looking at the world both quantitatively and qualitatively in conjunction with a thread that discusses both art and science. It brings to mind the book Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig who discuss the split between science and theology ... when and why the split occured ... two different ways people can view the world ... ect. Pretty interesting points are made in the book. Has anyone read it?

[glowbelly]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Except for Riddlin which should be over the counter and eaten like Pez.

[Vibecrewangel]

Okay Kelly....now I am weirded out.

You are the second person to bring up that book on this board and like the fifth or sixth who has brought it up to me.

Generally I stay away from any "Zen and the art of" books as they tend to be some wierd bastardized concepts of Zen.
But now I am intrigued as to why so many people have read this particular one.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

Generally I stay away from any "Zen and the art of" books as they tend to be some wierd bastardized concepts of Zen.
But now I am intrigued as to why so many people have read this particular one.

Don't let the title throw you. It's not a bastardization of Zen philosophy. If anything, it's more along the lines of layman's guide to classical western/european philosopy with, at best, some eastern influences.