*

+
/ Topic >  Re: Why Pot? Why Not? #3 / 16 January 2004 / NGZ:
/ alt.politics.marijuana,talk.politics.drugs,alt.philosophy /
.
  "Protagoras' notion that judgments and knowledge are in some
  way relative to the person judging or knowing has been very
  influential, and is still widely discussed in contemporary
  philosophy." -- from The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
.
>> wurm previously wrote: <snip> The desire to 'change your
>> mind', in the sense of experiencing altered states of
>> consciousness, is both normal and healthy. Using drugs is
>> one way of doing this, but of course there are many methods
>> and techniques for accomplishing this goal that don't
>> require booze or dope (eg. meditation, art, music, etc).
.
> On Jan10 Dan Day replied: How the hell is meditation, art,
> music, etc. "altered states of consciousness"?
.
 da wurm sayeth: In some people these things can have a dramatic
effect on the mind. 4X, there are well documented cases of Indian
holy-men who can enter a meditative state and actually slow down
the rate at which their heart beats. Four or five beats per
minute is an amazing feat for something so nebulous as an altered
state of consciousness! Art and poetry have also been known to
cause extreme reactions in some people; 'Starry Night' has even
put a few very sensitive people into a hypnotic-like trance
wherein the painting seems to "come alive".
.
 As for music ... Have you ever seen the movie 'Amadeus'? There
is one scene there where Antonio Salieri ("a successful court
composer driven mad by the revelation of his own mediocrity when
compared to Mozart's God-given genius") snags a freshly written
composition and begins to read it. After a while he goes into
what can only be called an ecstatic state of mind, where the
music completely carries him away. The interesting thing about
this is that there was no actual physical stimuli (ie. sounds)
present. The note-symbols on the page were quite enough to
transport him far out of his "normal consciousness"!
.
 I can appreciate this because I have myself experienced some-
thing similar (on very rare occasions (but not lately)) while
listening to music from people like Yes, Klaatu, Alan Parsons
Project, Moody Blues, etc. Of course, such rarified states
don't last for long, but there's no mistaking them for our
ordinary state of mind.
.
> Except under the influence of a drug, consciousness
> is all the same.
.
 I think it would be far more correct to say that consciousness
is *never* the same: it is always changing, always responding
to the world around us, to the thoughts we have, and to our
internal condition (eg. emotions). Even something so mundane
as a good meal can change our consciousness.
.
>> Smoking pot is merely one of the easiest ways of changing
>> your mind. And since it is relatively mild, and relatively
>> temporary, and relatively safe as well, in comparison with
>> 'hard drugs',
.
> This is an inconclusive statement. It is like asking "Would
> you rather die quickly or die very slowly, painfully while
> you're screaming like crazy?" The comparison of two wrongs
> doesn't make the lesser one right.
.
 Your logic escapes me. Death and pain have nothing to do with
it, therefore your judgment of 'two wrongs' has no basis in
fact, but is merely an assumption on your part. You should, at
the very least, try smoking a joint or two just so that you'll
have some small idea of what your talking about.
.
 <snipsome>
.
>> The experience of 'nothingness' is a pervasive one in a
>> childish and dissolute society such as ours, and while
>> pot cannot of itself cure this spiritual condition, it
>> can at least provide some temporary relief.
.
> So what?
.
 So that's a good thing.
.
> Relief neither solves the problem, nor does it ever
> improve the situation.
.
 It doesn't solve the problem, but it *can* improve the
situation somewhat by making the daily grind bearable.
.
> If one needs to relax from a situation, the alternatives
> are better (e.g. sleep)
.
 Pot can help some people sleep.
.
> which one is at least able-minded that they can work out
> their problems and solve them.
.
 Your insensitivity (and grammar) is appalling! Some problems
are impossible to "solve", Dan; especially this one. It's more
a matter of learning to live with it. Ignoring it is out of the
question. Falling victim to it is easy. Depression and suicide
are often the end result of a losing battle with nothingness.
Struggling against it day after day after day is very difficult.
If it can be shown that marijuana alleviates such suffering,
would you still be so quick to condemn it?
.
> Pot (and any other drug) takes away that ability of
> critical-thinking.
.
 This is simply not true, Dan. One of the most famous
philosophers of the last century, JP Sartre, was quite fond of
dope. And there are plenty of good critical-thinkers in these
ngz. Pot doesn't seem to have taken away anything from them.
If anything, pot can help us solve problems by allowing us to
think about things in new and novel ways. A simple change of
perspective can often yield surprising results.
.
>> This reason would then fall under the category of the
>> medicinal use of marijuana. But since most doctors are
>> shameless slaves of the established system, it is unlikely
>> that any of that lot would ever dare to approve pot-use
>> to this end. <snip>
.
> "most doctors are shameless slaves of the established system"
> ... sounds more like a Marxist critique if anything, but
> albeit a poor one.
.
 Actually, it's just a simple observation. Doctors have too much
to lose if they dare to buck the system, and everything to gain
by supporting the status quo. They are the very opposite of a
Marxist revolutionary.
.
> Is it that you just listen to the opinions of those
> doctors that approve of pot
.
 I've never actually seen such a creature; although I suppose
that there must be a few doctors with a modicum of common sense.
.
> and turn away from those who don't and call them "slaves"? It
> is pretty hypocritical of you to criticize anti-pot smokers
> for being one-sided but then turning around and doing the same.
.
 What's the problem? There are two sides to this issue: pro and
con. I've taken my stand on the pro side. Where's the hypocrisy
in that? You've taken your stand on the con side; and yet you've
never even had a toke! My opinions are formed inside my own mind.
You take yours from whoever tickles your fancy, and then simply
regurgitate them.
.
>> Marijuana, on the other hand, enhances our enjoyment
>> of many things (eg. music, movies, video games, etc)
>> and *expands* our minds.
.
> How the hell does pot "expand" your mind when studies have
> shown it removes (temporarily, of course) the chemicals in
> your brain which enable you to learn?
.
 Hahahahaha ... Where do you get all this nonsense?
.
>> In any case, the responsible use (note: not abuse) of
>> these drugs depends on moderation. As the ancient Greeks
>> wisely advise us: Moderation in all things!
.
> So what? You still haven't proven pot-smoking to be right
> in the first place.
.
 You didn't ask me to prove that pot-smoking is "right". You
asked for reasons why anyone would want to use pot. I gave you
some. Others here gave you more. Yet you consistently reject
them all! One can only assume that you already made up your
mind even before you posted your first question. :(
.
 <snipsome>
.
>> Moreover, it is obvious that Mr Day's philosophical
>> foundations are, to say the least, somewhat less than
>> adequate to the variety and complexity of human realities.
.
> "human realities"? Last time I checked, there was only reality.
.
 You mean 'only *ONE* reality'? Doubtful proposition there.
.
> The statement "Man is the measure of all things" (which could
> logically justify many realities) was proven false long ago.
> <snip remainder>
.
 "proven false long ago". Really? When was that? Who proved it
false? And, more importantly, HOW was it proved false? ... If
anything, the entire history of philosophy can be seen as a
kind of elaborate commentary and expansion on what the Greek
philosopher Protagoras observed 25 centuries ago (see top quote).
Consider Descartes' famous outburst, "I think, therefore I am";
which could be more accurately stated as 'I am, therefore I
think'. It's just a matter of first principles: start with what
you know, and build from there.
.
 Consider also the further example of time. The mundane empirical
mind supposes that time is made up of a sequence of discrete
units (seconds, minutes, hours, etc) such that time can be
objectively "measured" by simply adding up however many seconds
it took for something to happen.
.
 But time is not really like a set of tiny bricks set forth in
neat and tidy rows and columns. In reality, time is much more
like a stream constantly flowing from the past to the future,
sometimes faster, sometimes slower, depending on the rate of
changes that occur. Thus we can be sure (even to the point of
certainty) that the ancient Egyptians (4X) experienced time in
a very different way from that of post-modern man with his fast-
paced world of 24/7.
.
 All of this clearly demonstrates to us that man is indeed
"the measure of all things"!
.
         - the almost measureless one - cybrwurrm ;>
x

textman
*