|
yours is a surprising position timalkin: i figured you'd be more likely a consistent libertarian.
my basic position on this has already been summed up pretty well above.
what i guess is worth repeating is that i don't see where pot makes anyone anything insofar as basic tendencies or dispositions are concerned. i've known more people than i can count who've smoked: nothing in particular seems to be common to them. some are exceding direct, some aren't. some smoke once in a while, some do the wake-and-bake, but even within the latter group, i know a pretty wide range of folk. so if my experience is any guide, i think timalkin is trafficking in stereotypes more than conclusions reached on the basis of contact---but who knows, i could be wrong and he is one of those folk who travels in circles that do not include many folk who smoke and those that do are typically as he says. but if there's such wide variation in experience and information, even in this thread, it stands to reason that your position is particular, tim, a function of the social networks you've moved through and move through, and that's as far as it goes.
but what i really don't understand is: on what possible basis can altered states of consciousness be understood as necessarily a bad thing?
and what exactly is a non-altered state?
the more i think about it, the more problematic that becomes--i'm not sure it makes any sense at all.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|