Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

politics.salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 173 posts

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#151

Post by VMG »

bluedanieru wrote: post #48
VMG wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

downvoted for irrational mysticism

It's not particularly irrational or mystic. That experience he describes is quite common for people who use mushrooms a few times. What is the difference between you and a chair? What makes your brain so special, and why is it so important that it continue to exist? Why shouldn't a stick held in your hand be considered part of your body (in fact, one of the big differences between humans and most animals is that, unc…

I'm not against philosophical questions. I myself had them while on shrooms.

Still, there is no reason whatsoever to refuse materialism due to a mushroom experience, that is why I called it mysticism. The fact that your brain state alters because you consumed a tiny amount of a certain chemical should be proof of materialism.

The statement that "everything is connected" is meaningless without defining what you mean by "connected". In some quantum-physics way your brain atoms are connected to the atoms on the Jupiter, which is fascinating to think about, but without any real consequence. This fact doesn't change when you are high on shrooms.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#152

Post by bluedanieru »

VMG wrote: post #151
bluedanieru wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not particularly irrational or mystic. That experience he describes is quite common for people who use mushrooms a few times. What is the difference between you and a chair? What makes your brain so special, and why is it so important that it continue to exist? Why shouldn't a stick held in your hand be considered part of your body (in fact, one of the big differences between humans and most animals is that, unc…

I'm not against philosophical questions. I myself had them while on shrooms. Still, there is no reason whatsoever to refuse materialism due to a mushroom experience, that is why I called it mysticism. The fact that your brain state alters because you consumed a tiny amount of a certain chemical should be proof of materialism. The statement that "everything is connected" is meaningless without defining what you mean b…

I agree with you, but I don't think the so-called 'mystic' interpretation of the experience is that different from the materialistic one.

Consider Ptolemaic astronomy versus Copernican and later. Copernican astronomy is more accurate sure, and simpler in its construction, and just a better theory. However Ptolemaic astronomy was around for over a thousand years before it and worked quite well, despite being 'wrong' in just about every sense, far moreso than the model of Copernicus. Likewise while I consider 'mystic' interpretations of an experience on mushrooms to be rubbish, I have to admit that most of what they would take from it is not too dissimilar from myself.

If functioning GPS or transistors that worked depended on how most people modeled their experience on mushrooms, I'd probably be more inclined to persuade people toward a more sensible approach, but since for the time being it remains a deeply personal thing, and since it is a rather poor predictor of how they approach the rest of their life, I don't think it really matters.

And to be honest, I initially approached the experience from a mystic or even religious angle (despite being an atheist) but eventually discarded it as unworkable.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#153

Post by Egregore »

corin_ wrote: post #92
Jage wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I support legalization for ideaological reasons, but that doesn't at all sound accurate to me Drug use will almost definitely sky rocket if drugs are legalized, at least initially. We can't really say what will happen, say, 5-10 years after, because legalization in this country is unprecedented. But ask most users if they'd use more if it was legal, and you'll get your answer. Ask some fence sitters who are too scare…

There are also drug addicts who would like to stop, if more money (that's currently spent on prevention) was being spent on treatment. Read up on Portugal, they legalised all drugs, just over ten years ago, and the reports released a few months ago (after ten years of it) showed that there are less people using the drugs that previously were illegal (from weed up to heroine), and a higher percentage of those using dr…

I think they in Portugal have not legalized, but decriminalized drugs, these are two different things.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#154

Post by Gormo »

adamtmca wrote: post #76
rick888 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Illegal drug money is used to finance so much corruption and killing, that there seems to be little value in keeping them illegal, especially considering that everyone who wants to take drugs still does. If certain drugs do have harmful effects then at least the effects will be mostly limited to the people who take them." Mexico is already corrupt without the drugs. Making them legal will give the cartels even more…

Not to pile on, but: > Many people want government-run health care in the US. Legalizing illegal drugs will add to the already large amount of addicts. Do we really want more addicts in our hospitals? I also don't feel like I should be forced to pay for your poor life choices. Regular Drug users should immediately get a huge increase in healthcare costs. First, the fact that drugs are illegal has done nothing to make…

How is addiction a public health issue?

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#155

Post by drivebyacct2 »

rick888 wrote: post #136
dailyrorschach wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your welcome to believe that it is bad for you and that you don't want to do it, but I disagree that that should translate to you saying other people can't do something. We could easily replace pot with any number of substances, even legal psychoactive drugs. There are plenty of alcoholics in this world, does that mean that if I can enjoy alcohol occasionally and responsibly I shouldn't be able to? Many anxiety patie…

I see the drug overlords have again down-modded me for not being a troll and merely stating my opinion on the matter. "Your welcome to believe that it is bad for you and that you don't want to do it, but I disagree that that should translate to you saying other people can't do something." I'm fine with it as long as users of these drugs have to pay higher medical fees (if we ever have government-run health care). The…

You don't get it, the MJ bill did not prevent employers from firing employees if they were not competent or able to keep up with their work or if they were impaired by their drug use. Again, you have the hand shaking, scary notion of marijuana, and it's frankly silly to the rest of us. People don't have higher associated medical costs because of marijuana, LSD, mushrooms, etc. It's a completely unfounded, fearful assumption on your part, frankly born of ignorance.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#156

Post by billswift »

ldh wrote: post #58
bluedanieru wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not particularly irrational or mystic. That experience he describes is quite common for people who use mushrooms a few times. What is the difference between you and a chair? What makes your brain so special, and why is it so important that it continue to exist? Why shouldn't a stick held in your hand be considered part of your body (in fact, one of the big differences between humans and most animals is that, unc…

Well stated. It always turns me off when people use mysticism as a comforting hand-wave for things which can readily be be stated more plainly, as if shedding some rationality on a subject makes it any less awesome.

Goethe was the king of that sort of irrationality.

You might find the essays in Richard Dawkins's book, Unweaving the Rainbow interesting since the thread drawing them together is that understanding something scientifically does not make it less fascinating, if anything it makes everything even more interesting.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#157

Post by billswift »

derleth wrote: post #103
VMG wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

downvoted for irrational mysticism

Why is Hacker News so closed-mindedly pro-psychedelic? Do none of you think there is even a debate to be had here?

It is actually a trichotomy: close-minded, open-minded, and so-open-minded-that-all-your-critical-thinking-ability-has-run-out-your-ears. At least a third of HN commenters fall into the third group.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#158

Post by billswift »

rick888 wrote: post #142
MatthewPhillips wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone that's pro-drug wants the government out of their lives, yet they are fine with increased taxes and regulations to support more and more social programs. Everyone? Well that's convenient. That people who agree on one issue would all also agree on several other unrelated issues. Very convenient indeed.

"That people who agree on one issue would all also agree on several other unrelated issues. Very convenient indeed." No, they are hypocritical to say that they want the government out of their lives and then also want increased in more government control. You can't have it both ways, sorry.

Everybody except a very small number of consistent libertarians are that way - the liberals/socialists and paleo-conservatives and neo-cons (Judeo-Christian Socialists) just disagree on what they want the government to do. So we mostly end up with the government doing more and more and more. Most of which is not wanted by some group.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#159

Post by ldh »

cppsnob wrote: post #150
ldh wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Concluding that he wouldn't been the same successful person without doing LSD. There's no evidence of causation. That's the fallacy. Who's making that conclusion? As far as I can tell, nobody's attributing his success entirely to LSD. I'm sure he'd have been successful without it. But a person is a product of their experiences, and he plainly states that LSD factored strongly into it. You can disbelieve him, but I…

> Who's making that conclusion? Everyone who even brings up that he used LSD as a point of interest. At least that's the implication being made. > that doesn't make the points being made any less valid. No, the points are not valid. That's why we have a scientific method that proves causation. It's the exact same fallacy that someone falls into with e.g. alternative medicine. A person's cancer went into remission whi…

The notion that psychadelics affect a person's outlook is not that great a leap to make, and others have already posted links to studies supporting that. While I'm not asserting that LSD was the lynchpin to his success, I really don't see that it's the same as alternative medicine at all.

Re: Steve Jobs, LSD and Drug Freedom

#160

Post by ldh »

billswift wrote: post #156
ldh wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well stated. It always turns me off when people use mysticism as a comforting hand-wave for things which can readily be be stated more plainly, as if shedding some rationality on a subject makes it any less awesome.

Goethe was the king of that sort of irrationality. You might find the essays in Richard Dawkins's book, Unweaving the Rainbow interesting since the thread drawing them together is that understanding something scientifically does not make it less fascinating, if anything it makes everything even more interesting.

Thanks, I've put that on my reading list.
Post reply on HN