Author Topic: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis  (Read 7572 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Andante

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 296
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #60 on: October 24, 2016, 12:13:05 PM »
We can prohibit driving and hand-held cell phone use - as 14 sensible states have done.

In my country the use of hand held cell phones while driving is illegal but if caught a warning is given and after say 2 or 3 warning you get fined, but it is a paltry amount $40-$50 which of course is not a deterrent now if the amount was $1000 for the first offence I suggest it would immediately reduce offending by a very large amount. 
Andante always true to his word has kicked the Marijuana soaked bot with its addled brain in to touch.

Offline Ken B

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3465
  • The Age of the Wanker is upon us
    • kenBlogic
  • Location: Canada
  • Currently Listening to:
    Canoes not battleships.
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #61 on: October 24, 2016, 04:47:06 PM »
In my country the use of hand held cell phones while driving is illegal but if caught a warning is given and after say 2 or 3 warning you get fined, but it is a paltry amount $40-$50 which of course is not a deterrent now if the amount was $1000 for the first offence I suggest it would immediately reduce offending by a very large amount.
It probably would. Do you see that refutes your claim only total bans can work?
Give a man a fire and he is warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he is warm for life.

Offline Andante

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 296
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #62 on: October 24, 2016, 05:38:01 PM »
It probably would. Do you see that refutes your claim only total bans can work?
Did I actually say that Ken? Or are you deducing from something else I said.
Andante always true to his word has kicked the Marijuana soaked bot with its addled brain in to touch.

Offline Ken B

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3465
  • The Age of the Wanker is upon us
    • kenBlogic
  • Location: Canada
  • Currently Listening to:
    Canoes not battleships.
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #63 on: October 25, 2016, 09:42:03 AM »
Did I actually say that Ken? Or are you deducing from something else I said.
Overheard:
A: "The only way Trump could lose is if he is seen shooting a woman on Fifth avenue."
B:"Or he could get very few votes."
A: "Yeah, that too."
Give a man a fire and he is warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he is warm for life.

Offline -abe-

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1421
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #64 on: October 25, 2016, 09:44:39 PM »
In his topical book The Righteous Mind: Why good people are divided by religion and politics, psychologist Jonathan Haidt describes your reasoning self as being like a rider on an elephant. The elephant and rider describe human consciousness. We might like to think that the rider is always in charge and in control, but most often the rider merely rides along, controlling nothing and being helplessly dragged this way or that way by the elephant. The rider is helpless if the elephant wants to go in a different direction (say, not wanting to exercise) that the rider is eager to go. The rider's purpose is often merely preparing the way and making it easier for the elephant to go where it wants to go. For instance, the rider could reason his way out of exercising by saying something like "you already exercised twice this week and it's now Friday evening...screw it." In other words, the rider merely provides after the fact reasoning for believes and concepts the elephant clings onto, as if the rider is merely a lawyer for a more willful and stronger entity. The point here is that, being honest, I want marijuana legalization because that would mean that individuals who want access to cannabis will now have the means to acquire cannabis while being free from legal prosecution. As someone who experienced cannabis use, I don't believe people having this freedom is a scary or bad thing. I would like someone who opposes legalization to answer in the same way. What is your "gut level" reason for opposing cannabis legalization? What position is it that your elephant won't let go off that your reasoning self is lawyering for? I've been reading about this topic pretty heavily over the past couple of years and the anti-legalization side has 100% been riding on inertia from the era where distaste for cannabis was common and believe in government's rhetoric about it widely seen as unquestionable common-sense.

The smartest discussion on this issue is one from 2014 by Andrew Sullivan and David Frum. Frum is one of the founder's of the current top dog anti-marijuana groups (Smart Approaches to Marijuana.) You know the one clear reason Frum can give for why we should keep marijuana illegal? From the smartest of conservative minded writers?

Because it makes it easier for parents to say "don't do that, that's a bad thing."

Andrew Sullivan's point of view is that "no, it isn't a bad thing, it's gives pleasure to people and is in fact a good thing" and Frum was in no way prepared for that argument.

http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/23626

This video convinced me 100% that legalization would win if that's all that prohibitionists have to bring to the table.




Online Jo498

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3810
  • Location: Germany
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #65 on: October 25, 2016, 11:58:39 PM »
Haidt may well have deep insights into psychology but the main point of moral philosophy and legal debate should be to "bracket" the gut reactions and think in a principled fashion. This is obvious for many cases, e.g. blood and guts are disgusting but a nurse or a surgeon have to overcome this gut reaction for doing good. With drug liberalization/restriction there seem to be both arguments from general principles as well as arguments from probable consequences.
 
The principled argument for liberalization is based on freedom to do what I want, including ways of harming myself as long as they do not necessarily or very probably harm others. But almost anybody would still favor some restrictions, e.g. banning access to minors.
The consequentialist arguments for liberalization usually point out the many bad consequences of prohibition: jail terms/ruined careers for "victimless crimes" (possession/use), lots of funds wasted for police/control, furthering of some of the worst organized crime with countless deaths in turf wars etc. There is also the fact the prohibition does not really impede drug use very effectively although it is certainly contested to what extent the number of user would rise if liberalization took place. Finally, there is the merely historical difference in treatment between a dangerous drug like alcohol and the "illegal drugs" that is not a systematic justification.

The prohibitionist argument is mostly based on a variant of benevolent paternalism pointing out the bad consequences for the drug users whose numbers would supposedly increase with liberalization. And they might also think that drug use is deeply morally wrong and that the legal system should protect citizens from committing such evil, even if they delude themselves so that they think they are doing something good for them or mostly harmless.

I think the prohibitionist argument is very weak (even if one grants the contentious claim that most illegal drugs are extremely bad for you) but it is certainly interesting that a society that is more liberal than almost any other historical society in most respects is more restrictive/prohibitive then most historical societies wrt drugs.
Struck by the sounds before the sun,
I knew the night had gone.
The morning breeze like a bugle blew
Against the drums of dawn.
(Bob Dylan)

Offline jochanaan

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4702
    • Musician, Music Instructor and Piano Tuner
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #66 on: October 27, 2016, 02:26:19 PM »
Have we considered that the big pharmaceutical corporations here in the US don't want us to legalize a natural material that, if half the good things I read about it are actually true, would cut their sales in half?  I suspect that much of the "anti" reasoning was developed in corporate boardrooms.
Imagination + discipline = creativity

Offline Ken B

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3465
  • The Age of the Wanker is upon us
    • kenBlogic
  • Location: Canada
  • Currently Listening to:
    Canoes not battleships.
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #67 on: October 27, 2016, 04:47:35 PM »
Yep.  Big Pharma wants to the be only dealer in town.
Any business wants to be the only dealer. Businesses hate competition. That's precisely why we want markets.
Give a man a fire and he is warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he is warm for life.

Offline EddieRUKiddingVarese

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 434
  • "Everyone is born with genius, but most people onl
  • Location: Father of Electronic muse
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #68 on: October 27, 2016, 05:47:16 PM »
I Oz Land, medicinal use is in the process of being Legalised..
"Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes"
 and I need the knits, the double knits!

Offline -abe-

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1421
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #69 on: October 27, 2016, 09:40:46 PM »
Haidt may well have deep insights into psychology but the main point of moral philosophy and legal debate should be to "bracket" the gut reactions and think in a principled fashion. This is obvious for many cases, e.g. blood and guts are disgusting but a nurse or a surgeon have to overcome this gut reaction for doing good. With drug liberalization/restriction there seem to be both arguments from general principles as well as arguments from probable consequences.

Haidt was presenting that information as tragic and as significantly contributing to the current high pitched divisiveness in USA politics. Anyway, I was just asking others to reveal any deeper level primal reason for their position as I had done so. I really do want cannabis to be cheaper and legally safe to access for adults across the world, but I was not really moved into this issue until I discovered a taste for that substance. It just happens that the morally superior argument for legalization is favorable to me, but in this non-informal environment I was just asking: Why is legalization not preferable to others? I want to get at the gut level distaste. 
« Last Edit: October 27, 2016, 09:43:46 PM by -abe- »

Offline zamyrabyrd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3781
  • selig sind
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #70 on: October 28, 2016, 01:56:29 AM »
Yep.  Big Pharma wants to the be only dealer in town.

Indeed and Big Brother will tax it.
"I write to discover what I know."
 ― Flannery O'Connor

Offline k a rl h e nn i ng

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 50044
  • Et quid amabo nisi quod ænigma est?
    • Henningmusick
  • Location: Boston, Mass.
  • Currently Listening to:
    Shostakovich, Frescobaldi, Stravinsky, JS Bach, Liszt, Chopin, Haydn, Henning
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #71 on: October 28, 2016, 04:57:00 AM »
Interesting editorial in yesterday's (I think) Globe, recommending a vote for legalization.

Separately:

As marijuana legalization spreads, more pets are getting high
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Online Jo498

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3810
  • Location: Germany
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #72 on: October 28, 2016, 05:52:48 AM »
Yes, I think I understand Haidt and was more generally reacting to a frequent confusion between psychology and moral philosophy (a big offender is wunderkind Joshua Greene in his book "Moral tribes" although he is aware of it he still makes a horrible muddle).

I really do not have a dog in the fight, I rarely puffed but did not inhale tobacco when I was younger but I used and occasionally abused alcohol far more. I have people pretty close to me who used too much marihuana in some times of their lifes (no really bad consequences except slightly delayed careers etc. but enough to see that the use could derail some people although this seems far more frequent with alcohol).
It might well be true that there will be some collateral damage from more liberal drug policies but I am reasonably sure that the current collateral damage from the "war on drugs" is MUCH worse. So I think the consequentialist argumentation is clearly in favor of "legalize it".
As for the arguments from principles I think this speaks even more strongly in favor of liberalization because it is simply not the state's business (and I am in many other respects very far from libertarianism) to tell people that they are allowed to get drunk but not allowed to get stoned.
Struck by the sounds before the sun,
I knew the night had gone.
The morning breeze like a bugle blew
Against the drums of dawn.
(Bob Dylan)

Offline jochanaan

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4702
    • Musician, Music Instructor and Piano Tuner
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #73 on: October 28, 2016, 11:27:21 AM »
...It might well be true that there will be some collateral damage from more liberal drug policies but I am reasonably sure that the current collateral damage from the "war on drugs" is MUCH worse. So I think the consequentialist argumentation is clearly in favor of "legalize it".
As for the arguments from principles I think this speaks even more strongly in favor of liberalization because it is simply not the state's business (and I am in many other respects very far from libertarianism) to tell people that they are allowed to get drunk but not allowed to get stoned.
Yes. +1

zamyrabyrd, BB is already taxing it heavily here in the Mile "High" State.  My friends who do it say that the prices on the weed from dispensaries are so high that they have mostly kept to their old "dark market" sources. :blank:
Imagination + discipline = creativity

Offline k a rl h e nn i ng

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 50044
  • Et quid amabo nisi quod ænigma est?
    • Henningmusick
  • Location: Boston, Mass.
  • Currently Listening to:
    Shostakovich, Frescobaldi, Stravinsky, JS Bach, Liszt, Chopin, Haydn, Henning
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #74 on: October 28, 2016, 11:28:50 AM »
Yes. +1

zamyrabyrd, BB is already taxing it heavily here in the Mile "High" State.  My friends who do it say that the prices on the weed from dispensaries are so high that they have mostly kept to their old "dark market" sources. :blank:

Yah, the tax on gasoline would be counterproductive if motorists had a back-alley source  8)
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Offline NikF

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3420
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #75 on: October 28, 2016, 12:22:39 PM »
Have any of you listened to music while under the influence of cannabis especially the sativa strain?

Yes, I have. But it was usually cannabis resin.

Quote
In conclusion: What do you guys think of cannabis intoxication as a means to enhance artistic sensitivity and perception?

Back in the early 1980s I'd just bought my first place. It was located in the part of town occupied mostly by writers and actors and a variety of other artistically inclined ne'er do wells. So smoking at listening parties was a fairly common and regular occurrence.
As for the experience itself, I quickly found I could take or leave it. I kind of equate it to how that woman seated at the end of the bar starts to look better and better as the night progresses (of course, there's nothing wrong with that - especially if she's hot to begin with 8)) but I'd much rather become slightly intoxicated or have my judgement impaired by other means (preferably by the hot woman at the end of the bar  :laugh:) and I was already into training for the boxing by that time anyway, so indulging in anything other than a single malt wasn't really my bag.
Still, I can remember a number of late nights at a stranger's place, sitting on the floor half asleep with some libertine chick or another resting her head in my lap, while Lester Young or Steely Dan or perhaps Brian Eno was playing. All very warm and fuzzy - but little more than that.
"You overestimate my power of attraction," he told her. "No, I don't," she replied sharply, "and neither do you".

Offline Monsieur Croche

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1439
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #76 on: November 03, 2016, 10:37:56 AM »
Smoking / eating cannabis never made anyone creative who already was not, nor does it make anyone more creative.  That is part of the illusion under the euphoria (whatever degree) the substance induces when ingested.

Whether it is cannabis, or that seemingly preferred drug of choice for writers -- what these can do is slow down or to some degree shut off the more conscious and left-lobe brain activity, thereby making less resistance for what might come from the more intuitive or subconscious, i.e. 'our creative sources.'  Both of these drugs, alcohol and cannabis, are classified depressants.  Think about that. lol.

The standard joke-truth about either is in the moment, you can have dazzling ideas and revelations -- maybe of some real value -- but the nature of the drugs and the states is such that you
1.) can not get them down on paper when high. 
2.) can't recall them once the drug has worn off.

Back to the drawing board, then.
~ I'm all for personal expression; it just has to express something to me. ~

Parsifal

  • Guest
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #77 on: November 03, 2016, 10:42:39 AM »
Smoking / eating cannabis never made anyone creative who already was not, nor does it make anyone more creative.  That is part of the illusion under the euphoria (whatever degree) the substance induces when ingested.

Brings to mind a story told by Bertrand Russell.

Quote
William James describes a man who got the experience from laughing-gas; whenever he was under its influence, he knew the secret of the universe, but when he came to, he had forgotten it. At last, with immense effort, he wrote down the secret before the vision had faded. When completely recovered, he rushed to see what he had written. It was: "A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.”

Offline Andante

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 296
Re: Perhaps a sensitive topic? re weed, ganja, cannabis
« Reply #78 on: November 04, 2016, 04:30:29 PM »
Smoking / eating cannabis never made anyone creative who already was not, nor does it make anyone more creative.  That is part of the illusion under the euphoria (whatever degree) the substance induces when ingested.

Whether it is cannabis, or that seemingly preferred drug of choice for writers -- what these can do is slow down or to some degree shut off the more conscious and left-lobe brain activity, thereby making less resistance for what might come from the more intuitive or subconscious, i.e. 'our creative sources.'  Both of these drugs, alcohol and cannabis, are classified depressants.  Think about that. lol.

The standard joke-truth about either is in the moment, you can have dazzling ideas and revelations -- maybe of some real value -- but the nature of the drugs and the states is such that you
1.) can not get them down on paper when high. 
2.) can't recall them once the drug has worn off.

Back to the drawing board, then.

It is a waste of time you will never convince the users, just let them go on their own disillusional path.
Andante always true to his word has kicked the Marijuana soaked bot with its addled brain in to touch.

snyprrr

  • Guest
WILL IT CURE MY KARL-ITIS?
« Reply #79 on: November 05, 2016, 08:12:33 AM »
???