I am FOR the legalization of marijuana and think it's for the most part a harmless drug, especially when compared to alcohol or prescription medication.
In what way did my anecdote demonize it? Please do not put words in my mouth.
I am FOR the legalization of marijuana and think it's for the most part a harmless drug, especially when compared to alcohol or prescription medication.
In what way did my anecdote demonize it? Please do not put words in my mouth.
While the truncheon may be used
in lieu of conversation,
words will always retain their power.
Words offer the means to meaning,
and for those who will listen,
the enunciation of truth.
The link between marijuana and psychosis is pretty solidly substantiated. I am still for legalization but there needs to be more education to warn those with genetic risk factors for mental illness to steer clear of the drug.
“To practice any art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow. So do it.”
- Kurt Vonnegut
I didn't put anything into your mouth. Your whole story about your friend's paranoia because of the excessive weed he smoked strongly suggested that you were against it. Since you attributed his aberrant thoughts to the drug, by claiming that he was not in control of his physical and/or mental being (widely viewed as demonic qualities) you were essentially demonizing the drug. Usually when people want to support a position they cite reasons/personal accounts to support their argument; at they very least they are impartial. You didn't mention a single reason why you supported legalization. What else was I supposed to think?Originally Posted by Grit
My hide hides the heart inside
It was an anecdote like you said, not an argument. I didn't think I needed to clarify that a personal experience was not a universal statement, especially after saying that I know drugs effect everyone differently.
Last edited by Grit; 06-05-2013 at 03:59 AM.
While the truncheon may be used
in lieu of conversation,
words will always retain their power.
Words offer the means to meaning,
and for those who will listen,
the enunciation of truth.
i smoked a joint last night and wrote some poetry. what it made me think about was that doesn't make you creative so much as it relaxes you enough to be able to express yourself more naturally.
“the sense of being which in calm hours arises, we know not how, in the soul, is not diverse from things, from space, from light, from time, from man, but one with them and proceeds obviously from the same source.... Here is the fountain of action and of thought....
I have always been under the impression that being able to "express oneself more naturally" is the pure essence of creativity. How do you differentiate between them?
My hide hides the heart inside
You can express yourself very naturally if you have literary diarrhoea too. That doesn't mean other people would necessarily want to read it.
Pop singers may express their ideas using cliches, which come naturally to some people. But usually it's more creative to want to subvert or avoid them.
the question here is about condition. will you able to do the same without the smoke?
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
What I mean is it doesn't make you creative, it allows you to tap into your natural creativeness. everyone is creative, but most are too tense to relax and use their minds in that way.
“the sense of being which in calm hours arises, we know not how, in the soul, is not diverse from things, from space, from light, from time, from man, but one with them and proceeds obviously from the same source.... Here is the fountain of action and of thought....
Well thinking your butt-gunk doesn't stink is well... I don't need to finish that sentence, now, do I? Personally, I would rather read a stylistically awful poem that is extremely personal to the poet (a teenage girl writing about the death of her first boyfriend) than some beautifully written nonsense that says nothing about nothing but swears to god it means something (98% of Shakespearean sonnets). I advocate that the attitude one expresses should reflect how they feel.
Get a grip of this: If one person feels they want to butcher someone and eat their heart after the fact (Dahmer claimed to love his victims so much he wanted them to be a part of him) or if another person wants to donate an organ to a cancer patient without ever telling the recipient or seeking credit for the deed (based on a true incident of an organ donor whose former bout with cancer made him love fellow sufferers) the perception of a word (in this case, love) is applicable to a UNIQUE individual. Oh... Is this too "politically INcorrect"? Sorry, but deep down inside we all know it's true. We shouldn't feel the need to model our behavior around hypocritical laws or societal 'duties', but we ALL do it ANYWAY.
Now I know that pretty much everyone on this forum, myself included, would LOVE to think we are so special and perfect because we know how to write a grammatically correct sentence, but there will come a point in time when we realize that the only thing brilliant writing and poetic garble does is inflate our ego. We need to feel relevant, we need to feel like someone actually gives a dam n about us, since in our real lives no one really does give a dam n about us, so we tack on artsy little avatars log onto computers and verbally spew whatever crap comes to our head on a dinky little website. I do it, you do it, we all do it, we are going to continue to do it till we reach our graves or until we develop carpel tunnel from years of typing (whichever comes first) and in the end we will accomplish something SPECTACU... Oh wait, I meant nothing. So, I will continue to be irrelevant and so will everyone else here.
Hm. Did I just type three paragraphs without misspelling more than 7 words??? Two more ego points for me!
Last edited by Adolescent09; 06-12-2013 at 12:05 AM.
My hide hides the heart inside
There is a benefit to being able to relax. Having enough food so one isn't hungry should help creativity also. Overeating is bad for creativity as well.
I think you are correct in saying that drugs don't make one creative. Neither does food. Does anything actually make one more creative? Since we have brain scans today, and can probably point to areas in the brain that can be associated with creativity, and know the brain changes, we might be able to come up with some answers to that. I don't think it is entheogens, whatever other benefits they might have, but it could be some forms of meditation or breathing exercises.
My blog: https://frankhubeny.blog/
Yup. meditation and breathing exercises are a way to relax your mind, to calm the hustle and bustle, allowing you to focus. creativity is partially based on focus, though another aspect of it is this interesting sort of "lack of thinking" that enables you to think. i'm sure there's a word for it.
“the sense of being which in calm hours arises, we know not how, in the soul, is not diverse from things, from space, from light, from time, from man, but one with them and proceeds obviously from the same source.... Here is the fountain of action and of thought....
Though i'll agree with most of the above people, who say that one is creative through natural means, I do not know if that is completely possible for all people. Everyone thinks and responds to different stimuli in many different ways. Every experience or emotion or thought or inflection can be deduced down to chemicals in the brain. All drugs, from caffeine to alcohol to LSD, simply serve as artificial neuroreceptors. I think it is most important to look at physical negatives that can come up when trying to use drugs to simulate things that could be established through meditation or other means, but I would agree that some drugs can lead to more creativity in certain cases.
Indeed, it is all within our minds, but different people choose different means for fishing things out of our minds. The choice of which method is best, is certainly up the person.
Myself, I habitually use caffeine as a means for being more creative, or at least a means for motivating myself to be more creative
EDIT: In terms of what the original poster said:
is drug usage justified as far as art and expressions are concerned?
is it ok to write or indulge arts under the influence if so why?
many claim to have had second comings enlightenement and better expressive powers when writing or visualising art.
one book that comes to mind is ''Clockwork Orange'' written under the influence of opium admittedly by its own author Anthony Burgess.
To answer your first question it is up for debate which particular drugs and uses are justified and I think that differs from person to person
Your second question is a continuation of the first question. Faulkner was a heavy binge drinker, though he often said he rarely drank when he wrote. I do not know of this completely true. Dostoevsky openly admitted to being rather drunk when he wrote the majority of his works, and he would even often edit and peer review his works while drunk. Ken Kesey (One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest) and Jack Kerouac admitted to using psychedelic drugs while writing their books. Certainly, this can also describe many musicians and painters, which pretty much answers your third question.
Again, it is up for debate which drugs are good and which drugs are bad, but I'd argue that a lot of drugs have "helped" many artists and writers in the past.
Last edited by Mathor; 06-16-2013 at 12:04 PM.
I'm losing all those stupid games
That I swore I'd never play
Any and every drug responds to any and every person differently. The brain is complex. Whether or not some of these terrible substances like alcohol should be illegal does not really have anything to do with the OP's original post. The artistic implications of any and all drugs are a moral decision first and foremost. The implied legality of any of those things will differ from country to country, and means nothing when it comes to whether it is morally "right" to use artificial chemicals like caffeine or alcohol or weed to ingest or create art.
Last edited by Mathor; 06-16-2013 at 12:19 PM.
I'm losing all those stupid games
That I swore I'd never play
Interesting how legality and morality rarely overlap.
“the sense of being which in calm hours arises, we know not how, in the soul, is not diverse from things, from space, from light, from time, from man, but one with them and proceeds obviously from the same source.... Here is the fountain of action and of thought....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
