• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Good arguments for sticking only to natural drugs?

another reason plant drugs are good...

When you use only plant-drugs... You don't support pharm companies, ganstas, kingpins and drug manufacturers! You support farmers and gardeners!
 
^what if one gets all their psychedelic synthetics from a clandestine chemist who also happens to be a really close friend who manufactures solely for himself and his friends?
 
Teotzlcoatl said:
another reason plant drugs are good...

When you use only plant-drugs... You don't support pharm companies, ganstas, kingpins and drug manufacturers! You support farmers and gardeners!
Click to expand...

None of the synthetic drugs I use support any of those. Except maybe pain relievers and alcohol ;)
 
Ugster said:
When you are consuming these drugs into your body, you are also consuming the intentions that have been infused within the molecular structure of the chemical in question.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we could convince the dali llama to rock of some crack to see if it's less addictive than the regular kind.
 
here another one...

if the apocolypse came... and all the drugs labs destroyed or everyone was dead... or if the government started really, really cracking down and killing people for using drugs or something...

i could still grow my plants and get high, while y'all rely on labs and such.
 
^what if one gets all their psychedelic synthetics from a clandestine chemist who also happens to be a really close friend who manufactures solely for himself and his friends?
Click to expand...

all the chemicals he uses doesn't hurt the environment? How are they disposed of? How are the solvents and such produced?

growing plants never hurts anything (except maybe invasive species, but that isn't a problem with hardly any of the psychoactive plants in most areas).
 
Teotzlcoatl said:
here another one...

if the apocolypse came... and all the drugs labs destroyed or everyone was dead... or if the government started really, really cracking down and killing people for using drugs or something...

i could still grow my plants and get high, while y'all rely on labs and such.
Click to expand...
How exactly is that a valid argument?

No one here is against plant teachers...stop making it a me-against-the-world discussion. That doesn't help anyone. if if if if...what? Here and now please.
Teotzlcoatl said:
all the chemicals he uses doesn't hurt the environment? How are they disposed of? How are the solvents and such produced?

growing plants never hurts anything (except maybe invasive species, but that isn't a problem with hardly any of the psychoactive plants in most areas).
Click to expand...
...until you use chemical laden fertilizer and other nasty products.

Same goes for a lot of lab-produced drugs. It's a matter of process and mindfulness. Most byproducts can be safely disposed of, reused, etc... if someone spent the time to do it.

You can live in your fantasy world where you validate your 'natural' drug use through whatever means necessary but please don't attack something you don't seem to understand.

Ugster and psood I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in later when I've got more time to respond :)
 
Im all organic duh.

organic gardening/farming is the way to go.

permaculture, etc.

Same goes for a lot of lab-produced drugs. It's a matter of process and mindfulness. Most byproducts can be safely disposed of, reused, etc... if someone spent the time to do it.
Click to expand...

Right, and that is what people making drugs are concerned with. properly disposing of chemicals and ensuring their work has a positive effect on the planet and society... not making money.

how foolish of me
 
And how do you think the majority of growers out there are caring for their marijuana, coca, salvia, etc...? They are some of the worst offenders.

You can live in your dream world where everyone grows their own organic delights (which I advocate for btw), but in the end of the day that's not how people work.

So yes, how foolish of you.
 
naginnudej said:
And how do you think the majority of growers out there are caring for their marijuana, coca, salvia, etc...? They are some of the worst offenders.

You can live in your dream world where everyone grows their own organic delights (which I advocate for btw), but in the end of the day that's not how people work.

So yes, how foolish of you.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I would say one of the major advantages plant teachers have over the products of human ingenuity is that a user can, if he plans carefully, choose to cut out other people entirely from the entire manufacture and consumption process. This really doesn't work with synthing chemicals, which involves buying all sorts of precursors and tools. It involves wheeling and dealing and convincing people that no, you're not using this eyebrow-raising item they're selling to make drugs.

But your other point is equally as valid -- any consumer of street-bought weed or mushrooms or opium tar or especially coke, is kidding themselves if they think their product was likely manufactured with any less human suffering than any popular synthetic braincandy. Unless you know the ultimate source personally.
 
^ Lol, that discussion works all more to my advantage ;).

Humans cheaply produce Ketamine primarily to relieve animals' and childrens' suffering (it is on the essential medications list). Big pharma have other, bigger things to profit on.

And when Ketamine is stolen (and easily replaced for the animal's sake)? A single-dose vial feeds 10 mouths... err I mean noses =D.
 
Teotzlcoatl said:
here another one...

if the apocolypse came... and all the drugs labs destroyed or everyone was dead... or if the government started really, really cracking down and killing people for using drugs or something...

i could still grow my plants and get high, while y'all rely on labs and such.
Click to expand...

If that ever happened I would go back to school to get a shiny chem degree and make my own. I hope if the government starts cracking down on drug use, they target alcohol first. Please....lol
 
I think if one can get a similar/identical effect from a natural drug then given the choice you should pick the natural drug over the synthetic drug, however I definitely have no problem taking synthetic drugs. For example, with dissociatives, you are fairly limited if you stick to natural drugs, as the only two natural dissociatives I know of are Salvia Divinorum, which is potent but very very short lasting, and Amanita Muscaria which also contains a powerful deliriant so is very unpleasant in a lot of cases.
 
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
...Can anyone think of any completely rational, practical reasons for wanting to stick only to natural drugs, though? Are there any that might not occur to most people, including many of the people who live by this rule?
Click to expand...

The appeal to nature, or the argument that something is good or better because it is natural, is actually a logical fallacy, meaning that it is not a valid argument. Following from this, there really are no good arguments for choosing something that is natural over something that is not, apart from an individual's right to personal opinion and personal choice. You may wish to do some reading on the logical fallacy of the appeal to nature, or you may read more about it at the following link: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnature.html
 
>>if he plans carefully, choose to cut out other people entirely from the entire manufacture and consumption process. This really doesn't work with synthing chemicals, which involves buying all sorts of precursors and tools>>

i don't think that's accurate

natural:

buy some grow lights, some good soil, all legal and not expensive and not suspicious. and whip up your own

synth:

buy some acetone, some glassware, all legal and not expensive and not suspicious. and whip up your own

>> is actually a logical fallacy>>

not only is it a fallacy, it shouldn't exist. it makes no sense. there IS NO DISTINCTION between an artificial object and a natural object, ontologically speaking. artificial objects ARE natural objects;

if salvia taught me anything it's that it's just a big lego machine with steel-noodles streaming everywhere causing consciousness

last part was partly joking
 
graugeist said:
The appeal to nature, or the argument that something is good or better because it is natural, is actually a logical fallacy, meaning that it is not a valid argument. Following from this, there really are no good arguments for choosing something that is natural over something that is not, apart from an individual's right to personal opinion and personal choice. You may wish to do some reading on the logical fallacy of the appeal to nature, or you may read more about it at the following link: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnature.html
Click to expand...

Fantastic post!

And thanks for the awesome link :).
 
^ agreed.

Graugeist pretty much summed up the entire argument in that paragraph, and effectively ended any need for further discussion., Nice job.
 
not necessarily: the naturalistic fallacy (more correctly Hume's Guillotine in this case) only has dominion over a moral value judgement. that is because morality ('good' 'better') is not found in nature itself, but rather in the relation of the subject to it. without subject, no morality.
if one makes a general comparison on the basis of an objective value measure; say between natures and technology's intricateness, im sorry, but nature makes technology seem like a blunt instrument. or; in terms of functionaly, an eye still surpasses any bionics we have created to date, by far. (let alone a brain!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top