Intuition Pump: Philosophical Issues in Neuropharmacology and Drug Development

[Jabberwocky]

This thread is meant to pump your intuitions. I come to this forum and post this here, since many of you are quite intelligent and pursuing work professionally (or as a hobby) in this field. To wit, most of you are up to date on cutting edge drug development and exotic synthesis pathways, etc.

What do you think are the philosophical issues in the field of neuropharmacology and drug development?

This is an area of philosophy that has only very recently been developed...and I hope you will see the immediate pay-offs for having people trained to think precisely (analytic philosophers) working in this area. Philosophy is often heralded as a thing of leisure and frivolity. Hopefully you see how this topic is not like that.

This is a topic that I am considering pursuing for my thesis, since I have the pleasure of working with a person who is basically pioneering this field of philosophy.

For instance, an issue that might be tackled would be an analysis of the concept 'mental disorder' or an analysis of drug as a relational property between the structure of the compound, our brains, and our environment.

So, be creative! Give me your intuitions (pre and post theoretic!).

Hopefully this can be a fun exercise for some of you to think a little looser and work with some of the major concepts that you use so implicitly in your work.

Thanks!
samadhi

 

[Riemann Zeta]

I am currently working on a little treatise on the "ethics" of drug use (mainly focusing on cognitive enhancement via stimulant and nootropic compounds), as well as a few ideas that I've been mulling concerning "neurotheology" and the biochemical basis of spirituality/psychedelia (as is likely obvious, I consider them to be one and the same; that is, of course, spirituality with a small "s"--organized religion and its associated dogma is anything but spiritual, as it is designed to close, rather than open the mind).

When I have something cohesive, I'd happy to post it.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I would love to see it, riemann zeta!

I'm not professionally interested in Ethics, but of course that is a huge field within the philosophy of neuropharmacology.

 

[Jamshyd]

You'd be surprised (or perhaps not ) to find the issue of "mental disorder" to have more to do with Sociology than any of the disciplines that claim to be authorities on it (namely, psychiatry, psychology, and neuroscience). Social thorists have gnawed the crap out of the first two disciplines (especially psychiatry) through exposing them as social constructions. Therefore, a construction of a construction giving authority is nothing short of outrageous.

I know for a fact that ebola? would be MUCH more eloquent here than I, since his knowldge of the field far overpaces mine.

As for psychology, I see two things happening to it: there is a tendency to merge with neuroscience, and a tendency to give fresh food for the social-deconstructionist hounds.

To make this relevant to you, I would say motive is your ultiate key as to where pharmacology is headed. Who are the stakeholders? You might be able to pull a shulgin and work through loopholes and underground - but there has only been one shulgin to date. I see the current motive behind approval of drugs is the amassment of capital, which in a capitalistic society maintains the authority of the market by the relationship of power that is agreed upon (and thats the outrageous part) between the haves and the have-nots (who are usually the can-dos, as well).

I hope this makes any sense, I am rather exhausted and just waiting for the clock to hit 10 so that I could sleeep!

 

[Jabberwocky]

jamshyd those are neat thoughts! Analyzing the motives behind the industry would certainly be telling....I think at least....

neat thoughts....yes sociological analyses would be relevant for concepts like mental disorder. I agree completely with you there.

 

[spacefacethebassace]

I was thinking about the self-administration of psychedelic drugs being one of the emergent properties of the human mind. I believe I have read that humans are the only species that is known to repeatedly self-administer psychedelic drugs like 5-HT2 receptor agonists.

Maybe...the psychedelic headspace could be used to explore and/or disprove the computational theory of mind. I wonder if Jerry Fodor has ever taken LSD.

samadhi, have you heard about the Consciousness conference at U of Arizona this month. I think some of the presentations directly pertain to your topic.

 

[Psyduck]

Samadhi_smiles: You might find this to be an interesting read. He has a lot of other related publications on his site too. He discusses some ethical issues about drug development. I'm not sure if that's what your were looking for.

 

[kamikazikid]

One impact of this type of thinking could be a more widespread acceptance of healthy drug use as normal behavior and all the good stuff that comes with reason. But thats nothing new

 

[Alephnul]

I am currently working on a little treatise on the "ethics" of drug use (mainly focusing on cognitive enhancement via stimulant and nootropic compounds), as well as a few ideas that I've been mulling concerning "neurotheology" and the biochemical basis of spirituality/psychedelia (as is likely obvious, I consider them to be one and the same; that is, of course, spirituality with a small "s"--organized religion and its associated dogma is anything but spiritual, as it is designed to close, rather than open the mind).

When I have something cohesive, I'd happy to post it.

I would appreciate it if you could keep me informed of your work, particularly in neuro-theology. I am a theologian whose primary interests lie in Patristic Theology, however I have always been fascinated by what I believe is a integral part of our psychological make-up. The theological impulse I feel could be isolated, its brain chemistry understood (though I am more convinced by the informative results of experiments using high power magnets, to induce the response. Rather than clog this thread, could you PM me. I think we might share similar ideas, and could benefit mutually from discussing them in more detail. For what is the 'philosopher's stone' if not the search for this, the Manna, secret of Moses’ artificers, the chemical compound that facilitates spiritual experience? From the Lotus of the pre-Helene Egyptians, Iboga initiation and future empathogens, this is an area of primary interest to the theologian.

PM me, if not, no problems. I’ll send you a paper I’m planning which may be of interest to your research.

AN

 

[Barkuti]

...
What do you think are the philosophical issues in the field of neuropharmacology and drug development?

This is an area of philosophy that has only very recently been developed...and I hope you will see the immediate pay-offs for having people trained to think precisely (analytic philosophers) working in this area. Philosophy is often heralded as a thing of leisure and frivolity. Hopefully you see how this topic is not like that.
...

Curious, eh? How people usually disregard those matters which are of importance for the understanding of our purpose in/within life, engaging in all kinds of frivolities, instead of taking on an effort to accept, observe "reality", and let the flow of changes within themselves happen.

An "issue" is just an object in the mind of the one who observes it, an object of its mind. It is subject and consecuence of the cravings in his/her mind. It must be noted, that mind creates reality, we're a manifestation of MIND. Therefore, if you think you have a problem, an issue... no doubt you have it. You're actively diverging underlying energies towards the manifestation of that reality...

Issues with drugs? What is a drug? Something that changes the way you perceive? I have an absolutely lax definition for the term: in essence, anything is a drug; the food we eat, the air we breathe... anything which interacts with us, with our mental-physical structures, with what we are... because it makes us change.


Maybe to much weird texts, books, ... meditation, ... and K-holes of course.
Enough for now.


Cheers