Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pr1mezer0]

(...)

What is the luck of the sperm but a series of correct choices? Like species intelligence is a series of correct choices. And individual intelligence is reason with action; choice.

Isolating chemicals isolates the man using them. Depending on the sophistication of the process as the base, and the number of times processed, it could be 1 in (2,4,8...) or 1 in (10,100,1000...) likely to have a synergistic/symbiotic/synchronistic(getting back to luck) effect.

Most of you aren't considering that the isolate isn't just the apparently useful part of the plant. They are further refined with more select action the more it's processed ie. opium > morphine > heroin > codeine in order of refinement, not to mention more synthetic options like fentanyl and bupronorphine. Then there's ephedra > amphetamine (speed) > methamphetamine. It's like having less and less useful DNA in junk DNA.

[hector13]

Isolating the chemicals is intelligence; indeed, using your arguments, the culmination of species-wide intelligence to get to that point. It didn’t just happen in a vacuum.

We’re also not saying that synthetic drugs are by and large good, and by the same token, that not all “natural” (unprocessed) drugs/plants are good.

You’re just talking new age nonsense. Yeah, heroin’s bad, so is ricin. There’s cyanide in apple seeds. All that sort of nonsense.

[Maximum Spin]

Most of you aren't considering that the isolate isn't just the apparently useful part of the plant. They are further refined with more select action the more it's processed ie. opium > morphine > heroin > codeine in order of refinement, not to mention more synthetic options like fentanyl and bupronorphine. Then there's ephedra > amphetamine (speed) > methamphetamine. It's like having less and less useful DNA in junk DNA.

This is not how chemistry works.
Codeine isn't a "more refined" heroin, it's a different chemical with similarities to heroin. If there's any analogy to DNA, it would be like having RNA instead of DNA: it's clearly related, but a different thing with different properties. Similarly, methamphetamine, you can tell by the name, is a methylated derivative of amphetamine. Methylating isn't in any sense "refining", it's making a different chemical with an extra carbon hanging off. You don't even prepare it FROM amphetamine.

[jipehog]

Murder is natural it is also generally bad,

Wow, hard disagree.

Frumple already explained this on p.2, essentially if it is possible by the laws of nature, it is natural. Every other definition is something part of our cultural process, generally painted in our moral judgment and anthropocentric views.

[pr1mezer0]

Despite what I've said, or perhaps in spite of it, I'm not against chemistry. I just think it shouldn't be decoupled from evolutionary biology and sociology, and it should be balanced with wholesome compounds, not an if you can't patent it criminalise it mentality. I don't think a given molecule is likely to have a net benefit on society otherwise.
As to a natural definition, I think that which has life is more natural than that which hasn't. (But i think we inherited our will to self preservation from the stone). Complexity might be in the method of isolation, but not in the isolate.

[EuchreJack]

Despite what I've said, or perhaps in spite of it, I'm not against chemistry. I just think it shouldn't be decoupled from evolutionary biology and sociology, and it should be balanced with wholesome compounds, not an if you can't patent it criminalise it mentality. I don't think a given molecule is likely to have a net benefit on society otherwise.
As to a natural definition, I think that which has life is more natural than that which hasn't. (But i think we inherited our will to self preservation from the stone). Complexity might be in the method of isolation, but not in the isolate.

What are "wholesome compounds?"

[dragdeler]

Anything that can be used de-semanticise yourself when it's needed. Wholesome AF even if you can see rainbow of different pills in the vomit.


Ugh let me make up some garble (I halfway believe in but can't do justice):

Aromatic compounds are like the closest relative we have to psychoactive drugs. All of these can be most quickly thrown into and the same drawer if you say their evolutional advantage is the chemical transmission of information. Ok what are humans, omnivores, what's the like the opposite of an omnivore? Animals with extremly picky eating habits, idk like silkworms?! Stuff that doesn't generally evolve that much. All of these different compounds act like mutagenic influences to us, that's why we are so varied, as opposed to stuff that found it's ecological niche. Any attempt to derive a plan of action from this is just semanticisation. You can run in circles for decades with your therapist, I'd argue the best therapist in the world probably never saw anybody longer than 20 hours...

Blablabla, wouldn't it be more wholesome to be lying in an opium den instead of this?

[MrRoboto75]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8xkeww0eak

[King Zultan]

This guy reminds me of the eat your mushrooms guy, which means this is a shitpost thread but about drugs instead of mushrooms.

[MaxTheFox]

(...)

What is the luck of the sperm but a series of correct choices? Like species intelligence is a series of correct choices. And individual intelligence is reason with action; choice.

Isolating chemicals isolates the man using them. Depending on the sophistication of the process as the base, and the number of times processed, it could be 1 in (2,4,8...) or 1 in (10,100,1000...) likely to have a synergistic/symbiotic/synchronistic(getting back to luck) effect.

Most of you aren't considering that the isolate isn't just the apparently useful part of the plant. They are further refined with more select action the more it's processed ie. opium > morphine > heroin > codeine in order of refinement, not to mention more synthetic options like fentanyl and bupronorphine. Then there's ephedra > amphetamine (speed) > methamphetamine. It's like having less and less useful DNA in junk DNA.

1. A spermatozoon is not sentient or sapient beyond reasonable doubt and thus cannot make choices in any meaningful way, thus yes it amounts to luck. Luck of whichever one is the furthermost one in the splash of sperm and/or whichever one has the strongest flagella.
2. That's just. Not how it works? Do you think luck is tied to naturalness somehow?
3. See what Maximum Spin said. There is no statistic called "refinement". There is only chemical formula. Also, the thing about natural drugs is that they tend to be less concentrated, but it's not really about the drug itself as much as its substrate. You're confusing correlation with causation.

Despite what I've said, or perhaps in spite of it, I'm not against chemistry. I just think it shouldn't be decoupled from evolutionary biology and sociology, and it should be balanced with wholesome compounds, not an if you can't patent it criminalise it mentality. I don't think a given molecule is likely to have a net benefit on society otherwise.
As to a natural definition, I think that which has life is more natural than that which hasn't. (But i think we inherited our will to self preservation from the stone). Complexity might be in the method of isolation, but not in the isolate.

THC oil has as much life in it as a tab of LSD.

[pr1mezer0]

Sperm don't need intelligence to choose. I theorise; choice consists of reason and action, growth consists of incorporation and exploration, and intelligence consists of choice and growth; a transcendental being. The sperm represent choice and the egg represents growth. Growth wanes from conception to adulthood, as choice waxes. Then growth waxes with experience, while choice wanes with habit.

I should use motive instead of reason as reason is synonymous with intelligence.

[brewer bob]

This guy reminds me of the eat your mushrooms guy, which means this is a shitpost thread but about drugs instead of mushrooms.

It's also about sperm, apparently.

[MaxTheFox]

Sperm don't need intelligence to choose. I theorise; choice consists of reason and action, growth consists of incorporation and exploration, and intelligence consists of choice and growth; a transcendental being. The sperm represent choice and the egg growth. Growth wanes from conception to adulthood, then choice begins its waxing.

What is this supposed to mean...

[pr1mezer0]

I suppose I got a bit offtopic.

I modified it anyway for clarity.

[EuchreJack]

Sperm don't need intelligence to choose. I theorise; choice consists of reason and action, growth consists of incorporation and exploration, and intelligence consists of choice and growth; a transcendental being. The sperm represent choice and the egg growth. Growth wanes from conception to adulthood, then choice begins its waxing.

What is this supposed to mean...

Somebody has both Weed and an internet connection