This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I'm largely in the same boat as you, philosophically -- I go cold turkey on caffeine regularly to make sure I can, don't and can't take more than a single serving of alcohols at a time, have a bit of internal resistance to even prescribed non-psychoactive drugs, and think people are too quick to dismiss the psychoactive risks of 'soft' drugs -- but I'm gonna push back a little bit, here.
I don't like the existing drugs, but I also don't think there's some particularly holy nature of the unaltered biochemistry. The snarky side is that we're already doing a lot of alterations to it, for better or worse: people worried about fluoride in water stealing their essence are probably a little nuts but it also probably does have some minor neurological impact, removing lead from everything is probably overstated but also not trivial, the amount of taurine you get in your diet probably effects memory even if you can separately synthesize it internally.
But the deeper part is that I'm extremely skeptical that even if the modern natural brain biochemistry was once well-optimized for the ancestral environment, that it currently is for our current one. Depression and obesity are popping up at ranges that are simply nonsensical from an evolutionary perspective. A significant portion of the male population can't successfully initiate sex to completion with any partner, nevermind one they can reproduce with. Modifications should be met with extreme skepticism because they're so hard to evaluate from the inside, and shouldn't be exploited for stupid or valueless reasons, and if there are available non-pharmaceutical interventions that work even moderately well I'd favor them.
But shit's broke already.
Agree strongly here. For all the benefits of modernity it is clearly driving us 'crazy' in large numbers.
More options
Context Copy link
There clearly isn't in a broad sense - genetic differences between humans that lead to great differences in intelligence or some other traits are themselves biochemical. But the particular mechanisms of psychoactive drugs are strong enough that they aren't doing the kind of thing that, like, a gradient descent of fine modifications would, but more just 'making you focus really hard on some specific thing' (stimulants, bad because - naturally - you'd be considering if you should do that thing and how you should do it in relation to larger-scale structures), or 'kinda feeling good or having crazy insights while actually just being dumb' (alcohol, weed, psychoactives). In the particular case of stimulants for 'not being able to focus', I really do think it's just a 'natural' lack of desire to engage in various aspects of school, work, modern life that is in great part justified, but poorly developed, rationalized, and then treated with the drug
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link