I smoke pot all the time and I'm quite intelligent - in fact, I find I'm more lucid when I write high as opposed to not.
P.S. - I'm going to smoke now, so my next post is sure to be a gem...:2razz:
mikeey is always high, or maybe God is high hahah
Hatuey
I think he's just really old or something.
You are quite intelligent. What is debatable is whether you would be even more intelligent if you did not smoke pot.
I do understand why you are a libertarian now though.:2razz:
He has to be on something. There is no way anybody can make that many incoherent points and yet somehow manage to make sense. Well there is Monk-Eye. But I haven't seen him in a while.
OMG.lol Who cares if they were pothead or not, they used marijuana and they became successful.
Still, I have personally known at least 2 other people whom I could describe as 'needing' pot to be successful. (Not me, it just makes me stupid and doesn't give the euphoria. Boring, really) I am certain they were also self-medicating something. One of them is a Nurse (recently), now. The other I don't know anymore, but was a straight A student. Luckily, they both found pot to be helpful. There will be time later for them to find the better method for whatever ails them.
Of course these are anecdotal as well. And, if true, are still examples of exceptions to the rule.
Chances are, what that means is that both of those folks were suffering from some sort of ailment that would/could have been managed in other ways.
Carl Sagan smoked pot regularly and attributed much of his great scientific achievements to ideas he concocted while stoned.
Marijuana affects everyone differently. I smoke it occasionally because its effects on me closely match those described by Sagan. I think the problem with marijuana is that, like many illicit drugs, it attracts those who are unable to cope with sobriety. Those that easily cope with sobriety are less likely to use drugs and are, generally speaking, more successful.
It's the whole correlation does not equal causation thing. Stoners and potheads have a reputation for being pretty stupid, but is weed the underlying cause? Or did they simply not learn tap the potential of their minds, instead relying on a drug? Certainly weed has the potential to exarcerbate stupidity and ignorance; if you become hyperfocused while high and focus that energy intently on Seinfield reruns, you won't expand your mind.
However, when I become hyperfocused while high, I do hours of research. I attribute my deeper understanding of mathematics and physics to insight gained while high, a perspective I may not otherwise have achieved.
I think weed, like alcohol, can destroy the full capabilities of your mind. But, depending on how its used, I believe it can inspire new ways of thinking which may stimulate otherwise unused neurons. Until we allow actual research into its true nature, we'll have to discover its risks and benefits on a personal level.
1) It is unknown that if someone achieves when the use weed if they would not achieve MORE if they did not. Therefore, your assessment could be backwards.
2) If someone is more focused when the use weed, it probably means that they are suffering from ADD or some other psychological disorder. I've seen this TONS of times. There are other solutions to these issues.
3) From the research I've read, other than the smoking part of it, occasional marijuana use probably ranks with occasional alcohol use in the realm of danger... more or less. Consistent marijuana use? Absolutely dangerous with lots of negative effects.
At what point do excepions invalidate the rule? I imagine there are some like me who performed well under the influence. I know there are many others who performed well when not under the influence but would get high when the were studying or performing. To my mind there is a range of stupidity and performance associated with getting high. There are some things I will not do when high - any type of motor coordination including cooking and driving.
He has to be on something. There is no way anybody can make that many incoherent points and yet somehow manage to make sense. Well there is Monk-Eye. But I haven't seen him in a while.
Like prescription medicine?
Excuse me, but "ADD" is not a psychological disorder. Being bored in school and defiant towards authority figures is not indicative of psychological problems.
Secondly, if consistent marijuana usage is "absolutely dangerous with lots of negative effects" then consistent usage of prescription drugs is "extremely dangerous and life-threatening".
Excuse ME but ADD IS a psychological disorder. Your assessment of what it is and what symptons it is exhibited by shows that you do not know what it is. You are describing someone who is oppositional, not someone who is ADD.
AD/HD predominantly inattentive type: (AD/HD-I)
- Fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes.
- Has difficulty sustaining attention.
- Does not appear to listen.
- Struggles to follow through on instructions.
- Has difficulty with organization.
- Avoids or dislikes tasks requiring sustained mental effort.
- Loses things.
- Is easily distracted.
- Is forgetful in daily activities.
AD/HD predominantly hyperactive-impulsive type: (AD/HD-HI)
- Fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in chair.
- Has difficulty remaining seated.
- Runs about or climbs excessively.
- Difficulty engaging in activities quietly.
- Acts as if driven by a motor.
- Talks excessively.
- Blurts out answers before questions have been completed.
- Difficulty waiting or taking turns.
- Interrupts or intrudes upon others.
The Disorder Named AD/HD (WWK1)
Depends on the prescription drug and the level of use. If you take 10 oxycontins every day for a couple of years, you will certainly have negative effects and there will be danger of life-threatening consequences.
ADD people are not disordered, in my opinion. They just live in the wrong time in history. I'm sure they did fine in simpler times before the demands of modern schools and urban living. I'm sure ADD people functioned just fine in hunter/gatherer and agrarian societies.
Excuse me, but "ADD" is not a psychological disorder. Being bored in school and defiant towards authority figures is not indicative of psychological problems.
Secondly, if consistent marijuana usage is "absolutely dangerous with lots of negative effects" then consistent usage of prescription drugs is "extremely dangerous and life-threatening".
Okay, let's look at the "symptoms" of ADD...
Basically, if they have lots of energy and don't like listening to teachers talk about arithmetic they are "psychologically disordered" and in serious need of Ritalin.
How many people have died from marijuana usage?
How many people have died from prescription drug usage?
Having problems remembering things is not dementia, but it can certainly be a sign of it. ADD is real, as is ADHD, and while the symptoms are similar to normal kids, trust me that when you encounter the real thing, you will know it. It's a difference of degree.
Having problems remembering things is not dementia, but it can certainly be a sign of it. ADD is real, as is ADHD, and while the symptoms are similar to normal kids, trust me that when you encounter the real thing, you will know it. It's a difference of degree.
ADD people are not disordered, in my opinion. They just live in the wrong time in history. I'm sure they did fine in simpler times before the demands of modern schools and urban living. I'm sure ADD people functioned just fine in hunter/gatherer and agrarian societies.
I was diagnosed as having ADHD by two child psychiatrists and prescribed Ritalin, which I later refused to take. Ritalin was a nightmare and prescribing it to "ADHD" children is immoral.