There is a somewhat lengthy backstory as to why I am addressing these concerns to the Discovery Institute. But since I do not have the time to clarify this connection, I hope the reader will consider the issues here on their own merit without an undue regard for my choice of correspondent. Of course, if I'm honest with myself, I might as well have addressed this essay to the Moon, given the infantessimal odds of this organization responding in anything but the most impersonal and rote manner. But SOMEONE has to eventually win the Powerball Lottery!
I think it's great that you are pointing out the downsides of materialism and how many scientists have a "pre-commitment" to ignore such criticism.
I fear that, as an avowedly "conservative" group, the Discovery Institute may have a blind spot of its own, however, namely a previous commitment to the War on Drugs.
Materialism has conspired with the Drug War to hook 1 in 4 American women on big pharma meds that were touted (falsely) as curing depression via a reductionist approach.
Meanwhile, we have outlawed all substances that could be used intermittently to elevate mood -- either on a regular basis, as for instance the Peruvian Indians chewed the coca leaf daily for over a thousand years, or via the life-guiding epiphanies that can be wrought in the guided therapeutic use of psychedelics.
Materialism + the Drug War has kept us searching for "real" cures (i.e. reductionist cures) for mental issues while denying us the godsends that grow at our feet. Why? Because the actions of the latter drugs are holistic in nature and cannot be referred to a known reductionist cause.
In other words, materialists ignore medical godsends for the same reason that they ignore intelligent design and teleology in general: namely, their previous commitment to reductionist causes.
This is why Dr. Robert Glatter could write an article in Forbes magazine in 2021 with the absurd title: "Can Laughing Gas help fight Treatment Resistant Depression"?
Even the Reader's Digest knows that "laughter is the best medicine."
But Robert's answer is a very worried "Maybe." He wants to keep the chronically depressed from using the substance that inspired the philosophy of William James -- because it might be dangerous.
He ignores, of course, the dangers of letting the depressed remain depressed -- not to mention the sociopolitical dangers of outlawing philosophical research a la William James.
The materialist approves of euthanasia -- but does not want folks to use medicines that would make them want to live -- like the hundreds of psychedelics synthesized by Alexander Shulgin which elate and inform without addicting.
The materialist would rather damage the brain of the depressed with ECT than to let them use godsend and time-honored medicines like soma that have inspired entire religions.
I hope, therefore, that the Discovery Center does not have a "previous commitment" to the Drug War-- because it is the Drug War combined with materialism that has kept me now from using godsend medicines for 45 years!
I urge you not to fall for the notion that drug prohibition is a conservative doctrine. It is a brand-new unprecedented American idea, surprisingly coming from a nation that claims to be founded on Natural Law, including what Locke called the right to the use of the land and all that lies therein. But the Drug War represents a prehistoric mindset which feeds us the following lie: that some substances have no positive uses for anyone, anywhere, at any time, ever.
In reality, there are no substances of that kind. Even botox and cyanide have valid uses.
The Drug War is thus a war on science and scientific understanding and should be denounced as such by the Institute. But again, I fear that conservatives have a previous commitment to scaring us about drugs rather than teaching us about them.
I hope this email will inspire dialogue on this subject at Discovery. I would be glad to take part. I have tried for years to get philosophers to discuss this matter and they're terrified.
Of course, this is the kind of email that is usually ignored, but I hope you will share it with the likes of Behe and Meyer.
Materialist reductionism has more downsides than the fact that it keeps us from understanding the origins of life. It also keeps us from using obvious godsends to treat mental shortcomings, forcing us to search instead for the holy grail of reductionist drug research: a cause found in brain chemicals, which is the approach that results in modern antidepressants to which 1 in 4 American women are now addicted to Big Pharma meds for life: a veritable Stepford Wives come true, and no philosophers even notice it.
The Drug War also gives materialism an advantage in talks about origins because the Drug War outlaws all the substances that give us experiential evidence of a greater reality. Nitrous oxide convinced William James that we only see a small part of reality in our daily lives, but Drug Warriors in Britain are already doing their best to outlaw the substance and thus keep philosophers from following up on such leads.
It's amazing how many philosophers believe that the Drug War is just its own separate issue, like, say, abortion or gun rights. What they fail to realize is that the Drug War ideology causes all sorts of issues that affect everybody. The Drug War ideology of substance demonization both discourages and outlaws research on psychoactive agents that have prima facie value in treating conditions like depression, Alzheimer's and autism, given the fact that psychedelics can grow new neurons. The Drug War, in other words, censors science, as much or more than it was censored in the time of Galileo. The Drug War also violates the Natural Law upon which America was found, meaning that the Drug War should be front and center in all discussions of American jurisprudence, yet I've audited entire lecture series on the history of the legal system in America and the professors have never even MENTIONED the Drug War, let alone described how it has overthrown Natural Law.
So, again, the Drug War affects all sorts of aspects of American life, and yet most experts in the variously affected fields are silent on the subject.
Some materialists are no doubt happy for this scientific censorship because it tends to outlaw only those medicines that work in an holistic way, leaving them free to ignore the hints about non-physical reality that philosophers from William James to Plato have gleaned from using psychoactive substances.
Materialism
Materialist scientists collaborate with the drug war by refusing to see glaringly obvious drug benefits. They acknowledge only those benefits that they believe are visible under a microscope. The Hindu religion would not exist today had materialist scientists held soma to such a standard. But that's the absurd pass to which prohibition eventually brings us in a society wherein materialist science is the new god: scientists are put in charge of deciding whether we are allowed to imagine new religions or not.
This materialist bias is inspired in turn by behaviorism, the anti-indigenous doctrine of JB Watson that makes the following inhumane claim:
"Concepts such as belief and desire are heritages of a timid savage past akin to concepts referring to magic."
According to this view, the hopes and the dreams of a "patient" are to be ignored. Instead, we are to chart their physiology and brain chemistry.
JB Watson's Behaviorism is a sort of Dr. Spock with a vengeance. It is the perfect ideology for a curmudgeon, because it would seem to justify all their inability to deal with human emotions. Unfortunately, the attitude has knock-on effects because it teaches drug researchers to ignore common sense and to downplay or ignore all positive usage reports or historic lessons about positive drug use. The "patient" needs to just shut up and let the doctors decide how they are doing. It is a doctrine that dovetails nicely with drug war ideology, because it empowers the researcher to ignore the obvious: that all drugs that elate have potential uses as antidepressants.
That statement can only be denied when one assumes that "real" proof of efficacy of a psychoactive medicine must be determined by a doctor, and that the patient's only job is to shut up because their hopes and dreams and feelings cannot be accurately displayed and quantified on a graph or a bar chart.
The first step in harm reduction is to re-legalize mother nature's medicines. Then hundreds of millions of people will no longer suffer in silence for want of godsend medicines... for depression, for pain, for anxiety, for religious doubts... you name it.
Prohibitionists have blood on their hands. People do not naturally die in the tens of thousands from opioid use, notwithstanding the lies of 19th-century missionaries in China. It takes bad drug policy to accomplish that.
I'd like to become a guinea pig for researchers to test the ability of psychoactive drugs to make aging as psychologically healthy as possible. If such drugs cannot completely ward off decrepitude, they can surely make it more palatable. The catch? Researchers have to be free.
Today's war against drug users is like Elizabeth I's war against Catholics. Both are religious crackdowns. For today's oppressors, the true faith (i.e., the moral way to live) is according to the drug-hating religion of Christian Science.
The DEA outlawed MDMA in 1985, thereby depriving soldiers of a godsend treatment for PTSD. Apparently, the DEA staff slept well at night in the early 2000s as American soldiers were having their lives destroyed by IEDs.
The addiction gene should be called the prohibition gene: it renders one vulnerable to prohibition lies and limitations: like the lack of safe supply, the lack of choices, and the lack of information. We should pathologize the prohibitionists, not their victims.
The problem with blaming things on addiction genes is that it whitewashes the role of society and its laws. It's easy to imagine an enlightened country wherein drug availability, education and attitudes make addiction highly unlikely, addiction genes or no addiction genes.
Even the worst forms of "abuse" can be combatted with a wise use of a wide range of psychoactive drugs, to combat both physical and psychological cravings. But drug warriors NEED addiction to be a HUGE problem. That's their golden goose.
That's how antidepressants came about: the idea that sadness was a simple problem that science could solve. Instead of being caused by a myriad of interrelated issues, we decided it was all brain chemistry that could be treated with precision. Result? Mass chemical dependency.
I could tell my psychiatrist EXACTLY what would "cure" my depression, even without getting addicted, but everything involved is illegal. It has to be. Otherwise I would have no need of the psychiatrist.
Buy the Drug War Comic Book by the Drug War Philosopher Brian Quass, featuring 150 hilarious op-ed pics about America's disgraceful war on Americans
You have been reading an article entitled, Materialism and the Drug War Part II: open letter to the Discovery Institute, published on February 28, 2023 on AbolishTheDEA.com. For more information about America's disgraceful drug war, which is anti-patient, anti-minority, anti-scientific, anti-mother nature, imperialistic, the establishment of the Christian Science religion, a violation of the natural law upon which America was founded, and a childish and counterproductive way of looking at the world, one which causes all of the problems that it purports to solve, and then some, visit the drug war philosopher, at abolishTheDEA.com. (philosopher's bio; go to top of this page)
You have been reading an article entitled, Materialism and the Drug War Part II: open letter to the Discovery Institute, published on February 28, 2023 on AbolishTheDEA.com. For more information about America's disgraceful drug war, which is anti-patient, anti-minority, anti-scientific, anti-mother nature, imperialistic, the establishment of the Christian Science religion, a violation of the natural law upon which America was founded, and a childish and counterproductive way of looking at the world, one which causes all of the problems that it purports to solve, and then some, visit the drug war philosopher, at abolishTheDEA.com. (philosopher's bio; go to top of this page)