Enjoying your book on the Enlightenment, but I believe the latest news about empathogenic medicines (like MDMA and psilocybin) shows that Hobbes' belief about a fixed and combative "human nature" was misinformed. In the 1990s, MDMA 1 brought unprecedented peace, love and understanding to the British dance floor among dancers of all ethnicities, religions and skin colors -- until Drug Warriors criminalized the substance after one single well-publicized death, which was the result of Drug War prohibitions, which prioritized fear over education when it comes to psychoactive substances. Why don't we have a peaceful world, then? Not because human beings are naturally combative and restless but because we westerners prioritize a know-nothing War on Drugs over having a peaceful world. I invite you to see my essay entitled and ended the peaceful Rave scene. To this day, philosophers "reckon without their host" when they ignore the Drug War while speculating on the "true nature" of human beings, which turns out to be quite pharmaceutically pliable indeed. For this reason, no modern speculation about human nature is complete without mentioning the Drug War and how it prevents us from treating "haters" with empathogenic substances - thus possibly even preventing school shootings.
I don't have a problem with CBD. But I find that many people like it for the wrong reasons: they assume there is something slightly "dirty" about getting high and that all "cures" should be effected via direct materialist causes, not holistically a la time-honored tribal use.
We know that anticipation and mental focus and relaxation have positive benefits -- but if these traits ae facilitated by "drugs," then we pretend that these same benefits somehow are no longer "real." This is a metaphysical bias, not a logical deduction.
No drug causes addiction after one use. From this fact alone, it follows that even drugs like meth and crack and Fentanyl can be used wisely -- on an intermittent basis.
When we place the FDA in charge of deciding whether a psychoactive drug should be re-legalized or not, we are asking them to decide on things like the relative importance of appreciating a sunset, a task for which the FDA has no expertise whatsoever.
The Drug War treats doctors like potential criminals and it treats the rest of us like children. Prohibition does not end drug risks: it just outsources them to minorities and other vulnerable populations.
The press once again hauls out the easy answer. Reiner's son was using drugs! Aha! Of course, that explains EVERYTHING! [sigh]
This is why we would rather have a depressed person commit suicide than to use "drugs" -- because drugs, after all, are not dealing with the "real" problem. The patient may SAY that drugs make them feel good, but we need microscopes to find out if they REALLY feel good.
And we should not insist it's a problem if someone decides to use opium, for instance, daily. We certainly don't blame "patients" for using antidepressants daily. And getting off opium is easier than getting off many antidepressants -- see Julia Holland.
The Partnership for a Drug Free America should be put on trial for having blatantly lied to Americans in the 1980s about drugs, while using our taxpayer money to do so!
If opium and cocaine were re-legalized, hospital buildings would no longer be the secular cathedrals of our time. Some of that wealth would actually go to healthy people.
(up)