Let me know what you have in mind via PM! Between that and something on stoicism (and eventually on emergence), we have a solid dance card and plenty of opportunities.
#6 is really dumb. Substance use enhances the lives of millions, including myself. Just as one example, I started using marijuana everyday last year, and the result has been a total transformation of my personality for the better: I sleep better, and I'm less angry and anxious and more productive. One of the reasons that it took me so long to discover the healing effects of weed is crude sweeping anti-drug rhetoric like yours.
It strikes me that four things can be true at the same time:
1) Some part of the population will best manage their mental health with exogenous substances/drugs
2) A very large part of the population faces mental health challenges of various kinds, and could adequately manage their mental health without drugs/exogenous substances.
3) That #2 might require quite a bit of effort, experimentation, discomfort, and growth that many are not willing to experience/endure.
4) That facing #3, a large part of the population will opt for drugs/exogenous substances, and that some portion of those people will arrive at very dark places as a result. Some part of #1, if they're not careful, can end up at the same spot.
I've know at least half a dozen people in my life who say something like the following: "I just can't relax at the end of the day without a glass of wine."
We could probably agree that most of those people are fully capable of trying things that fall in the #2 bucket, and likely could relax without wine, but won't commit to doing so because of #3, or lack of interest, or lack of time, or whatever.
You can take out the value judgment and just let it be what it is.
I'd like to think it's pretty clear from what's written that it's the addiction to those substances, not moderate use, that we push back on. I'm not anti-drug; I'm libertarian in my drug policy. It's when you can't live without them that there's a problem.
Charlie Munger just smiled the tiniest bit from six feet under. Rest in peace, master inverter!
Inversion is easily one of my favorite thinking tools.
And now you've got me off and running with a new essay focused on Inversion. 😆👊🏽
You're probably already all over this, but I wrote about inversion not terribly long ago: https://goatfury.substack.com/p/inverting-ideas
You can't do jiu jitsu if you can't invert ideas.
I've learned to search your pages before I write my own. Want to collaborate on this one then?
Let me know what you have in mind via PM! Between that and something on stoicism (and eventually on emergence), we have a solid dance card and plenty of opportunities.
Intentional Reframing a'la The Enemy's Gate is Down! It's such an interesting way to view the world.
This was really insightful. I love how you framed it. How to be miserable... made me rethink a few things on that list that I do!
I credit Andrew with that framing. That’s what I liked about it.
#6 is really dumb. Substance use enhances the lives of millions, including myself. Just as one example, I started using marijuana everyday last year, and the result has been a total transformation of my personality for the better: I sleep better, and I'm less angry and anxious and more productive. One of the reasons that it took me so long to discover the healing effects of weed is crude sweeping anti-drug rhetoric like yours.
It strikes me that four things can be true at the same time:
1) Some part of the population will best manage their mental health with exogenous substances/drugs
2) A very large part of the population faces mental health challenges of various kinds, and could adequately manage their mental health without drugs/exogenous substances.
3) That #2 might require quite a bit of effort, experimentation, discomfort, and growth that many are not willing to experience/endure.
4) That facing #3, a large part of the population will opt for drugs/exogenous substances, and that some portion of those people will arrive at very dark places as a result. Some part of #1, if they're not careful, can end up at the same spot.
I've know at least half a dozen people in my life who say something like the following: "I just can't relax at the end of the day without a glass of wine."
We could probably agree that most of those people are fully capable of trying things that fall in the #2 bucket, and likely could relax without wine, but won't commit to doing so because of #3, or lack of interest, or lack of time, or whatever.
You can take out the value judgment and just let it be what it is.
I'd like to think it's pretty clear from what's written that it's the addiction to those substances, not moderate use, that we push back on. I'm not anti-drug; I'm libertarian in my drug policy. It's when you can't live without them that there's a problem.