Slashdot Mirror
The Animal World Has Its Junkies, Too
Phoghat writes "Research scientists have used many animal species in investigating mind-altering drugs, but it may come as a surprise to learn that animals in the wild — from starlings to reindeer — also make use of psychoactive substances of their own accord. It seems that many of these species have a natural desire to experience altered states of consciousness, and man may well have found his way to some of his favourite recreational drugs by observing the behaviour of animals."
I remember watching a show on TV where a judge was telling a teenager that he was more stupid than an animal. The judge added: "Even animals aren't stupid enough to do drugs".
I can only imagine the teenager replying to the judge: "But your honor here a picture of a Reindeer seeking the hallucinogenic fly agaric mushroom".
It gave me an idea and I am now looking for investors to do a remake of that TV show with twists like this one added. Kind of "judge Judy is always wrong". It should be a great success and make a lot of money. ;-)
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Just give a cat catnip it is like watching a junkie just getting their fix. My friend's cat just discovered where it was hidden and was opening the cabinet and closing it to get his fix.
In case the server gets Slashdotted, here's the Coral link:
http://www.pjonline.com.nyud.net/christmas/pj2010_723
Interesting article.
Willie...
I quickly checked on that, in the legal section, it says:
"PJ Publications is part of Pharmaceutical Press, the publishing division of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain."
It seems credible. At first glance anyways... ;-)
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
So do skunks call unpungent marijuana "human"?
There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
Have a listen to his 'Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge' (tape 4 from memory) for a very nice exposition of the Santa Claus/psychedelic reindeer juxtaposition (e.g. red & white Amanita mushrooms that live under Xmas trees, toy-making elves, Lappland, flying reindeer).
... While the substances are an easy way to experience something a little different, it's also possible to achieve "altered states of consciousness" entirely without the chemicals.
I don't have a copy of Stoned Free, but I like the premise:
I had to figure out how to relax my body (it was dysfunctional following a head injury), but even so I've had some neat experiences along the way: hypnagogic imagery, 360-degree vision, etc. If you've previously used substances (marijuana, LSD, etc) one can re-vivify those experiences with self-suggestion (self-hypnosis), or use descriptions of others to design your own trip.
Tripping without substances generally begins with relaxing the physical body, relaxing the mind, then making suggestions to yourself.
Binaural beats can help - Gnaural is the open source tone generator. I had to do some other things to fully recover from said concussion, and I'm finally dreaming up a storm. :)
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
Many traditional stories about the discovery of coffee recount shepherds discovering its unusual properties after observing that their goats were unusually perky after munching a certain red berry, which turned out to contain coffee beans (which are technically seeds).
I certainly think this and other stories of discovering analgesics, psychoactives, etc. by observing animals are quite plausible.
I remember a shaman from one of those South American cultures say something like: "We have been using tobacco for hundreds of years, and look at what it did to you when you discovered it. We have been using coca for generations, and look at what you did when you found it. I fear the worst for you once you find the rest of our plants."
I guess the point is of the article is that the use of "drugs" is something part of nature, it's just how we do it that matters.
> States of WHAT? Animals have consciousness now?
No, it popped up MAGICALLY in us apes at some point; someone throw on a switch and BAM, consciousness overnight. MAGIC, I tell you.
Or, you know, maybe consciousness is not a binary variable, but, like most everything about the real world, a continuum, and like most things about the real world, various species have achieved various levels of it? You know? Just sayin'.
-- B.
This sig does in fact not have the property it claims not to have.
Care to provide a source for that claim, other than your ass? Consciousness, as I suspect you mean it, is roughly synonymous with self-awareness, although I don't think it's quite that simple. In any case, that has been observed in a number of animals besides homo sapiens, such as certain apes and bottlenose dolphins. Of course due to the nature of the whole concept, it's pretty much impossible to conclusively prove any entity is in possession of consciousness, so cling to that if you wish.
It's a common perception ... and totally wrong ... that psychoactive users are junkies. Far from it. I have participated in multiple voluntary studies with the Australian National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, where they study recreational drugs ( E, LSD, etc ) ... and have asked them each time what they thought of my habits, and that of my peers. Each time they said the same thing ... that it was a pleasure to work with people who actually had their life together ... that the real 'junkies' use heroin, alcohol, cocain, etc ... and the recreational drug users, in contrast, are well in control of their activities, and leading productive lives. In fact I would go a step further and say that psychoactive drug users have their life together far more than the average person.
Slow news week - and, where's the usual filler about how Santa visits all the chimneys?
I've read that every human culture with the exception of one has it's own intoxicants. All but the Inuit (what are you gonna do, ferment whale blubber?) have found some form of mind alternation. Extending this to the rest of the animal kingdom, it's not surprising to me that other species are just as keen to how much fun booze or drugs can be.
You're not going to believe this, but... fermented walrus meat. I'm not kidding.
I lived on Baffin Island for three years, and during that time, I was regaled at length on a number of occasions with first-hand accounts of how the Inuit would cache stores of walrus meat under stones in October (to keep the ravens from getting it) for about six weeks. Once it had a pretty solid veneer of mold, they would take it out, scrape it off and ingest it with gusto.
According to those who tried it, it induced a mild, contented buzz.
No, I did not try it. I didn't even want to see it.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
It is sad to see it posted. I see nothing but hear-say and conjecture.
Accompanied by the smell of shit? Hint: it's because you've got your head up your arse.
Nothing in it is actual scientific evidence of these happenings except vague references. I question what this articles intention is except to perhaps attempt to make a case for drugs, which almost seems like a drug addicts logical reasoning after being blitzed on weed and watching a "National Geographic" documentary on something.
What is truly sad is a/clowns like yourself - who abuse the ability to read by not researching, and disregard anything that stands in the way of their deep emotional investment in stupid beliefs
Kind of like those that persist with the belief that nature is pure and humans are sinners - we are all animals, just some more "civilized" than others. Next week - perverts insist not all animals are monogamous and heterosexual, and murderers claim animals sometimes kill more than they eat.
Of course (recreational) drugs are just a crutch for those that can't cope with reality... and spouting patently, and demonstrably, bullshit opinions like yours isn't avoiding reality?
Or is this a "god" thing - the same one that made the drugs and the capacity to be affected by them?
I am hoping the headline was a joke, done to suggest thoughts of *intentional* drug users rather than the mythological addict, essentially hyperbolic negation of the intended result. Of course I could be wrong, we do live in a world where people presume that just because someone else likes to do something they don't quite understand it must be evil wrong immoral deadly and antisocial.
"It pains me to know that there is a solution for preventing tragedy and nothing is being done because of ignorance, stubbornness, unsubstantiated fear and greed."
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
I'm 43 years old, I haven't used hallucinogens since I was 28 and I still have to say that it was a very interesting experience that I do not wish to have undone. It's not a "miracle pill" but LSD definitely can be helpful in helping you understand yourself in a way that most people who do not use hallucinogens never come close to understanding.
While the experience can be as plain as just a "laser show" (lots of visual stimulation, giggling and general silliness) it can also be extremely fascinating. I still remember the feeling of being able to how I was thinking. It's a bit like using a kernel level debugger on your thought processes, you see things about the way you think that you never would have picked up as clearly otherwise. Of course, there's always the risk of getting stuck in an infinite loop which forces you to figure out how to manipulate your own mind in order to snap out of it.
Did you ever consider that people may not be comfortable attaching their names or even their more commonly used nicknames to posts stating that they have used drugs and that they considered said drug usage to be mostly positive? There are plenty of people who have to pretend to be anti-drugs publically because their employer, friends and many others would never approve of anything short of "Drugs are bad, mmkay?".
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
animals do not perform anything that requires abstract thought
Clearly, you have never observed an octopus. They appear to study a problem before tackling it, and can solve unnatural challenges such as figuring out how to open a screw-top jar which contains a morsel of food. They don't just attack the jar with random moves, but study it while turning it around. Accomplishments such as these are suggestive of abstract thought, not mere instinctive behavior.
Despite living only about two years, and receiving no training from its parents (who die around the time their offspring hatch out), an octopus is a surprisingly intelligent mollusc.
BTW, you might try to define what you mean by "abstract thought" some time. You'll find it hard to include your own mental processes while excluding the perceived mental processes of tool-making animals (e.g. crows) or even of mammals which are considered less intelligent than the octopus (e.g. a horse).
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Get fucked, you cryptofascist!
Or to put it another way, I guess you are one of those who will not listen to criticism of the police or military unless it comes from current or past service members too?
Most of the shit that goes round about drugs comes from those who have never done them. Or they have, but they pretend their choice of drugs aren't drugs, they are "drinks" or "medicines", etc.. You don't appear to be dismissing what they have to say, so your agenda is actually quite clear.
Yours,
A different AC to the one you are trying to attack.
Then, I guess he is not so proud of using drugs, now is he?
I don't think he/she stated that he/she was "proud" of his/her drug use, but even if the parent poster is proud or in no way feels guilty about his/her prior drug use that doesn't mean that it is without consequence to publicly state this fact.
There are plenty of people out there who would be happy to force someone who has not used drugs for years into rehab, or have them fired because "we don't hire druggies". That's not to mention just generally being viewed with suspicion by your peers. And if you have kids and social services find out about any prior drug use (not counting severe alcoholism though) they're very likely to put your kids in foster care (at least around here). Oh, and if you are divorced with shared custody you can bet your former spouse will use any and all drug use in the past as an excuse to get full custody of the kids.
"Free speech" doesn't mean "Free speech as long as you reveal your identity up front".
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4