I know... I said I wouldn't post here again, but I just can't seem to get away
First, I want to address Iron Flatline... I did not call
you close-minded, I said your statement was a close-minded judgement - which it was. You appeared to be making judgments/assumptions and writing them as factual statments. Maybe this is not what you intended, but it is how your words read. Additionally, I only commented specifically on some of your statments because they were the most recent examples at the time... certainly not the only examples in this thread! My overall comments regarding close-mindedness, false propoganda, etc was about the thread as a whole and directed to those who, indeed, are turning thier assumptions and uneducated judgements into their own false anti-drug propoganda/soapbox.
This brings me to my second point - I want to reiterate that people still seem to be missing the point of the original post: The question was NOT "Should I try/take drugs to increase my creativity" NOR was it "Do people
need drugs to increase creativity" NOR was it "Does everyone who takes drug become more creative". The question simply asks...
Do drugs help us enhance or inhibit creativity and our expression of such?
The fact is, they do both depending on the type, amount, and individual... it's been proven... there's your answer... whether drugs are bad for you, whether your will 'become a junkie after one hit' (ughhh!), whether other famous artists who were affected creatively by drugs died young, whether your personal creativity was enhance or inhibited, whether you believe the propoganda or not, whether you think drugs are the root of all evil (again, ughhh!)... none of this is even relevant to the question at hand.
Again, recognizing and acknowledging proven information, is not the same as advocating drug use/abuse... lighten up a little.
I can't believe I just sat here and wasted another minute of this thread.
... can't we all just get along?
