“in a vote that wasn’t even that tight, my Twitter chose weed theory”
July 29, 2019 12:46 PM Subscribe
A few weeks back I decided to push back on Twitter against the idea that Freud’s work was discreditable because, as a young man, he took a lot of cocaine. I have an interest in this question because, as a young man, I took a lot of cocaine. But that wasn’t quite my point. My point was if we to discredit those theorists who have done a lot of cocaine, we will be left with the stoners, which would, moreover, be a boring monocrop to harvest.–Coke Theory/Weed Theory, and Some Possible Alternatives by Grace Lavery.
Wow, I am extremely here for this. Thanks for posting!
I do want to suggest actually constructing a science of psychology that subtracts the coke people. What would we be left with? Part 2 I hope!
posted by rhizome at 1:04 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I do want to suggest actually constructing a science of psychology that subtracts the coke people. What would we be left with? Part 2 I hope!
posted by rhizome at 1:04 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Having grown up with and worked for angry drunks, I'd choose both over alcoholics.
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:08 PM on July 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:08 PM on July 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
Not sure if article mentioned Dr. Wm. Halsted:
"Halsted and Dr. Richard Hall were the only colleagues who became addicted that would survive their cocaine problems. Halsted maintained an active career while dealing with his addiction for five years. Although, there were some clues to his condition during this time.Halsted published an article in 1885 in the New York Medical Journal, and it was incoherent. This showcased what state Halsted was in with his addiction to cocaine."
But pot has been found in numerous tombs around the world.
Compelling argument. Like deciding to buy more coke to finish the Theorem of conducive ether. Or a 20$ sack to research the word Theorem.
Now, my dead friend theorized that opiate folk are more wise with a reasonable degree of intelligence, whilst coke folk like to toss ideas around like a Top.
posted by clavdivs at 1:08 PM on July 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
"Halsted and Dr. Richard Hall were the only colleagues who became addicted that would survive their cocaine problems. Halsted maintained an active career while dealing with his addiction for five years. Although, there were some clues to his condition during this time.Halsted published an article in 1885 in the New York Medical Journal, and it was incoherent. This showcased what state Halsted was in with his addiction to cocaine."
But pot has been found in numerous tombs around the world.
Compelling argument. Like deciding to buy more coke to finish the Theorem of conducive ether. Or a 20$ sack to research the word Theorem.
Now, my dead friend theorized that opiate folk are more wise with a reasonable degree of intelligence, whilst coke folk like to toss ideas around like a Top.
posted by clavdivs at 1:08 PM on July 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Coca leaves have similarly been found in graves of Andean people where the plants grow for some distance back in time as well. Cocaine itself is a technological artifact, a result of 19th century chemistry, as much as morphine and heroine were. Molly, MDMA, dates back to WW1, but didn't get explored for psychoactivity until Shulgin started fooling around with it in the 1960s.
posted by bonehead at 1:24 PM on July 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by bonehead at 1:24 PM on July 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
The cocaine isn't the reason Freud's work has been discredited (there are many reasons), after all, Sherlock Holmes used a lot of cocaine as well and he is still considered the world's greatest detective.
posted by betweenthebars at 1:34 PM on July 29, 2019 [17 favorites]
posted by betweenthebars at 1:34 PM on July 29, 2019 [17 favorites]
DH is Digital Humanities.
One thing I found interesting about using this lens, is that it puts in one bucket philosophers and theories that I would never have thought to place in the same tradition. For instance, it makes perfect sense to me to compare Derrida and digital humanities in how "one is likely to be persuaded by one […] argument if one has already been persuaded by another".
With Derrida, I was persuaded at the start that there was something important in his work. With Digital Humanities (and here I'm thinking of something like Culturomics rather than, say, digital archiving) I wasn't persuaded to begin with and have yet to be persuaded that new ground has been broken.
But now I understand better why people might have the opposite reaction.
posted by Kattullus at 2:23 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
One thing I found interesting about using this lens, is that it puts in one bucket philosophers and theories that I would never have thought to place in the same tradition. For instance, it makes perfect sense to me to compare Derrida and digital humanities in how "one is likely to be persuaded by one […] argument if one has already been persuaded by another".
With Derrida, I was persuaded at the start that there was something important in his work. With Digital Humanities (and here I'm thinking of something like Culturomics rather than, say, digital archiving) I wasn't persuaded to begin with and have yet to be persuaded that new ground has been broken.
But now I understand better why people might have the opposite reaction.
posted by Kattullus at 2:23 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
She don’t lie...
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:39 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 2:39 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Surely the greater percentage of us prefer to balance cocaine and weed intake.
And as a rock musician who grew up in the 70s, I can sure you the aesthetics of weed and cocaine are compatible and complementary.
posted by spitbull at 3:03 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
And as a rock musician who grew up in the 70s, I can sure you the aesthetics of weed and cocaine are compatible and complementary.
posted by spitbull at 3:03 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
Marx is weed theory.
posted by Jon_Evil at 4:05 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by Jon_Evil at 4:05 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Dialectical Materialism is weed theory, if you get into Marx you’re discussing which stand.
posted by The Whelk at 4:06 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 4:06 PM on July 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
By the time I got to the comments it really started seeming as if she's taking it all a lot more seriously than one might have guessed (by which I mean, than I was taking it)—that this is an entertaining way to look at these thinkers and divide them up that, sure, might even provide a productive way to look at them or shake up established categorizations, sure; that these are "real categories" beyond that that ought to receive scrutiny and multiplication (into k theory, heroin theory, etc.)—eh, less sold on that, and I thought it flagged a bit as it went on.
posted by kenko at 4:06 PM on July 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by kenko at 4:06 PM on July 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
(I appreciated the reminder that in person Kant was a jovial person and a good host.)
posted by kenko at 4:09 PM on July 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by kenko at 4:09 PM on July 29, 2019 [7 favorites]
I don't know most of these authors -- Spivak is as far as I stretch. But I am given to understand that, as he built his reputation as a public intellectual and author, Carl Sagan was frequently and thoroughly baked. Those of us who are less highbrow can compare Carl Sagan's early 1980s work with Stephen King's early 1980s work for a quick demonstration of the premise.
posted by Countess Elena at 4:15 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Countess Elena at 4:15 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
This article reminds me why I dropped out of my one philosophy class in college.
Well, I was also smoking way too much weed.
posted by aloiv2 at 4:49 PM on July 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
Well, I was also smoking way too much weed.
posted by aloiv2 at 4:49 PM on July 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
My theories only got as far as - writers are drunks, but far more rarely stoners, whereas musicians love weed, even across many different genres. Stimulants can kinda work for any form and medium, for obvious reasons, but certainly seem more appropriate to certain genres and styles.
posted by atoxyl at 6:51 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by atoxyl at 6:51 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Weed theory is Ernie's soft round eyes and coke theory is Bert's aggressive eyebrows. Alcohol theory is Oscar the Grouch. Weed theory is Rose, coke theory is Dorothy from golden girls.
posted by bleep at 7:03 PM on July 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by bleep at 7:03 PM on July 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
There have been books written about how LSD may have been a key part of the start of the tech industry.
posted by eye of newt at 8:07 PM on July 29, 2019
posted by eye of newt at 8:07 PM on July 29, 2019
Also - Coke/Weed Theory is obviously a coke theory so I'll give her that.
posted by atoxyl at 8:54 PM on July 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 8:54 PM on July 29, 2019 [13 favorites]
So, no one is going to mention Erdős and amphetamines? Just me? Ok.
posted by eustatic at 10:43 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by eustatic at 10:43 PM on July 29, 2019 [8 favorites]
Weed Theory is the opium of the people.
posted by chavenet at 6:54 AM on July 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 6:54 AM on July 30, 2019 [2 favorites]
This article makes me think I should actually write down my extended riff on how the entire history of American popular music is a reflection of trends in recreational drugs.
posted by vibrotronica at 8:41 AM on July 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by vibrotronica at 8:41 AM on July 30, 2019 [4 favorites]
« Older American Hikikomori | No Plow ~ 360 Crop Rotation Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Kattullus at 12:51 PM on July 29, 2019 [1 favorite]