We seem to be ok with people dropping out and becoming monks, but somehow living a relaxed lifestyle is somehow a major problem. Is it ok for people not to be a cog in the machine that makes your lifestyle possible or not?

Sure, I might be happier if my past self saved even more money, lived a vegan lifestyle, or learned to play an instrument. But, I don't think it's a problem that I have failed to optimize for making this second of my life be the best it could be.

Having known both drop-out monks and drop-out stoners, they're very different. Long-term meditators seemed to be very psychologically healthy, self-aware, cheerful, disciplined, etc whereas long-term stoners tended to be delusional, paranoid and irritable.

(Many people into meditation had at some point used drugs, but eventually decided they were at best a distraction and at worst actively harmful).

Did you know that many religions use drugs as part of meditation?

I think the problem is not that people shun them that those people want to live a more relaxed life, but more that some of these people haven't done the necessary steps to do it properly (bouncing from job to job because you can't function due to psychological addiction in a high-cost city is not good). As anything else, I believe that the individual should be responsible for what they do, yet proper knowledge of potential effects and how to face them is needed to avoid wasted years of their life.

> We seem to be ok with people dropping out and becoming monks, but somehow living a relaxed lifestyle is somehow a major problem.

Thank you for this reframing! I believe that it is useful and will likely use it in the future.

I totally agree with the statement itself, but my experience around many stoners is similar to IsaacL's: they're generally not happy or relaxed at all, and smoke weed because they're stuck somehow (or vice versa, perhaps).

More often than not, the 'relaxed lifestyle smokers', myself included, did so primarily to numb the stress in their head, whether caused by work stress, personal issues, social anxiety, etc.

Basically, it's often more to cope than to relax, at least in my experience and that of my surroundings.

But exceptions always exist, of course. I just think it's good to be cautious with anything that seems to offer a quick solution to a difficult problem (being at peace / relaxed).

I would rephrase be a cog in the machine to "contributing to society". If someone wants to live a hedonistic carefree life, more power to them. But this is often coupled with abusing the social safety net designed for people who are down on their luck and can't contribute enough to society due to no fault of their own.

Pot is an expensive habit in large quantities which is not really conducive to staying on welfare. The issue is self sufficiency is not really enough without 2.2 kids thing break down long term. Further without economic growth our system is completely unsustainable.

So, if parity is not enough and everyone must be a net contributer, well that's a cog.

expensive cost for the body

Which is why many people support removing public safety nets (or reducing them). I feel like anyone who wants to opt out of society should be able to do so, but they also lose societal support

very few people drop out to become monks, and to be blunt that is dangerous too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acedia

Kathleen Norris wrote a book titled with the same name, and one of the things you notice about monastic life is that it's very spiritually dangerous, and often leads to a lot of abuses.

There is a huge confirmation bias. You only hear about the horror stories, while people who are perfectly fine are afraid to admit so much, because of social stigmas and prejudices. Hell most companies require a drug screening as a condition of employment. People who smoke pot aren't going to come out and mention it at the water cooler for fear of retribution.

I was talking with a co-worker about US laws in general and he mentioned something I'd never thought of. Many of the laws we pass, speed limits, alcohol tax, prohibition, .08 legal driving limit, etc are designed for the lowest common denominator. Meaning, we pass laws based on the worst case scenario. It seems like it's illegal to do just about anything these days.

Yeah, we are hearing only horror stories about people walking on red signal, while majority of people are perfectly fine. It's time to legalize walking on red sign.

The UK doesn't have jaywalking laws and it seems to work okay. Not sure about crossing directly against a light, but in general if it's safe to cross, it's legal to cross.

I think this is a great example. Walk on red -- just be aware of your surroundings and responsible for the outcome when you do.

As opposed to your (implied) recommendation, which is for society to spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year enforcing jaywalking statutes.

Let's fix the potholes before we go after the pot users.

Many of us in other countries (almost anyone without kids with them) do just this. People rarely die. We learn how to look out for cars as soon as we're able to walk.

Yes, cars should drive slower when near pedestrians.

Encaging myself in steel and gasoline makes me a God. Out of the way, mortal. We are not equals.

>> I've seem how irritable they can be when they're not blazed.

This is a symptom of this:

>> They may not be chemically addicted

When people who smoke weed on a regular basis stop, the effects are similar to nicotine withdrawal - irritability, anxiety, fatigue and difficulty concentrating.

>> but the "harmless marijuana" trope is a little much.

I agree and would also add that when people are forced to consider statistics of people driving while high has increased dramatically in places like Washington and Colorado, their only response is, "Well drunk drivers kill way more people than people driving high." as some way to justify that it's ok.

What are those statistics?