|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
I just read in an article in the San Francisco Chronicle
that Carl Sagan did some of his best thinking while stoned. Is this true? Does anyone know more about this? Thanks. Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. Also - that he could have done more and better work if he had not used any narcotic. Many very bright and creative people have worked under the influence of various chemicals but my opinion is that it distracts them and it lowers their grasp of reality. Charles Phillips "Drink Upstream Of The Herd, Get A Macintosh" note feeble anti-spam attempt on Reply-To address |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
"triples" wrote in message news:40992cc6.4d0.41@news2... Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. I second Charles' thoughts..... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
In article ,
Jim Davis wrote: Guido Marx wrote: 1. It's easy to make claims about dead people. Of course - Mr. Sagans estate is certainly entitled to sue people for slander or libel. His name is still worth lots of money - so I'm sure the damages would be substantial. To my knowledge - Sagan's estate hasn't done anything. My understanding is that you can't slander or libel the dead. You can call Sagan a serial killer on a billboard in Times Square and Sagan's estate can't do a thing about it. Jim Davis That's the Anglo-American common law rule and has been for centuries. However, defamation is a state-law matter and I wouldn't put it past certain state legislatures to adopt statutes in derrogation of the common law in order to appease special interests. I know Tennessee's legislature modified the common law with regard to certain publicity interests to keep Elvis' estate happy and I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that California and perhaps NY might have done the same. Tennessee did it so that the King's estate might still rake in the $$$ for use of his likeness and image on things like mugs, T-shirts, etc. Typically, the rule had been that one's interest in one's likeness or image ended with death. Not anymore in this state and quite possibly many others. So, having deemed that a man several decades dead can still rake in millions of dollars from the sale of bundt cake pans in his likeness, it's a very small step to take to decide that his Estate also has an interest in his reputation, thus opening up the law of defamation to include defaming the dead. I note (with more than a trace of cynicism) that this sort of thinking is the same profit-above-all thinking that has led to the current extension of copyrights until the end of the human race or the heat death of the universe, whichever comes last. :-/ -- Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D. Reformed Aerospace Engineer Columbia Loss FAQ: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
Herb Schaltegger wrote: In article , Jim Davis wrote: Guido Marx wrote: 1. It's easy to make claims about dead people. Of course - Mr. Sagans estate is certainly entitled to sue people for slander or libel. His name is still worth lots of money - so I'm sure the damages would be substantial. To my knowledge - Sagan's estate hasn't done anything. My understanding is that you can't slander or libel the dead. You can call Sagan a serial killer on a billboard in Times Square and Sagan's estate can't do a thing about it. Jim Davis That's the Anglo-American common law rule and has been for centuries. However, defamation is a state-law matter and I wouldn't put it past certain state legislatures to adopt statutes in derrogation of the common law in order to appease special interests. I know Tennessee's legislature modified the common law with regard to certain publicity interests to keep Elvis' estate happy and I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that California and perhaps NY might have done the same. Tennessee did it so that the King's estate might still rake in the $$$ for use of his likeness and image on things like mugs, T-shirts, etc. Typically, the rule had been that one's interest in one's likeness or image ended with death. Not anymore in this state and quite possibly many others. So, having deemed that a man several decades dead can still rake in millions of dollars from the sale of bundt cake pans in his likeness, it's a very small step to take to decide that his Estate also has an interest in his reputation, thus opening up the law of defamation to include defaming the dead. Sagan was evidently sensitive to use of his name while alive: "According to Hugh Madison he was also a jerk:" "Sagan was known to have a bit of an ego. In 1994, Apple Computer began developing the Power Macintosh 7100. They chose the internal code name "Sagan", in honor of the astronomer. Though the project name was strictly internal and never used in public marketing, when Sagan learned of this internal usage, he sued Apple Computer to use a different project name. Though Sagan lost the suit, Apple engineers complied with his demands anyway, renaming the project "Butthead Astronomer". Sagan sued Apple for libel over the new name, claiming that it subjected him to contempt and ridicule. Sagan lost this lawsuit as well." from http://homepage.mac.com/pblake/webpa...77/E189953942/ I note (with more than a trace of cynicism) that this sort of thinking is the same profit-above-all thinking that has led to the current extension of copyrights until the end of the human race or the heat death of the universe, whichever comes last. :-/ Eisner should be hung by his balls. -- Hop David http://clowder.net/hop/index.html |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
JimO wrote:
"triples" wrote in message news:40992cc6.4d0.41@news2... Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. I second Charles' thoughts..... Indeed. Back in college days, I knew numerous people who swore up and down that pot made them more interesting, had more fascinating and intellectual conversations and whatnot. I finally got the opportunity to observe them... and noted that it turned them into zombies, about as interesting as John Kerry. They just *thought* they were more interesting. -- Scott Lowther, Engineer Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
"JimO" :
"triples" wrote in message news:40992cc6.4d0.41@news2... Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. I second Charles' thoughts..... Since I don't drink or smoke I get to be the driver for those who do. And I too observe that under the influence people say the dumbest things while still thinking that they are the smartest person on Earth. Earl Colby Pottinger -- I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos, SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
"Earl Colby Pottinger" wrote in message
... "JimO" : "triples" wrote in message news:40992cc6.4d0.41@news2... Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. I second Charles' thoughts..... I went through a mini-stoner phase in college. Having two consecutive Deadhead roommates made that fairly inevitable. The thing about marijuana is, all that stuff you find absolutely astoundlingly mind-bogglingly owwowoh**** funny or profound or freaky or whatever...a couple of days later you see the same thing and it's *nothing*. Case in point: we'd be watching TV and some commercial would come on and it would be the greatest thing in the world, just really hilarious and absurd and everything. Next time I saw the commercial cold sober, I'd have to actively concentrae on it just for it to register at all. Not even slightly funny, not profound, not even interesting, just another commercial. But when you're stoned it's supercallafrabulistic. too observe that under the influence people say the dumbest things while still thinking that they are the smartest person on Earth. hell, lots of people do that sober. Jon Miller springs immediately to mind g -- Terrell Miller "At one point we were this Progressive edgy group and we can't really equate that with Brother Bear so I don't know really." -Tony Banks |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
JimO wrote: Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. I second Charles' thoughts..... All in all, after seeing Dr. Sagan far too many times on "The Tonight Show", and reading one too many articles of his in the "Parade" Sunday supplement, I must echo Perfect Tommy's comment in "Buckaroo Banzai": "Mr. Wizard _WAS_ a great scientist!" Tripping through the cosmos in my "Bong of the imagination; as organic as a reefer seed"... Pat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
triples wrote:
I just read in an article in the San Francisco Chronicle that Carl Sagan did some of his best thinking while stoned. Is this true? Does anyone know more about this? Thanks. Not to begin another boring pro- or con- substance discussion, but he did openly discuss his use of marijuana. He said that some of his best work was done while under the influence. My own limited experience makes me say that he probably THOUGHT that his best work was done under those conditions. ROTFL I also had that experience. When you are under influence of MJ, you often believe that your thoughts are profound and revolutionary. When you are sober again you probably do not remember them, so there is no way to tell if they really were. I once did the experiment of writing down my thoughts under influence and then reading them again when I was sober. There were some interesting thoughts, but most of it was just unbelievably trivial. Also - that he could have done more and better work if he had not used any narcotic. Many very bright and creative people have worked under the influence of various chemicals but my opinion is that it distracts them and it lowers their grasp of reality. I agree. Recreational MJ consumption can be fun and is not as addictive or unhealthy as nicotine consumption. But when you think that MJ makes you *think* better that might be an indication of a substance abuse problem. That said, there are definitely some drugs that make you work better for a limited time. Amphetamine (speed) and caffeine (my favorite) for example. But MJ is definitely not among them. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Sagan and marijuana?
Since I don't drink or smoke I get to be the driver for those who do. And I
too observe that under the influence people say the dumbest things while still thinking that they are the smartest person on Earth. Looks like we found a cure for mental retardation. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|