I thoroughly enjoy using the 'first do no harm' principle when it comes to controversial subjects, as in this case, 'mind altering substances'. Allow me to give an example, which if you haven't encountered already, chances are you know someone that has, nuisance neighbours!
So they love to play jungle music through the night and sleep all day, that's perfectly acceptable to me. However, if the volume of that music is so high it disturbs my peace and causes me 'harm', then I certainly do have a problem. I feel everyone has the right to do as they please in the privacy of their own home as long as it causes no harm to others.
Back to mind altering substances, Absinthe being a particular favourite of those that choose the Bohemian lifestyle, but most would equate illegal drugs I guess, again, I strictly adhere to the harm principle. Sherlock Holmes resorted to cocaine when he needed stimulation and I do empathise with him, how many days, weeks, months have I spent in the gaping maw of the black dog when there has been nothing to spike my intellectual curiosities. Now I am married, with children, I no longer participate in the heavy stuff to give me that release I need, because it may not just harm me. If by using these substances, I put myself in a position where I harm those closest to me, or mentally/physically harm myself and leave my loved ones to care for me or even grieve for me, that is going against my own principles, which I try never to do.
So when asked my opinion on mind altering substances, I have to say, 'First do no harm'. The problem is, where do we stop? Should I not be a construction worker because there are inherent risks, which could harm my family if I have a fatal accident? Or should we stick to the 'First do no harm' in the sense that only if my actions would lead to me causing directly harm to others, it is wrong? I do feel for the latter, the nuisance neighbour after being told repeatedly to turn the music down, but ignoring such requests, is obviously, deliberately, doing harm to others. Sherlock Holmes, locking himself in his room for days on end, with no food and injecting himself with cocaine, is not violating the principle, because he has locked himself away. Certainly after effects of concern or grief may occur, but the basis of the principle has not been violated.
So in conclusion I would say if you choose to use mind altering drugs and are fully aware of any risks to health and you lock yourself away so you cannot harm others while under the influence, go right ahead and use them. It's not something I personally use, nor advocate use of, but neither do I presume to judge or break people's free will of choice. Stick to the no harm principle and feel free to do as you please, laws after all are in constant flux and at the whim of politicians, not the people!
Posts
