Caelestis

I agree with Rand on some points, and I disagree on others. Agreeing with someone and referring to someone for their knowledge does not keep one from thinking for themselves. Much like writing a paper you may consult many sources in order to come to make your thesis and come to a well thought out conclusion, but it takes a great deal of thought to bring a well thought out argument together. About the drugs: If in 'drugs' you include everything from nicotine and caffeine to heroin and shrooms, then no not all of them imply the desire to escape reality. My main disagreement was with the idea that shrooms, which Liriodendron Tulipifera earlier only described as being used to hallucinate (mildly to greatly depending on dosage), are somehow not an escape from reality. While I have never done them nor plan to, those who I know that have all knew and openly admitted that the purpose was to hallucinate. If that is the purpose, I would definitely say they have a desire to escape reality.

I agree with Exabyte entirely. Here you say that not all drugs are mindless - but in earlier posts you happily explain how you think shrooms are ok because they're not addictive yet go on to explain how they cause mild to serious hallucination. How is going into a state where your mind cannot tell reality from hallucination not mindless? Don't get me wrong, I quite honestly don't care if you do shrooms, LSD, smoke, drink till you passout drunk as long as you don't infringe upon someone else's rights - but the question at hand is whether it goes against Objectivist philosophy which I think it most certainly does.