By Rob Lovering
Why does American legislations permit the leisure use of a few medicinal drugs, corresponding to alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine, yet now not others, akin to marijuana, cocaine, and heroin? the reply lies no longer easily within the damage using those medications could reason, yet within the perceived morality--or lack thereof--of their leisure use. regardless of robust rhetoric from ethical critics of leisure drug use, although, it truly is strangely tough to figure the explanations they've got for deeming the leisure use of (some) medications morally flawed. during this booklet, Rob Lovering lays out and dissects numerous arguments for the immorality of utilizing marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and different medicinal drugs recreationally. He contends that, normally, those arguments don't prevail. Lovering's booklet represents one of many first works to systematically current, learn, and critique arguments for the ethical wrongness of leisure drug use. Given this, in addition to the recognition of the morality-based protection of the U.S.' drug legislation, this publication is a vital and well timed contribution to the controversy at the leisure use of drugs.
Read or Download A Moral Defense of Recreational Drug Use PDF
Similar social philosophy books
The Nicomachean Ethics is one in every of Aristotle’s most generally learn and influential works. rules significant to ethics—that happiness is the top of human activity, that ethical advantage is shaped via motion and habituation, and that sturdy motion calls for prudence—found their strongest proponent within the individual medieval students easily known as “the thinker.
During this shut exam of the social and political considered Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B. C. ), Neal wooden specializes in Cicero's conceptions of nation and govt, exhibiting that he's the daddy of constitutionalism, the archetype of the politically conservative brain, and the 1st to mirror commonly on politics as an job.
This hugely unique e-book takes as its place to begin a imperative query for 19th- and twentieth-century literature and philosophy: the way to symbolize the negative? overlaying the interval from the booklet of Les Fleurs du Mal in 1857 to the composition of Benjamin's ultimate texts within the Thirties, premature Beggar investigates the accident of 2 glossy literary and philosophical pursuits: representing the terrible and representing power.
Why does American legislations enable the leisure use of a few medicines, similar to alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine, yet now not others, reminiscent of marijuana, cocaine, and heroin? the reply lies no longer easily within the damage using those medications could reason, yet within the perceived morality--or lack thereof--of their leisure use.
- Narrative, Nature, and the Natural Law: From Aquinas to International Human Rights
- Phenomenology for the Twenty-First Century
- New Waves in Philosophy of Technology
- Political Thought and China's Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China
- Lenin (La coherencia de su pensamiento)
- Classical and Modern Thought on International Relations
Additional resources for A Moral Defense of Recreational Drug Use
What differentiates one nonreligious argument from another, then, is the activity as well as the nonreligious claim(s) on which it depends. With this in mind, consider an argument addressed in Chapter 4: (1) By using drugs recreationally, the user degrades himself or herself. (2) If, by using drugs recreationally, the user degrades himself or herself, then recreational drug use is wrong. (3) Therefore, recreational drug use is wrong. ”63 Harm-based arguments for the wrongness of an activity move from a claim about a harm the activity involves to a claim about the wrongness of the activity.
All this to say, even if eating highly unhealthy food is generally unhealthy for the agent, this does not seem to render it wrong or even likely to be.
For present purposes, what makes a nonreligious claim a nonreligious claim is simply the fact that it does not make any religious claims. Nonreligious arguments may be stated formally as follows, with X standing for an activity and N standing for a nonreligious claim: 20 A MORAL DEFENSE OF RECREATIONAL DRUG USE (1) N. (2) If N, then X is wrong. (3) Therefore, X is wrong. What differentiates one nonreligious argument from another, then, is the activity as well as the nonreligious claim(s) on which it depends.