What would be different if there were no mind-altering substances?

People would have to find other ways to relax and feel uninhibited. I know non-alcoholics who are able to have one or two drinks and feel relaxed and cheerful and able to lose their veneer of always being self guarded.

Those of us in recovery from substance abuse issues are already there. We relax through laughter or exercise or being with people. But any of us do not really relax and ease up until it has been a long time since we have had anything in our system.

I don’t think it’s quite possible. Many of the mind altering substances around are just refined versions of poisons that are around naturally. If you took away all of the manufactured drugs and alcohol, people would find a way to get high off other things. Like, take away LSD, people can still hallucinate off “rust”—a mold that grows on wheat.

I’ve even heard stories about people who deliberately go without eating or drinking for a few days and then smoke a single cigarette. They get high. And little kids will spin around in circles until they get dizzy and fall down.

Being “high” seems to be something our species seeks out and finds ways to get there. Take away everything, we’ll find something else.

We’d have to alter our minds ourselves.

This is a huge counter-factual question! I think that the development of all religions worldwide would have been significantly different without the entheogens that feature in many mystical traditions. Also, military and political history would be drastically different without the existence of powerful drugs like cocaine, heroin, opium, etc., that enable armed groups to gain control over trade routes or even entire countries. (The French had a tax on opium in Indochina, the British grew it in India to sell to China, the Taliban are still funded today by opium and heroin production…). A great deal of literary and other cultural products would not exist.

Many substances are mind-altering if used in the right circumstances or correct dosage. Table sugar was considered a drug/medicine in the Middle Ages.

We would have bazillions of generations of teenagers spinning around after school and on the weekends and zero DUI’s. There would be no drug paraphernalia found in cars and no one would be looking. There would be no announcements to friends, “my parents were alcoholics, therefore I can’t help but…..” There would be no bars where people would get drunk and kill pedestrians or other drivers. Instead, they’d be spinning down the streets. I mean, you cannot spin behind the wheel, right? There would be no drug dealers on corners and no arrests for the same. The prisons would not be overcrowded unless spinning in circles became illegal and dangerous. There would be fewer cases of liver disease. The organization MADD wouldn’t exist . It’s endless, really. I think I could live happily in such a society.

After everyone made their homemade wine and did some peyote buttons or rust (thanks @keokooks for the new term!), they may crack open a book or spend more time fishing?! Either way, I agree that sobriety is unnatural to our species as a whole.

And yes, I huffed gas around age 9 way out in the country in the Bible Belt with all my friends, seeing who could run the farthest when ‘high’...ha!

It would be like everyone had a huge stick up their ass. Almost everyone would go to church.

-90% of rock ‘n roll history and greatness would be obliterated
-The Psychedelic 60s and 90s never would have occurred, and we’d be a far more authoritarian and superstitious culture
-Natural foods would never have gone mainstream
-The DNA protease chain reaction never would have been discovered
-Doc Ellis never would have thrown a no-hitter on June 12, 1970
-The Grateful Dead would never have evolved into shamanic miracle working
-Millions of other horrible things and a couple good things.

@Kraigmo But we may still have Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis and Jim Morrison. :)

We’d be missing certain works of art, literature, and music.

Jim Morrison had stage fright, it’s doubtful we would have even had him at all.

A world without “Ren and Stimpy”. There would be so many uninteresting people,and more ugly women.

“Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.”

@Jeruba I question the truth of that widely accepted assumption. Since when did substance abuse become accepted for the sake of great art?

It does alter perception but many day to day things alter perception at least temporarily.

Then there is Meditation. A great non drug related consciousness expander.

I would say it is plausible that many artists were artists first and their substance problems was just an unrelated fact of them.

Artists do pull from themselves so some content is thematically drug related and I do like some of it. But wouldn’t anything taken away from the world also take with it not just itself but many related things?

But still it is a good point.

@rosehips Mind altering substances can simply be used, and not necessarily abused.

@rosehips: ???

In my post, do you see any reference whatsoever to an assumption about anything, or to substance abuse, or to acceptance of it, or to great art? Do you see any position taken on the use of mind-altering drugs?

The question was: What would be different if there were no mind-altering substances?

It is a fact that some works of art, literature, and music have been created under the influence of or in the aftermath of using mind-altering substances. It seems no great logical leap to say that in the absence of that influence, those works would not have been created as they were.

This is to say nothing about the quality or reputation of that work.

Other opinions that you have ascribed to me are not in evidence in my post.

Our brains rely on the use of “mind-altering substances” produced by the body in order to work. Neurotransmitters, endorphins, and other brain chemicals all are mind-altering substances. If these didn’t exist, there would be no minds to alter.

@Kraigmo : PCR, good one, I remember hearing that that guy was way into acid.

My memory might be better than it is…

@Jeruba and RERRL I concede.

Wow. I learned a lot just now. Thank you, everyone!
@zenvelo I agree. And apart from the physical effects alcohol has on us, you’d also have to consider people expect to “loosen up” after having a drink – I can’t find it right now, but I read a study about the placebo effect of non-alcoholic drinks very recently.
@keobooks Interesting, and good point about kids spinning in circles. It does seem to be something we crave very early.
@janbb I guess. That sounds like a lot of work. ;)
@bookish1 True. I was only thinking about our world today – but of course, you could just as easily point out that a lack of mind-altering substances would prevent future works of art, discoveries, etc.
@Aster I like the image of all those spinning teenagers. You’re right, though. There would be some positive aspects.
@KNOWITALL That made me smile.
@cheebdragon Church – that would never have occurred to me. Could be, though!
@Jeruba – definitely. Though we’d probably have others instead. But those would probably be very different…
@Kraigmo Interesting aspect, the more authoritarian culture. And I like your conclusion!
@woodcutter So true.
@rosehips “But wouldn’t anything taken away from the world also take with it not just itself but many related things?” < I liked that!
@rexacoracofalipitorius I was thinking of “external” influence – but you’re right, of course.
and @CWOTUS Well, damage done…cheers to that!