I am human and I need to be loved…
I am human and I need to be loved…
love is fake get drugs they are real
I used to smoke a lot of weed… it sort of made me feel better, until I realized I was turning 30 and had spent a decade and a half doing nothing but getting high and playing games. Now I don't smoke weed… and nothing else has changed.
you're a human
you need air, food, and a place to live
everything else is a want
social beings dont thrive just on that
but drugs help to alleviate even necessities like food
you can live on drug alone for a while
you only need to eat every 3-5 days
Actually according to Maxwell's hierarchy of needs, emotional gratification and physical contact are tremendously important to human health and happiness. They did a test in USSR where infants were fed and changed but not given affection. I can't remember all the details, but they literally all died.
weed aint drugs …
weed is like smoking nicotine
do pure shit like heroine
man drugs cover all last 4 floors
Weed is a drug in the sense that it is a substance which, when consumed, triggers the dopamenergic system and causes a sense of euphoria. It also creates a positive feedback loop in which more of the drug is needed to get that same good feeling. I got to a point with weed where I need to smoke copious amounts just to derive minimal satisfaction from playing games, eating or listening to music.
I understand when you're coming from, though. When I was younger I was big into drug culture. I did anything I could get my hands on. Shrooms, pills, speed, you name it. Some friends and I actually smoked these topical morphine patches somebody found in their gramma's medicine cabinet. I would even crush up different psych meds and snort them to try and catch a buzz… The older I've gotten though, the less it appeals to me… It seems a lot less real than I did when I was a teenager, or even in my twenties.
Who needs it?
I'd rather be happy than loved any day.
I can't remember all the details, but they literally all died.
That's fucking bullshit
so you are saying i will die from not having a gf?
It's a true story but I did get some of the details wrong. It was Murica.
http: //stpauls.vxcommunity. com/Issue /Us-Experiment-On-Infants-Withholding-Affection/13213
You're not an infant, but you might have a higher propensity for suicide resulting from that situation.
a load of bullshit. Bullshit site with no sources and all google results give more bullshit sites or forums where people are saying that it's bullshit.
One doesn't even have to follow that link or look for any info unless they're fucking retarded, because this sounds like some kind of facebook post that ends in "1 like 1 prayer"
Uh huh. You're obviously biased, and that's fine. It's most likely a conspiracy of multiple people on innumerable websites crafting a false myth about an eighty year old science experiment to prove a point no one cares about. They're probably all part of that wicked Christian cabal, really. You a Rick and Morty fan, champ?
Biased in what way?
Retards parroting a fake story, that's unimaginable, right?
All I have to do is say that it's bullshit. That's literally it. It's your job to prove me wrong, because you started talking about this experiment claiming it's real. All you did is link to a no-name site that has 0 sources cited and I didn't find a source on the first page of google results
Actually according to Maxwell's hierarchy of needs
It's (((Abraham Maslow)))'s hierarchy of needs.
I just don't understand why you're so angry about it. Not surprising though, you fedora-fags are always angry about something or other. I could link a hundred articles talking about it and it wouldn't satisfy you, unless it had the Richard Dawkins seal of approval. I heard about it from a Jordan Peterson !!!!Filthy Theist!!! lecture, so I gave it the benefit of the doubt. Regardless, the fact that humans, especially infants, require some degree of affection is settled science famalamadingdong.
Thanks, I kinda knew in the back of my head I had the name wrong.
Yeah, affection is important. Doesn't change the fact that they don't die without it. I bet you started clinging to Richard Dawkins and Rick and Morty replies because you failed to find a reliable source and got all upset about losing an argument
Infants actually will, as the study indicates; but since you are unwilling to believe any evidence presented that brings us to an impasse. I couldn't help mocking your obvious 'enlightened' 'intellect' since you made it so painfully obvious from the first butt-rattled post. As stated, I only heard about it second hand from someone credible, so I gave it the benefit of the doubt.
since you are unwilling to believe any evidence presented that brings us to an impasse
you still didn't present any evidence, you fucking nigger faggot
And I'm not going to bother doing further digging, since you're obviously just an angry child. It really makes me wonder why you're so mad; did your mother not hug you enough? Sad tbh.
not going to bother doing further digging
You didn't do any in the first place. You replied to me 5 times and didn't give any other proof other than that no-name site with barely any story and no sources. Rick and Morty, Richard Dawkins, "enlightened intellect", angry child, what are you going to pull out of your ass next? Either provide proof or shut the fuck up and accept you're a dumb faggot
1 like 1 prayer
Yes, all your arguments were really tough. You sure whipped me something good.