edit: to respond to greyface- below since I am not longer allowed to reply. what you seem to be hinting at amounts to reasoning by extremes, a trite fallacy.
edit: to respond to greyface- below since I am not longer allowed to reply. what you seem to be hinting at amounts to reasoning by extremes, a trite fallacy.
Please define "degenerate". Would you consider individuals who hold successful, stable careers (they may even hold down a high-level role), have a family, no criminal records, for all intents and purposes are 'normal' people, but maybe once every few years they go camping with friends and consume psychedelics, to be a "degenerate"?
Because to me it sounds like you're making a gigantic blanket generalization.
The word "degenerate" is reasoning by extremes. It signals puritanical zealotry from a palingenetic perspective.
Whatever glorious past you think society is de-generating from is a myth composed by people with rosy-eyed memories and an agenda that, were it not for the justifying myth, would be obviously absurd.
Referring back up to the earlier comments, what I read here strikes me as similar to the opinions the earlier commenter was describing, the idea that the success of society relies on some inherent concepts of self-control and personal sovereignty that are somehow threatened by use of psychedelic drugs. You are completely entitled to your own opinion, but throwing the d-word around isn't doing anything to clarify why you hold that opinion for me. It reads like an argument based on emotion.