"Drugs are for mugs"

You're barely even responding to what I said. Your list of people with achievements, is not the golden standard for determining whether drugs are overall, bad for people, and thus whether or not drugs are for "mugs". Furthermore, as I've said, just because a few dozen people do drugs and came up with some good ****, it does not mean that millions of people have not ruined their lives due to drugs. It's such a ridiculous generalization to say people must be lacking knowledge just because they don't rely on your cherry-picked poster-boys for drug use for their opinion on whether it is a practice for "mugs" or not. Worse still, it's incredibly hypocritical to fight an outrageous generalization with one of your own.

Studies show otherwise http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/15/why-kids-with-high-iq-are-more-likely-to-take-drugs/

While non-specialists are even more easily swayed by incorrect or misinterpreted information and anecdotal evidence. And surely greed had a lot to do with the financial crisis? Its not like the bankers had an interest in the Greater Good, which obviously have to somehow be a prerequisite for being in the hypothetical Technocratic Council.

What is edgy about my avatar(s)?

The ****ing zookeeper could have just drugged me but no...

But you're ignoring the actual point. Saying "drugs are for mugs" asserts that anyone who takes drugs is a "mug". Even if there was only one person ever who took drugs and was very smart, then this statement would therefore be false. But the reality is that there have been many very smart and talented people who have taken drugs, and that even in the general population, many many drug users are smart people. Take a look at this study http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/15/why-kids-with-high-iq-are-more-likely-to-take-drugs/

Lets follow that example for a second. Say half the world took drugs, half didn't. If only one person's life were positively influenced by drug use, and 3.5 billion other's lives were ruined by it, you'd tell me that "drugs are not for mugs"? In exactly the same way, a very small few are immune to HIV, so would you go on and say "have unprotected sex with random partners, these few people prove its not true that it's a bad thing to do"? And you're completely side-skirting the fact that insomnia and depression also positively correlate with IQ. Saying "drugs are for mugs" is false because smart people take them, is like saying "rape is for mugs" because smart people rape, or any statement to that effect really. Because you have the correlation backwards.

Gosh, is this actually true?

Lets follow that example for a second. Say half the world took drugs, half didn't. If only one person's life were positively influenced by drug use, and 3.5 billion other's lives were ruined by it, you'd tell me that "drugs are not for mugs"? In exactly the same way, a very small few are immune to HIV, so would you go on and say "have unprotected sex with random partners, these few people prove its not true that it's a bad thing to do"? And you're completely side-skirting the fact that insomnia and depression also positively correlate with IQ. Saying "drugs are for mugs" is false because smart people take them, is like saying "rape is for mugs" because smart people rape, or any statement to that effect really. Because you have the correlation backwards.

It really depends on what drug we're talking about and how the person uses it. I love how people casually forget that alcohol is also a drug, probably because it's socially acceptable to drink it and it's legal. It's much easier for someone who smokes cannabis to lead a normal life when compared to a crystal meth user. The problem with drugs (and lots of other things) is that it's easy to get addicted and that's where it all goes downhill. The people you reference as drug users probably weren't addicts and just used drugs occasionally to get a kick out of it, or for whatever reason.

Some of them were drug addicts, and they suffered from it.

Anyone who says this phrase with any amount of seriousness is surely a philistine, an anti-intellectual, and someone severely lacking in knowledge. How can anyone claim this when Berlioz wrote at least a portion of his famous "Symphony Fantastique" whilst high on opium, Coleridge wrote the "Kubla Khan" after an opium influenced dream, Francis Crick used acid, Freud snorted large amounts of coke, Steve Jobs dropped acid, Robert Louis Stevenson wrote "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" on a six day coke binge, and there are countless other drug using geniuses like Baudelaire, Aldous Huxley, Philip K Dick, Hunter Thompson, William Burroughs, Ken Kesey, Jack Kerouac, David Bowie, Jimi Hendrix, Robert Plant, Charlie Parker, Martin Scorsese... the list is endless...

Anyone who says this phrase with any amount of seriousness is surely a philistine, an anti-intellectual, and someone severely lacking in knowledge. How can anyone claim this when Berlioz wrote at least a portion of his famous "Symphony Fantastique" whilst high on opium, Coleridge wrote the "Kubla Khan" after an opium influenced dream, Francis Crick used acid, Freud snorted large amounts of coke, Steve Jobs dropped acid, Robert Louis Stevenson wrote "Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" on a six day coke binge, and there are countless other drug using geniuses like Baudelaire, Aldous Huxley, Philip K Dick, Hunter Thompson, William Burroughs, Ken Kesey, Jack Kerouac, David Bowie, Jimi Hendrix, Robert Plant, Charlie Parker, Martin Scorsese... the list is endless...