Recreational drugs in the Trekverse

[JirinPanthosa]

Maybe all drugs are legal, but most humans are well educated enough not to use the ones that can harm them?

I don't understand so many people's need to interpret the Star Trek utopianism in a way that meets their cynical view of the present. Oh, it's really a smokescreen that shrouds the awfulness of human nature that is still present in the so called utopian future! Sure, that's a valid interpretation of reality, but it's the opposite of the point of the show.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Was she wrong in her explanation?

I imagine the explanation offered would be that Tasha's biased based on what she's seen and lived through. In a better organized, less anarchistic society, it might not be as uncontrolled and desperate.

 

[Vger23]

I think there should be an entire mini-series about this.




Because it's so interesting and I need to know about drugs in the FUUUUTUUUUUREEEEEEEEEEE.

 

[cosmic mouse]

Every time this topic comes up, I express the same idea, and nobody seems to notice. Nonetheless, here is my idea again.

I think that in a Trekkian future that is much more socially liberal and open about all sorts of things, there would be many recreational psychoactive substances (or perhaps electronic devices with similar effect) that have been developed and refined to a high degree for pleasurable experiences, but at the same time engineered specifically to have little to no negative physical or psychological side effects, and to not be addictive at all.

So some Starfleet officers will get back to their quarters at the end of their shift and choose to relax with a good book and a glass of wine. Others will kick back, close their eyes and listen to some classical music or jazz (since those are apparently the only genres that exist in the future). And still others will spend a couple of hours exploring a radically altered state of consciousness.

Kor

I agree... humans and other species in the Trek-verse clearly still had a use for "getting high". There are examples of it all over, esp. with regards to methods and modes that are new and/or unconventional and perhaps less deleterious (e.g. the holodecks, coffee, meditation, etc.). This is something that won't ever go away unless a species evolves in such a way as to lose neurological receptors for an array of things found in the natural environment.
Plus there are more conventional examples of it both in and out of Starfleet: trillium-D, alcohol, synthehol, felicium, rhuludian, etc. And the stuff that Kirk and Bones smoked on Rura Penthe.

 

[Deks]

Well, recreational drug use would have diminished to practically 0 from 2063 to 2100.
Why?
Because Humanity managed to eliminate poverty, diseases, war and prejudice/bigotry since First Contant with the Vulcans.
Reality became far more fascinating ... and with no one left behind to fend for themselves, people would have an opportunity to actively contribute to society in a way that matters... or to explore the galaxy.
Plus the level of education they'd all have would be pretty high... so people would know that using drugs could have negative effects on the body.

Recreational drugs are mainly used to escape the ridiculously heavy lives we lead in reality (or at least those who find use of alcohol and other drugs useful or needed for that) due to an outdated socio-economic system.

Trek Humans (and later on the Federation at large) wouldn't have these issues as reality would become far more interesting.

The holodeck might perhaps become a form of addiction as its a very useful tool in manifesting anything you desire, but only if you're stupid enough to perceive it as your own domain... and most holodecks seem to be shared by everyone.

Sure, you could run endless simulations, etc. but they do require energy to run, so resources need to be taken into account... and since they are mostly for public use, you'd still be limited in using them.

Though to be honest, I didn't see as Reginald Barclay (the single most prominent case of 'holo addiction' in Star Trek) as having an addiction to the holodeck.
His social skills were not giving him opportunities towards making friends or connecting with people in reality (and given his personality, from his point of view, he was surrounded by people who weren't exactly understanding of this - which is odd for 24th century humans in the first place), so, he created an environment which allowed him to behave in a more confident manner.
Troi merely helped him in functioning better outside the holodeck.

Not really sure where the 'holo addiction' came from to be honest.
By that analogy, Nog would have been a far more qualifying candidate for 'holo addiction', and oddly enough, no one seems to claim he recovered from 'holo-addiction'.

So, Barclay ends up spending limited amount of time in the holodeck as a way to help him cope with peers who aren't really understanding of his personality... and he ditches the holodeck after talking with Troi fairly quickly.
Nog spends practically an 'eternity' in the holodeck by comparison, and doesn't get called an 'addict' because 'yanking him out could be traumatizing' (though Troi did make a similar argument - though Riker did want to simply shut down the program, but Barclay was more willing to get out if he was approached directly within the simulation itself) due to him losing a leg.

Both characters end up having issues in connecting with people in reality and resorting to the holodeck as a way of dealing with their problems... and yet, one is called an 'addict' while the other is not?

 

[Qonundrum]

We know alcohol is still a thing. People still get drunk in the 23rd and 24th centuries and it's seen as no big deal. But what about recreational drugs? Did Kirk and Bones get stoned at Starfleet Academy? Did early-twenties Beverly and Troi go on nights out with friends and get completely fucked up on strange alien pills someone brought? Has Jean-Luc Picard ever been high?

Certainly Tasha's infamous speech in TNG: "Symbiosis" suggests recreational drugs no longer exist, but Paul Stamets was high as a kite on sporestuff in Discovery and nobody was really bothered. DSC: "Will You Take My Hand" had Tilly get high with an Orion on Kronos and it was played for laughs.

These very different takes may reflect changing attitudes in TV over the decades, but what does it say about the characters in the Star Trek universe?

(EDIT: I asked a similar question two years ago, but thought DSC's contribution to Trek makes it worth revisiting)

Would anybody really want to know, much less care, if Cadet Kirk got stoned, either with (il)legal substances or what's strewn around a quarry. Or any of the TOS or TNG crew, but two or three reboots later it'd be safe to say nobody would be in shock if they went there.

It's possible that the Federation no longer has the actual substances, the replicator doing to ordered drugs what it does with "Synthahol" (same great taste, no brainfartery or hangover withdrawl aftermath). That explains Yar's comment, as well as Scotty's - and Guinan being the type to break the rules in such an inconsequential way as she doesn't share them with just anybody and I doubt many know she keeps anything on board...

Picard probably was on something, not merely reckless, given how he was mouthing at the Naussicans so boisterously. But if "Tapestry" was going to insult anyone in a profession that isn't a captaincy, it's certainly not going do a "Winners don't use drugs" message that was popular at the time with "The War on Drugs" and all. I'm amazed at how compelling that story was despite the nitpicks, which were certainly unintentional but some viewers at the time did go to Usenet to promptly bring up the oversight.

People still watch DSC? Must be more addictive than a drug and sure as heck costs a lot given that the basic subscription still bestows a ton of commercials.

Glorifying drug use (or, at least as played for as laughs per the one episode you'd mentioned ) sounds almost like the sheer antithesis of anti-drug messages told in TNG's "Symbiosis" and TOS's "Mudd's Women". Or that episode is a mirror universe episode or something. If the sensibilities of the writers went from discouraging to drug use to making jokes about it, maybe the writers should camp out at a few rehab clinics and jails and talk with people who'd been abused or worse by addicts.

 

[Jayson1]

Well we tried to get this done on "Discovery" I recall the thread were I think it was also connected to the spore stuff we didn't know much about. I also recall trying to get this idea across way back before "Enterprise." had started where this question was also connected to a thread where I think I asked if the crew should be eating monkeys. The idea being that social norms change and how humans seem to eat a diverse amount of meat so their in theory shouldn't be any "bad" meat or "good" meat. The other idea is people doing drugs on the holodeck and the effects go away, once you leave it since they instantly go out of your system since it's holodrugs.

Jason

 

[Makarov]

Though to be honest, I didn't see as Reginald Barclay (the single most prominent case of 'holo addiction' in Star Trek) as having an addiction to the holodeck.
His social skills were not giving him opportunities towards making friends or connecting with people in reality (and given his personality, from his point of view, he was surrounded by people who weren't exactly understanding of this - which is odd for 24th century humans in the first place), so, he created an environment which allowed him to behave in a more confident manner.
Troi merely helped him in functioning better outside the holodeck.

Not really sure where the 'holo addiction' came from to be honest.

He kept choosing to return to the holodeck instead of facing his problems though, he skipped sessions with the real Troi to go and see the fake Troi.

 

[Deks]

He kept choosing to return to the holodeck instead of facing his problems though, he skipped sessions with the real Troi to go and see the fake Troi.

Nog did the same thing... only to a greater extent (because he actually stayed in the holodeck for weeks).

 

[TribbleFeeder]

If humans could rid themselves of the need to have possessions I don’t know why they wouldn’t be able to end drug use. It’s essentially the same thing, the need to replace emptiness in your life with something else, be it heroin or handbags.

The future sounds so much more peaceful. I don’t know if people would really even have access to drugs. At least not the kind we see today. It requires mass amounts of people to manufacture and distribute enough drugs so that they’re readily available. It doesn’t seem like there is that much evil in the 23rd/24th century that could produce that many people in the drug trade. It seems like earth becomes a better place, people aren’t impoverished, they don’t need to sell drugs to survive.

All the addiction based episodes (The Game particularly) were more so based on mind control than actual addiction IMO.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

The future sounds so much more peaceful. I don’t know if people would really even have access to drugs. At least not the kind we see today. It requires mass amounts of people to manufacture and distribute enough drugs so that they’re readily available. It doesn’t seem like there is that much evil in the 23rd/24th century that could produce that many people in the drug trade. It seems like earth becomes a better place, people aren’t impoverished, they don’t need to sell drugs to survive.

You do realise that a lot of addiction is to legal and/or medically useful drugs right? Not just the purely "recreational" types. According to drugabuse.com (https://drugabuse.com/12-addictive-drugs/), two of the most addictive drugs (nicotine and alcohol, natch) are legal and four or five are prescribable (amphetamines, benzodiazepines, methadone, GHB (limited) and oxycodone), only five are fully illegal (cocaine, crack cocaine, crystal meth, heroin & MDMA), and technically the first two could be regarded as the same thing.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

You do realise that a lot of addiction is to legal and/or medically useful drugs right? Not just the purely "recreational" types.

No, you’re absolutely right. But still, even if they have access to prescription drugs or legal addictive substances, I don’t think they would abuse them. I honestly think if humans could give up the need for “want” (Picard says that in “The Neutral Zone” I think) and live in a more stable world we could probably give up addiction as well. After all, isn’t “want” the basis of all addiction?

 

[1001001]

For some, perhaps.

There's the chemical/genetic aspects, the mental health aspects, and the environmental aspects. A lot of substance abuse comes from trauma.

So I think (particularly TNG) would say in an idealized future where there's no poverty, hunger, disease, etc., people would be less likely to "need" recreational drugs. No reason to escape (and easier better ways to do so if you do). There's a bit of "we've evolved beyond that" to TNG, and this issue is no different.

I don't necessarily agree with that, but that would be my interpretation.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

For some, perhaps.

There's the chemical/genetic aspects, the mental health aspects, and the environmental aspects. A lot of substance abuse comes from trauma.

So I think (particularly TNG) would say in an idealized future where there's no poverty, hunger, disease, etc., people would be less likely to "need" recreational drugs. No reason to escape (and easier better ways to do so if you do). There's a bit of "we've evolved beyond that" to TNG, and this issue is no different.

I don't necessarily agree with that, but that would be my interpretation.

Definitely. I too get the “utopian earth” vibe from TNG. I was also thinking maybe with what appears to be a fairly rigorous process to get into SFA, is it possible they would avoid accepting anyone they might feel has abusive behaviors or tendencies? (I don’t know if/how you would evaluate that). Because if they did, it might explain why we don’t see it on the show.

 

[cosmic mouse]

Definitely. I too get the “utopian earth” vibe from TNG. I was also thinking maybe with what appears to be a fairly rigorous process to get into SFA, is it possible they would avoid accepting anyone they might feel has abusive behaviors or tendencies? (I don’t know if/how you would evaluate that). Because if they did, it might explain why we don’t see it on the show.

...and then there's caffeine.

If only Starfleet could have foreseen: Coffee. Black.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Riker'sMailbox]

I think a distinction needs to be made with addiction and recreational drug use. There seems to be a lot of pontificating about people moving past addiction and that the sole reason people use drugs is to fill some emptiness or because they are wrecked from some trauma.

Some people like to smoke pot because it is fun.

Humans have used drugs and alcohol since their discovery thousands of years ago. Some people use it for religious purposes, some to forget, some because it is fun.

 

[jaime]

After a Third World War where the military combatants were all high as kites (see farpoint) it’s entirely likely humanity ditched recreational drug use pretty quickly. Alcohol seems to have hung about as its associated with cultural traditions, and Chakotays tribe had tech for their cultural traditions.

Should Trek change to a pro recreational chemical stance?
Nope. Because somewhere along the line in the really real world, people are properly damaged directly or indirectly by it. Rodenberry was even against smoking, despite his own habits...or more likely because of his own habits.

One you can go out into space and get stuck in a rift or an amoeba, once the rec deck or holodeck can literally build you a world to play in, and given how much damage was done to your species by such things...why would anyone even bother? Some artists claim it boosts their creativity...but in the future maybe they just hang out with Deltans or Betazoids if they need some kind of boost.

Fundamentally, Treks message of hope includes the hope that we just don’t need that kind of stuff anymore.

 

[TribbleFeeder]

Fundamentally, Treks message of hope includes the hope that we just don’t need that kind of stuff anymore.

I think this really sums it up quite well. Roddenberry was obviously trying to write us a future where drugs weren’t a problem or needed even just for kicks. Is that realistic? Probably not, but still nice to think about...

 

[Spot261]

I think this really sums it up quite well. Roddenberry was obviously trying to write us a future where drugs weren’t a problem or needed even just for kicks. Is that realistic? Probably not, but still nice to think about...

Drugs are bad, cordrazine especially so.

 

[1001001]

I want to score me some of that sweet Inaprovaline.

The EMH was pushing that stuff all the time.