DRUG LAWS, ETHICS, AND HISTORY

• Authors: Greif Adam
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

In this paper, I present and criticize several historical arguments in favour of prohibition and criminalization of illicit psychoactive substances. I consider several versions of Charles Brent’s argument from drug harms and an argument from addiction based on Kantian view on autonomy. My criticism will mainly rely on empirical evidence on drugs, drug use, and addiction. I think that in light of this evidence, all of the arguments lose their cogency or can be refuted altogether. Moreover, the evidence reveals an inconsistency in the international drug law framework. Therefore, I provide in conclusion a general argument challenging the legitimacy of the existing distinction between licit and illicit drugs based on the inconsistency.

Keywords

EN

PROHIBITION; CRIMINALIZATION; DRUG; ALCOHOL

• Publisher: Institute of Philosophy, Slovak Academy of Sciences
• Journal: Filozofia (Philosophy)
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 74
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 95 – 110

Contributors

author

Greif Adam

• Filozofická fakulta Univerzity Komenského v Bratislave, Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Identifiers

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2019.74.2.2