by society because use of illegal drugs is seen as dangerous not only to personal health but also to the social structure as well; and the abuse of prescription drugs, which carries much less of a stigma and which often involve people who, like Huxley, are willing to sacrifice some of their freedom of control to a doctor who will make their behavior conform to social norms as they themselves may be unable to do. Both types of abusers may be taking drugs in order at least to believe that they are better, wiser, and more capable than they really are. They are also seeking the state that Huxley holds out as an ideal--no responsibility, but also no harm. Peter D. Kramer shows how close the two types of drug may be when he refers to the patient named Tess:
A cynic may wonder whether in Tess's case drug abuse has sneaked in through the back door, whether entering the middle class carries the privilege of access to socially sanctioned drugs that are safer an more specific in their effects than street drugs but are morally indistinguishable in terms of the reasons they are taken and the results they produce (Kramer 16).
Kramer talks about the drug Prozac in particular, though what he says can apply to a wide range of drugs that offer control, improvement, and all supposedly without pain or individual effort. Kramer refers to the use of Prozac as offering a relief from social vulnerability for someone like Tess, for instance. Tess turned to drugs after a long period of attempting self-understanding through therapy, but that method was not quick enough for her. Drugs are much quicker, though the benefits they provide may be only illusions, transitory at best.
Yet here as well we are surrendering a large degree of personal control and ceding our decision-making to a doctor. To a degree, we have to do so--medical knowledge is knowledge poss
...