In this chapter, Hari briefly examines the philosophical questions of why people use drugs and whether controlled drug usage is harmful. He begins by explaining that the war on drugs is technically not about ending addiction but rather ending worldwide drug use everywhere. Hari shares an anecdote about how research has scientifically proven that various animals purposely intoxicate themselves in the natural world. His purpose here is to show that two separate arguments support pushing for drug law reforms. The first argument is simply that drugs are bad, but prohibition is worse because it adds many other problems as well. According to Hari, “in this argument, we are all antidrug” (148). The second argument, however—which is much more difficult to make but perhaps more honest—is simply that most drug users do not become addicts and are not harming themselves by using their drug, so prohibition is unnecessary. He argues that “there is such a thing as responsible drug use, and it is the norm, not the exception” (148).

Next, Hari looks at the historical roots of intoxication and finds that “there has never been a society in which humans didn’t serially seek out these sensations” (149).