Philosophy has its own language with precise meanings for words that we commonly use. I won't pretend to understand the meaning of the word "know" in a philosophical context, so I'll just argue from my own point of view. What I've learned is that there are many different levels of reality depending upon one's frame of reference. I would imagine that the world would appear very different if we were conscious at the level of the electron, the atom or the cell. Not to mention that as biological organisms we are limited only to the capabilities of the sensory organs that we are endowed with. It's kind of like light. Our eyes only have the capacity to distinguish a small part of the spectrum called visible light. There must be gaps that our senses aren't capable of perceiving. Our reality is 3 dimensional. We can scarcely conceive of 4 dimensions let alone 10. How can we "know" there aren't other things out there that our senses, our brain, can't register. Can we form a predictable enough picture of our reality so that we can achieve great things with our efforts, our imagination, our consciousness? Maybe, but can our limited biology "know" about the true nature of reality? Probably about as much as we can understand infinity.

I think the biggest reason that marijuana is illegal is a cultural one. If you've never smoked it, it's hard to describe how it makes you feel. The best way I can put it is that it relaxes you enough for you to notice the world around you. It slows the momentum of life so that you are more aware of your environment. This leads me to my next part. It's going to require a leap, so follow me. The only function of our government is to maintain a robust economy. Most everything can be understood under this one assumption. The main goal of our government is to keep us preoccupied, to keep us serving the economy by producing and consuming. Our government is a client of corporations. It's another tool that large businesses use to reach their goals. They invest in government like they invest in a business venture, with the expectation that it will make them more money.

A requirement of this ever churning, ever expanding economy is the passivity of its participants' inquiries and the maintenance of their blind actions. This brings me to my conclusion. When you smoke marijuana, you start to think more about the requirements of your brain and your mind (What do I truly NEED?) You start to ask questions like, "Do I really need that many THINGS?", "Is it natural to be obligated to a flourescently lit office building for 40 hrs every week of your life to basically move paper from one place to another, to be treated like a child whose time is monitored, and reprimanded by a "boss"?" "Do I get meaning from my life or am I just a cog in the wheel of this economy, eg. is it essential for the universe to contain operating services clerical specialists?" "Why can't I grow a plant in my backyard, but I can be on numerous synthetic prescription medications?"

There are other reasons that marijuana should be legal or at least decriminalized, but I believe this is the biggest obstacle: We might actually wake up and analyze what our lives are, what consequences our behaviors have on ourselves, our neighbors, and the rest of the world. We might stop consuming.

This falls into the category of "how many suspicious things must be revealed before the mounting questions tip the balance away from the official story?" By the official story I mean the explanation profferred by a government or other overarching body, and it always holds much more sway with the general public. But when presented with an "official story" about anything, I would encourage everyone to investigate the possible motives that the establishment would have for pushing this particular version of events.

In the case of 9-11, the official story serves so many purposes for the establishment that it starts to look very much like the event was a benefit to them and their associates. Just look at the Reichstag fire in 1933. It was blamed on communists and helped Nazi Germany consolidate power under Hitler. Once you start to accumulate enough advantages from a so called negative event, is it that much of a leap to actually think that the ones standing to gain were involved? Isn't it strange that the interests of radical Islam parallel the interests of the Bush administration so closely? Global unrest has allowed the Bush administration to impose so many of their policies, is it so hard to imagine him and his business partners pumping their fists in the corridor of the White House?