Comment on Cheating by SilverInkblot
Art is in the eye of the beholder. 
A question, though: If you found a painting to be beautiful and loved it, but later found out that the artist was high when he painted it, would you not find it beautiful anymore or not love it?
(Also because I think the distinction matters. Sports involves competition. Not all art does. If a person enters an art contest and is using drugs to make their artwork better, I would consider that cheating. If they're just doing something for fun? It's other things, but not cheating.)
A painting's aesthetic quality has nothing to do with the subject at hand IMO. My question then would be whether the artist could still have created something that beautiful without the drug; it wouldn't effect how beautiful the painting was, but it would effect my opinion of the artist. I have more respect for the artist than can create of their own volition, through work and practice and training, than someone who relies on chemicals to achieve what they want. It may enhance something in the person that is already present, but isn't that exactly what a steroid does?
I can see what you mean about the competition angle though.
I can see what you mean about the competition angle though.
I completely agree with you. I have much more respect for artists who can create without chemical help, but I don't consider it "not art." I just consider it less meaningful.
Fair enough 