Some thought provoking paragraphs from the epilogue of Philip K. Dick's novel A Scanner Darkly. "This has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did. They wanted to have a good time, but they were like children playing in the street; they could see one after another of them being killed--run over, maimed, destroyed--but they continued to play anyhow. We really all were very happy for a while, sitting around not toiling but just bullshitting and playing, but it was for such a terrible brief time, and then the punishment was beyond belief: even when we could see it, we could not believe it." And "In Greek drama they were beginning, as a society, to discover science, which means causal law. Here in this novel there is Nemesis: not fate, because any one of us could have chosen to stop playing in the street, but, as I narrate from the deepest part of my life and heart, a dreadful Nemesis for those who kept on playing." I found these paragraphs in particular very intriguing. As he painfully reminisces on both the fate of his friends and the nostalgic times they shared together he brings up the law of causality. When discussing addiction he says "Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car. You would call that not a disease but an error in judgment." While I don't wholeheartedly agree with this statement, for I do believe addiction is a disease, there is a certain amount of ownership one must take over their actions. And being aware of the law of causality we know that our actions have an inevitable reaction. What I find fascinating is his use of the word "punishment" instead of consequences. He goes through great lengths to explain that these actions are not a moral wrong or failing but his use of the word punishment implies some kind of heavy moral judgement on the soul. So the question I ask is why must we be punished? Is wanting some peace of mind really punishable?