Endogenous cannabinoid system was discovered in the early 1990s. The endocannabinoid system includes cannabinoid receptors, ligands, and metabolic enzymes found within the central nervous system (CNS). Inhibition or slowing of the degradation of endocannabinoids in select tissues may confer analgesic or anxiolytic effects. Cannabinoids are becoming increasingly prescribed and studied as potential analgesic agents. Cannabinoid therapy may offer a viable alternative to opioids for management of chronic pain. Studies have demonstrated the presence of endocannabinoids and cannabinoid receptors throughout the nervous system. Cannabinoids have been shown to induce analgesic effects through mechanisms different from traditional antinociceptive pathways. Investigations of the clinical applications of cannabinoids have been limited. Clinical trials suggest that extracts containing THC or its derivatives may be efficacious in the treatment of inflammatory, neuropathic, and oncologic pain. Pharmacologic agents aimed at increasing levels of endogenous endocannabinoids may represent an alternative way of producing analgesia. There is a need for further double-blinded placebo-controlled clinicals to support the use of cannabinoids for pain control.

In this chapter, I maintain that the system of controls on government chosen during the origins of modern constitutionalism reflected the fear of and resistance against citizen activism. For this reason, of the different control models that were considered, “internal” or “endogenous” controls were chosen over others that emphasized “popular,” “external,” and “exogenous” controls. This choice, I demonstrate, explains the gradual elimination of “external” tools for establishing “popular” control over representations, which were commonly employed or valued at the time. These tools included the right to recall, mandatory instructions, annual elections, mandatory rotation, etc.

Popper and the logical empiricists focused on the logical status of the products of research and made scientific discovery and invention, the processes of achieving creative breakthroughs, exogenous to the logic of science. Creative insights were the result of happy but accidental psychological experiences, of minimal cognitive interest. Kuhn, in Structure, attempted to endogenize discovery, to provide an account of the practice of scientific problem-solving but without employing traditional logic of discovery or justification. Key to his account of normal science was the role of exemplars (standardized problem solutions) and acquired resemblance relations (analogies, metaphors, similes). Kuhn’s account was insightful in suggesting that puzzle solving amounts to rhetoric-based problem reduction to existing exemplars, largely independent of theory reduction. While Kuhn helped to resurrect philosophical interest in the process of research, he was only partially successful. By taming discovery in normal science, he exacerbated his problem of understanding how revolutionary breaks are conceived. And he left us with several questions about exemplars. What, exactly, are exemplars and where do they come from? Can exemplars carry across revolutionary breaks? I employ examples from early quantum theory.