7 ms·

If that were the case, then those insights would be remain insightful when taught to someone who isn't on the drug. And if it isn't teachable, it's neither demo

• state_less 8y ago
  It can be very difficult to teach someone something they are actively repressing. There might be lines of thought that are repressed normally that when on a psychedelic are allowed to enter the conscious mind. I think psychedelic research has been repressed by society at large and I can only guess at why... But there is some positive findings that we ought to pursue around depression and addiction. I hope we can make some progress here.
  • hannasanarion 8y ago
    > There might be lines of thought that are repressed normally that when on a psychedelic is allowed to enter the conscious mind. And how do you know that those lines of thought aren't repressed because they're total garbage and make no sense at all? Just because something feels true when you're on psychadelics doesn't let you skip the scientific method and assert its universal truth, fie on the unenlightened who says otherwise
    • coldtea 8y ago
      >And how do you know that those lines of thought aren't repressed because they're total garbage and make no sense at all? Because we have carried some of those drug-induced lines of though (and poems, melodies, and insights, etc) out of drug trips for millennia, and people still care for them without drugs.
      • Retra 8y ago
        People care for all kinds of nonsense.
• coldtea 8y ago
  >Alertness is a state of mind. Insight is not. Says who? Insight in general is not the same as information. Even without drugs a person can understand something instinctively but be totally unable to convey the notion to others (I'm reminded here of St. Augustine: "What then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know"). Besides, all kinds of artists, writers, thinkers and even a few scientists, have gotten interesting insights while on psychedelic drugs which remained tangible (in the form of songs, writings, etc) when they got off the drugs.
  • Retra 8y ago
    The kind of insight that we value is obviously not a state of mind. Let's not nitpick verbiage and risk missing the point. Valuing different states of mind and interesting artwork is not the same as valuing insight. Just because psychedelics produce value does not mean the value is indicative of insight.
    • coldtea 8y ago
      >The kind of insight that we value is obviously not a state of mind. Let's not nitpick verbiage and risk missing the point I'm afraid the nitpick is necessary. For example, nobody said or implied that an LSD user comes out with full schematics for a CPU or some new laws of mathematics. So, to avoid further confusion: 1) I wasn't referring to some technical or quantifiable "insight that we value" and that is "obviously not a state of mind". 2) While not on par with the discovery of calculus or the internal combustion engine, I (and many others I presume) also value the kind of insight people do get with psychedelics (and several other means, including philosophy). Even if it doesn't arrive in a readily communicable form. 3) That doesn't mean there's also no mere sentiment manipulation done by these drugs. But, even though those are there too, people have used them to come to significant personal and artistic etc insights for millennia. 4) That said, other drugs, have helped people (including scientists and engineers) achieve actual technical insights of the "kind we value", and perform impressive feats of concentration etc (amphetamines etc).
      • 8y ago
• gdubs 8y ago
  I mean, you can argue that’s essentially what religions are. One person goes off, hallucinates, ...
  • coldtea 8y ago
    And blam! They create civilization from what was essentially an animal pack.