12 ms·

A Psychedelic Renaissance

tlb 7y ago
The funding discussed here is for scientific studies. But it's not clear what important question is still open and needs further study. From what I've read [1, 2, 3, 4], the psychological benefits are well-established and powerful if used in the right mindset, and the health risks are also well-established and rare or minor if used carefully. So science seems to have answered the questions it can answer. The obstacle to wider use is policy and regulation. Is funding scientific studies where the answers are already known an effective way to change government and social policy? It could be, but I hope everyone involved understands whether they're doing Science or Advocacy. [1] Michael Pollan, _How to Change your Mind_ [2] James Fadiman, _The Psychedelic Explorer's Guide_ [3] Ayelet Waldman, _A Very Good Day_ [4] Dozens of popular articles
- max76 7y ago
  > the psychological benefits are well-established and powerful if used in the right mindset, and the health risks are also well-established and rare or minor if used carefully. > I hope everyone involved understands whether they're doing Science or Advocacy. The data (science) gives creditably to the activist and lobbyist hoping to change policy (advocacy). I think everyone is clear on what side they are on. There is plenty of space for science to expand our understanding. What is the probability of a bad outcome of psychedelics? How does dose effect the probability of a bad outcome? Is Mushrooms, LSD, or MDMA the most effective treatment for PTSD? For end of life anxiety? For major depression? What conditions are these substances helpful for (I don't think we have a complete list)? When should a medical provider recommend psychedelics? Can psychedelics be used on everyone, or just those with certain conditions? How does repeated long term exposure adjust the risk profile? What is the optimal microdosing schedule? What are the objective benefits of microdosing? What is optimal microdosing dose? Who should be microdosing? There are a lot of unanswered questions to answer, and probably even more questions we don't have enough data to know to ask. The studies that we have are with low sample sizes, so larger studies would be scientifically significant. What we have with psychedelics are a few recent studies done with modern scientific rigor that all conclude there is a lot of potential in this space. We have more historical studies done, but without modern scientific rigor and need to be recreated before being reliable data. Lets not forget that while these human trials are taking place real people are legally being given life changing help. That's enough to make the entire thing worth it.
- Alex3917 7y ago
  > Is funding scientific studies where the answers are already known an effective way to change government and social policy? A lot of the science had to be re-done because there were methodological issues in the original research, and no one was really sure whether or not the data was faked. I think it was Rick Doblin who discovered that one of the folks in either Leary's or Pahnke's studies actually ran away during the study, but because the researcher never reported this as a possible adverse event it opened up other questions about the validity of the data. It turned out the original data was basically accurate, but it wasn't necessarily a given.
- anythingnonidin 7y ago
  Yes, the obstacle to wider use is policy and regulation. For those interested, some thoughts: There are two types of users from a policy perspective. People with specific diagnoses/diseases, and "healthy" people. For people with specific diagnoses and diseases, the most important work is FDA approval of MDMA and psilocybin. MAPS, COMPASS Pathways, and Usona are working on this and they require a bunch of money to get through to a successful FDA approval. Funding this research is a very high leverage way to enable policy change, because the FDA has a relatively clear process to approving a drug for medical use for patients with relevant medical diagnoses. For "healthy people," there needs to be another route. Some people are working on ballot initiatives and legislation that will impact this (see Oregon, Denver, Oakland, Iowa) and that may be a high leverage route. But the path here is less clear. As you note in some cases, some types of research can be helpful for boosting political change, whereas others aren't going to be an efficient use of capital for that goal.
- blendo 7y ago
  Here's one scientific question I'd like to see answered: If a patient is currently taking anti-depressants (or other meds) for the treatment of PTSD, depression, or addiction, and if a physician thinks a psychedelic treatment might help, how should they understand the interaction between the psych meds and the hallucinogen? Since we're dealing with ill people, a larger amount of care is warranted.
  - Nasrudith 7y ago
    There is a large pool to draw upon for reference informally - experiences of users who did so without skipping doses.
  - filoeleven 7y ago
    It depends on the meds. MAOIs have a strengthening effect with every psychedelic, as far as I’ve read. Anyone going for an ayahuasca treatment needs to know that an MAOI is part of that brew, so they’d have to stop their medication some weeks beforehand or risk potential death if already taking one. The places running medical studies like Johns Hopkins probably have good info on interactions, unless they’re turning away study participants who take medication. Since they’re specifically looking at treating depression, anxiety, addiction, I suspect they’re accepting people who are already on a variety of medications.
tabtab 7y ago
I keep my bell-bottom jeans, disco ball, lava lamp, and wide ties because I'm pretty sure they'll come back in style eventually, sometimes twice. However, keeping all that stuff drives my spouse crazy. My parents' furniture from the late 1950's is quite in style now.
GreaterFool 7y ago
When did we forgo > Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness ? "Modern" mentality seems to be that everything is illegal unless government specifically approves. Any substance that emerges and becomes popular enough gets banned immediately (unless there's a huge backlash; I can only recall one case like that, kratom. Don't know much about that substance though). Meanwhile invasive questionable medical treatments and supplements are marketed as safe (government stamp of approval) all the time. I recall how green tea extract destroyed someone's liver because the dosage was just crazy high. But it's green tea, so must be good for you? Or how about alcohol or tobacco or opioids which are literally killing people? I think psychedelics should be unbanned first, because it's the right thing to do. The need for more research to treat specific conditions is a separate manner. At the very least this should apply to mushrooms and perhaps LSD. MDMA can be great even in self-administered setting but I think it has more potential for (unintentional) abuse. But mushrooms can be abused right? Sure. What about people who died in water drinking or hot-dog eating contents then? Are we going to ban those?
- GreaterFool 7y ago
  Also, psychedelics make you face your inner demons. Perhaps not right away because the wonders of the experience can be captivating, for a while. But sooner or later they will. Many people I talked to tried something like LSD once or twice and while they enjoyed the fun part they didn't like what they've seen once the party was over and they were left alone with their own thoughts. This is where the benefits are but it's work and it's not easy. Just imagine something like cannabis lounge where you could take mushrooms in safe setting and if you feel overwhelmed you could talk to a trained staff member. Not necessarily a psychologist, just someone who can guide you through the experience. I really believe it could unleash incredible well-being for the society. But then who'd gobble up those anxiety or depression or ADHD or sleeping^` pills? ^1 Wasn't there a severe warning issued by FDA on sleeping pills just few days ago? Risk of injury or death? I had some Ambien to sleep on a plane but I thrown that stuff away.
  - grawprog 7y ago
    >Just imagine something like cannabis lounge where you could take mushrooms in safe setting and if you feel overwhelmed you could talk to a trained staff member. Not necessarily a psychologist, just someone who can guide you through the experience. I really believe it could unleash incredible well-being for the society. I like idea of this, but I don't think I'd like to do mushrooms in a place like that. I tend to alternate between getting strong urges to wander and urges to just sit and do nothing and i'm not a big fan having people around not also on mushrooms. I couldn't hand sitting in a cafe like that for the duration of a trip. That would probably make it worse for me.
sharkweek 7y ago
I would love to try a psychedelic trip with a trained therapist guiding me toward facing my fears. I’m generally a pretty anxious person (diagnosed with OCD, managed with ERP therapy), and I feel pretty confident that it would force me to face that part of me. I have no doubt that it’d be a beneficial experience. Buuuuut... part of me is super nervous about what I might also find. It’s like part of my mind wants to explore it, and the other part doesn’t, which creates a lot of inner conflict. I honestly don’t know what I’m supposed to do with two parts of my brain fighting with itself. Side note: How To Change Your Mind by Michael Pollan is a fantastic book and worth a read.
- nazgulnarsil 7y ago
  There are a few therapy modalities that can help, check them out and see if any resonate with you: core transformation (my fave), feeding your demons (buddhist), internal family systems, focusing (eugene gendlin), coherence therapy. All are predicated around the same few core concepts of having different parts of yourself that view the world in different ways, acknowledging and accepting that each of those parts has some positive contribution to our well being even though they get into conflicts with each other about their proper 'domains' of applicability sometimes. In this case, it sounds like one part is worried that you'll label it as bad and try to change it without acknowledging the ways in which it might be protecting or helping you. If you read the wikipedia page on coherence therapy for instance you'll see the steps around needing to address those parts needs before they're willing to compromise. Happy travels.
  - sharkweek 7y ago
    I'd be interested in some more reading on core transformation - do you happen to have any recommendations? Thanks!
    - nazgulnarsil 7y ago
      the book by Connierae Andreas.
- h2odragon 7y ago
tomhoward 7y ago
This recent interview [1] with Jamie Wheal, co-author of Stealing Fire [2] is worth watching if you're interested in this topic. He's observed the psychedelic "revolution" in recent years, and has both positive and negative things to say about it, but on the whole he's deeply pessimistic about where it seems to be going. His observations about fashion-driven, Instagram-performative "enlightenment", and the propensity for a little bit of enlightenment to lead one down dangerous paths (including charging big money to lead others down the same dangerous path), are resonant for me, having been through the journey myself and seen it from both sides. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkPB33bD3hQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkPB33bD3hQ [2] https://www.amazon.com/Stealing-Fire-Maverick-Scientists-Revolutionizing/dp/0062429655 https://www.amazon.com/Stealing-Fire-Maverick-Scientists-Rev...
- ak39 7y ago
  Thank you for the video links. I had never heard of Jamie Wheal before - I enjoyed listening to his thoughts. I also enjoy listening to Terence McKenna and Alan Watts every once in a while ... most of what they say often sounds completely irrational, outrageously verbose, ridiculous and border-line ramblings of "mad men" ... but their words are also powerfully disarming, deeply engaging and resonant and finally emotionally embracing. I don't know how to explain it. I wouldn't want to be caught listening to them!
  - tictoc 7y ago
    Yeah Jamie Wheal is kind of along the same lines. He has a way with words to say the least. It's intoxicating actually.
  - pmoriarty 7y ago
    I'd encourage you to have a listen to Erik Davis' "Expanding Mind" podcast.[1] Erik Davis is, to my mind, the most interesting and intelligent of the post-McKenna visionaries/psychonauts. He's at the same time much more critical than most of his predecessors, and very open to an interested in extraordinary experiences and what he calls "high weirdness". [1] - https://techgnosis.com/category/podcast/ https://techgnosis.com/category/podcast/
mapcars 7y ago
From my experience, everything mentioned in the article can be "treated" with meditation. I say treated in quotes because all this is self-caused and treatment is only to realize that it's actually me is the one who is causing stress and anxiety to myself. Once this is realized these things disappear in a matter of days. Meditation is long-established, safe, legal, available to everyone regardless of any status or condition (excluding only severe damage in brain/spine areas) and does not require billion dollar research.
- fartcannon 7y ago
  Have you tried it? Perhaps there words aren't doing justice to the experience and what you're writing off as the same as some other act might be missing the target. For example, having never tried meditation nor psychedelics, both yours and ops experiences seem barely believable. But I haven't tried either so I wouldn't go out and say that.
  - mapcars 7y ago
    Yes, I'm saying this only because last 1.5 years I'm doing my kriya practice which includes meditation, breathing technic and few other things and it has been working wonderfully - since I "got it" I never had a single bad day. I am comparing this to having occasional bursts of depression, loneliness, self-doubt for a few years before. I did not try strong psychedelics but the problem with them as with any kind of drug is the effect wears off inevitably. If you feel great for some time, going back becomes even more terrible than staying there, because now you know there are better states. What sets meditation apart is that it is a process which (at a certain level) lasts through the day and even becomes permanent. This is something you can not get with outside help because you will just become dependent on the source of that help.
    - easymodex 7y ago
      >I did not try strong psychedelics but the problem with them as with any kind of drug is the effect wears off inevitably. If you feel great for some time, going back becomes even more terrible than staying there, because now you know there are better states. This is hard to claim if you've never tried it. Personally when I do a shroom trip I don't even feel like doing it again until months later. I've done it like 8 times in my whole life, usually for fun with friends but it always ends up enlightening and spiritual. The effects are permanent in a very good way. It's a trip, same as you travel to a different exotic country and explore a different world, the memories, the feelings you experienced and the knowledge you gained will stay with you.
cerealbad 7y ago
any link between the melted art visual neural networks produce and the visuals that are reported during various psychedelic sessions? how plausible is the theory that what is occurring is just various networks in the brain deteriorating while the drug is being flushed through the system? a type of audio-visual anesthesia experienced in an otherwise conscious semi-lucid waking state.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  I think this is pretty accurate. I think psychedelics are basically like the electrical box in your house, but for your brain. You can flip the breakers and see what happens with different circuits disabled. Since normally everything in your brain operates simultaneously this can be very instructive for learning what's happening. Once you come back to sobriety, you can then use what you saw to start training yourself to move your attention between those circuits, giving you basically better brain control. Neural nets are trained on the tiniest tiniest slices of human experiences so their feedback has a similar character to partly disabled brains.
chinarulezzz 7y ago
> Pardon Our Interruption... As you were browsing www.philanthropy.com something about your browser made us think you were a bot. ... To request an unblock, please fill out the form below and > we will review it as soon as possible. First Name: Last Name: E-mail: Thanks.

tlb 7y ago

The funding discussed here is for scientific studies. But it's not clear what important question is still open and needs further study. From what I've read [1, 2, 3, 4], the psychological benefits are well-established and powerful if used in the right mindset, and the health risks are also well-established and rare or minor if used carefully. So science seems to have answered the questions it can answer. The obstacle to wider use is policy and regulation. Is funding scientific studies where the answers are already known an effective way to change government and social policy? It could be, but I hope everyone involved understands whether they're doing Science or Advocacy. [1] Michael Pollan, _How to Change your Mind_ [2] James Fadiman, _The Psychedelic Explorer's Guide_ [3] Ayelet Waldman, _A Very Good Day_ [4] Dozens of popular articles

max76 7y ago
> the psychological benefits are well-established and powerful if used in the right mindset, and the health risks are also well-established and rare or minor if used carefully. > I hope everyone involved understands whether they're doing Science or Advocacy. The data (science) gives creditably to the activist and lobbyist hoping to change policy (advocacy). I think everyone is clear on what side they are on. There is plenty of space for science to expand our understanding. What is the probability of a bad outcome of psychedelics? How does dose effect the probability of a bad outcome? Is Mushrooms, LSD, or MDMA the most effective treatment for PTSD? For end of life anxiety? For major depression? What conditions are these substances helpful for (I don't think we have a complete list)? When should a medical provider recommend psychedelics? Can psychedelics be used on everyone, or just those with certain conditions? How does repeated long term exposure adjust the risk profile? What is the optimal microdosing schedule? What are the objective benefits of microdosing? What is optimal microdosing dose? Who should be microdosing? There are a lot of unanswered questions to answer, and probably even more questions we don't have enough data to know to ask. The studies that we have are with low sample sizes, so larger studies would be scientifically significant. What we have with psychedelics are a few recent studies done with modern scientific rigor that all conclude there is a lot of potential in this space. We have more historical studies done, but without modern scientific rigor and need to be recreated before being reliable data. Lets not forget that while these human trials are taking place real people are legally being given life changing help. That's enough to make the entire thing worth it.
Alex3917 7y ago
> Is funding scientific studies where the answers are already known an effective way to change government and social policy? A lot of the science had to be re-done because there were methodological issues in the original research, and no one was really sure whether or not the data was faked. I think it was Rick Doblin who discovered that one of the folks in either Leary's or Pahnke's studies actually ran away during the study, but because the researcher never reported this as a possible adverse event it opened up other questions about the validity of the data. It turned out the original data was basically accurate, but it wasn't necessarily a given.
anythingnonidin 7y ago
Yes, the obstacle to wider use is policy and regulation. For those interested, some thoughts: There are two types of users from a policy perspective. People with specific diagnoses/diseases, and "healthy" people. For people with specific diagnoses and diseases, the most important work is FDA approval of MDMA and psilocybin. MAPS, COMPASS Pathways, and Usona are working on this and they require a bunch of money to get through to a successful FDA approval. Funding this research is a very high leverage way to enable policy change, because the FDA has a relatively clear process to approving a drug for medical use for patients with relevant medical diagnoses. For "healthy people," there needs to be another route. Some people are working on ballot initiatives and legislation that will impact this (see Oregon, Denver, Oakland, Iowa) and that may be a high leverage route. But the path here is less clear. As you note in some cases, some types of research can be helpful for boosting political change, whereas others aren't going to be an efficient use of capital for that goal.
blendo 7y ago
Here's one scientific question I'd like to see answered: If a patient is currently taking anti-depressants (or other meds) for the treatment of PTSD, depression, or addiction, and if a physician thinks a psychedelic treatment might help, how should they understand the interaction between the psych meds and the hallucinogen? Since we're dealing with ill people, a larger amount of care is warranted.
- Nasrudith 7y ago
  There is a large pool to draw upon for reference informally - experiences of users who did so without skipping doses.
- filoeleven 7y ago
  It depends on the meds. MAOIs have a strengthening effect with every psychedelic, as far as I’ve read. Anyone going for an ayahuasca treatment needs to know that an MAOI is part of that brew, so they’d have to stop their medication some weeks beforehand or risk potential death if already taking one. The places running medical studies like Johns Hopkins probably have good info on interactions, unless they’re turning away study participants who take medication. Since they’re specifically looking at treating depression, anxiety, addiction, I suspect they’re accepting people who are already on a variety of medications.

tabtab 7y ago

I keep my bell-bottom jeans, disco ball, lava lamp, and wide ties because I'm pretty sure they'll come back in style eventually, sometimes twice. However, keeping all that stuff drives my spouse crazy. My parents' furniture from the late 1950's is quite in style now.

GreaterFool 7y ago

When did we forgo > Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness ? "Modern" mentality seems to be that everything is illegal unless government specifically approves. Any substance that emerges and becomes popular enough gets banned immediately (unless there's a huge backlash; I can only recall one case like that, kratom. Don't know much about that substance though). Meanwhile invasive questionable medical treatments and supplements are marketed as safe (government stamp of approval) all the time. I recall how green tea extract destroyed someone's liver because the dosage was just crazy high. But it's green tea, so must be good for you? Or how about alcohol or tobacco or opioids which are literally killing people? I think psychedelics should be unbanned first, because it's the right thing to do. The need for more research to treat specific conditions is a separate manner. At the very least this should apply to mushrooms and perhaps LSD. MDMA can be great even in self-administered setting but I think it has more potential for (unintentional) abuse. But mushrooms can be abused right? Sure. What about people who died in water drinking or hot-dog eating contents then? Are we going to ban those?

GreaterFool 7y ago
Also, psychedelics make you face your inner demons. Perhaps not right away because the wonders of the experience can be captivating, for a while. But sooner or later they will. Many people I talked to tried something like LSD once or twice and while they enjoyed the fun part they didn't like what they've seen once the party was over and they were left alone with their own thoughts. This is where the benefits are but it's work and it's not easy. Just imagine something like cannabis lounge where you could take mushrooms in safe setting and if you feel overwhelmed you could talk to a trained staff member. Not necessarily a psychologist, just someone who can guide you through the experience. I really believe it could unleash incredible well-being for the society. But then who'd gobble up those anxiety or depression or ADHD or sleeping^` pills? ^1 Wasn't there a severe warning issued by FDA on sleeping pills just few days ago? Risk of injury or death? I had some Ambien to sleep on a plane but I thrown that stuff away.
- grawprog 7y ago
  >Just imagine something like cannabis lounge where you could take mushrooms in safe setting and if you feel overwhelmed you could talk to a trained staff member. Not necessarily a psychologist, just someone who can guide you through the experience. I really believe it could unleash incredible well-being for the society. I like idea of this, but I don't think I'd like to do mushrooms in a place like that. I tend to alternate between getting strong urges to wander and urges to just sit and do nothing and i'm not a big fan having people around not also on mushrooms. I couldn't hand sitting in a cafe like that for the duration of a trip. That would probably make it worse for me.

sharkweek 7y ago

I would love to try a psychedelic trip with a trained therapist guiding me toward facing my fears. I’m generally a pretty anxious person (diagnosed with OCD, managed with ERP therapy), and I feel pretty confident that it would force me to face that part of me. I have no doubt that it’d be a beneficial experience. Buuuuut... part of me is super nervous about what I might also find. It’s like part of my mind wants to explore it, and the other part doesn’t, which creates a lot of inner conflict. I honestly don’t know what I’m supposed to do with two parts of my brain fighting with itself. Side note: How To Change Your Mind by Michael Pollan is a fantastic book and worth a read.

nazgulnarsil 7y ago
There are a few therapy modalities that can help, check them out and see if any resonate with you: core transformation (my fave), feeding your demons (buddhist), internal family systems, focusing (eugene gendlin), coherence therapy. All are predicated around the same few core concepts of having different parts of yourself that view the world in different ways, acknowledging and accepting that each of those parts has some positive contribution to our well being even though they get into conflicts with each other about their proper 'domains' of applicability sometimes. In this case, it sounds like one part is worried that you'll label it as bad and try to change it without acknowledging the ways in which it might be protecting or helping you. If you read the wikipedia page on coherence therapy for instance you'll see the steps around needing to address those parts needs before they're willing to compromise. Happy travels.
- sharkweek 7y ago
  I'd be interested in some more reading on core transformation - do you happen to have any recommendations? Thanks!
  - nazgulnarsil 7y ago
    the book by Connierae Andreas.
h2odragon 7y ago

tomhoward 7y ago

This recent interview [1] with Jamie Wheal, co-author of Stealing Fire [2] is worth watching if you're interested in this topic. He's observed the psychedelic "revolution" in recent years, and has both positive and negative things to say about it, but on the whole he's deeply pessimistic about where it seems to be going. His observations about fashion-driven, Instagram-performative "enlightenment", and the propensity for a little bit of enlightenment to lead one down dangerous paths (including charging big money to lead others down the same dangerous path), are resonant for me, having been through the journey myself and seen it from both sides. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkPB33bD3hQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkPB33bD3hQ [2] https://www.amazon.com/Stealing-Fire-Maverick-Scientists-Revolutionizing/dp/0062429655 https://www.amazon.com/Stealing-Fire-Maverick-Scientists-Rev...

ak39 7y ago
Thank you for the video links. I had never heard of Jamie Wheal before - I enjoyed listening to his thoughts. I also enjoy listening to Terence McKenna and Alan Watts every once in a while ... most of what they say often sounds completely irrational, outrageously verbose, ridiculous and border-line ramblings of "mad men" ... but their words are also powerfully disarming, deeply engaging and resonant and finally emotionally embracing. I don't know how to explain it. I wouldn't want to be caught listening to them!
- tictoc 7y ago
  Yeah Jamie Wheal is kind of along the same lines. He has a way with words to say the least. It's intoxicating actually.
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  I'd encourage you to have a listen to Erik Davis' "Expanding Mind" podcast.[1] Erik Davis is, to my mind, the most interesting and intelligent of the post-McKenna visionaries/psychonauts. He's at the same time much more critical than most of his predecessors, and very open to an interested in extraordinary experiences and what he calls "high weirdness". [1] - https://techgnosis.com/category/podcast/ https://techgnosis.com/category/podcast/

mapcars 7y ago

From my experience, everything mentioned in the article can be "treated" with meditation. I say treated in quotes because all this is self-caused and treatment is only to realize that it's actually me is the one who is causing stress and anxiety to myself. Once this is realized these things disappear in a matter of days. Meditation is long-established, safe, legal, available to everyone regardless of any status or condition (excluding only severe damage in brain/spine areas) and does not require billion dollar research.

fartcannon 7y ago
Have you tried it? Perhaps there words aren't doing justice to the experience and what you're writing off as the same as some other act might be missing the target. For example, having never tried meditation nor psychedelics, both yours and ops experiences seem barely believable. But I haven't tried either so I wouldn't go out and say that.
- mapcars 7y ago
  Yes, I'm saying this only because last 1.5 years I'm doing my kriya practice which includes meditation, breathing technic and few other things and it has been working wonderfully - since I "got it" I never had a single bad day. I am comparing this to having occasional bursts of depression, loneliness, self-doubt for a few years before. I did not try strong psychedelics but the problem with them as with any kind of drug is the effect wears off inevitably. If you feel great for some time, going back becomes even more terrible than staying there, because now you know there are better states. What sets meditation apart is that it is a process which (at a certain level) lasts through the day and even becomes permanent. This is something you can not get with outside help because you will just become dependent on the source of that help.
  - easymodex 7y ago
    >I did not try strong psychedelics but the problem with them as with any kind of drug is the effect wears off inevitably. If you feel great for some time, going back becomes even more terrible than staying there, because now you know there are better states. This is hard to claim if you've never tried it. Personally when I do a shroom trip I don't even feel like doing it again until months later. I've done it like 8 times in my whole life, usually for fun with friends but it always ends up enlightening and spiritual. The effects are permanent in a very good way. It's a trip, same as you travel to a different exotic country and explore a different world, the memories, the feelings you experienced and the knowledge you gained will stay with you.

cerealbad 7y ago

any link between the melted art visual neural networks produce and the visuals that are reported during various psychedelic sessions? how plausible is the theory that what is occurring is just various networks in the brain deteriorating while the drug is being flushed through the system? a type of audio-visual anesthesia experienced in an otherwise conscious semi-lucid waking state.

erikpukinskis 7y ago
I think this is pretty accurate. I think psychedelics are basically like the electrical box in your house, but for your brain. You can flip the breakers and see what happens with different circuits disabled. Since normally everything in your brain operates simultaneously this can be very instructive for learning what's happening. Once you come back to sobriety, you can then use what you saw to start training yourself to move your attention between those circuits, giving you basically better brain control. Neural nets are trained on the tiniest tiniest slices of human experiences so their feedback has a similar character to partly disabled brains.

chinarulezzz 7y ago

> Pardon Our Interruption... As you were browsing www.philanthropy.com something about your browser made us think you were a bot. ... To request an unblock, please fill out the form below and > we will review it as soon as possible. First Name: Last Name: E-mail: Thanks.