3 ms·
> It's an experience which we have no reason to think is representative. That's the very nature of "experiences" and some might argue precisely the point of de
by rv-de 6y ago
> It's an experience which we have no reason to think is representative.
That's the very nature of "experiences" and some might argue precisely the point of describing those.
> How is this highly artificial process any better than making a pill?
Never said that. Do you even know what you mean by "pill" in this context?
> I can tell you one way it's worse: What else is in the mushrooms? How do you know what else is in the mushrooms?
Maybe you should read the article first?
"Psilocybin mushrooms have been found to have minimal harmful effects and could potentially benefit those with depression."
They want to reproduce a mushroom trip - not a trip based on individual psychoactive substances.
- msla 6y ago> That's the very nature of "experiences" and some might argue precisely the point of describing those. It's also why we need controlled experiments. > Never said that. Do you even know what you mean by "pill" in this context? Of course I do: A pill with a controlled amount of the active ingredients and a neutral binder. > Maybe you should read the article first? Maybe you should stop trying to condescend to me and answer the question? > They want to reproduce a mushroom trip Obviously not. They want to treat mental disorders.