5 ms·

Important thing to understand is that psychedelics can be used at most as an easy incentive for people to see if they interested in this direction of experience

Important thing to understand is that psychedelics can be used at most as an easy incentive for people to see if they interested in this direction of experience. There are reasons why most profound mystics don't value substances much and rather focus on developing people's own perception. Yes it takes time but results come above all expectations. From my experience it's much healthier to realize I can go into states of bliss and ecstasy completely by myself without any external help.

whalesalad 5y ago
If you can reach enlightened states on your own - more power to you. I don’t think it’s fair to put down psychedelic drugs though. They rapidly accelerate the journey if used with the right amount of respect and intention. Your experience is yours. Don’t invalidate the experiences of others.
- 8bitsrule 5y ago
  I found the book (and many more) following the experience, and so Huxley's pitch was welcomed but 'not needed'. Agreed:respect and intention may indeed lead to very helpful insights. That said: as always in life, if you can't trust the source, you may find yourself misled.
mylons 5y ago
Maynard Keenan from Tool had a good line about this he’d use in interviews. Something like, “you get a shortcut to transcendence that you spend the rest of your life developing the ability to get their naturally“
- b3morales 5y ago
  Precisely this. This is something that Huxley himself emphasized in his writing. The substance is, like any medicine, an aid to the natural process, not a substitute for it.
- GameOfFrowns 5y ago
  I think Alan Watts stated something similar in one of his famous speeches. The question is if the value of that experience is the same if it's "unearned" by taking the easy path or if it's better to experience profoundness earlier in life through consuming DMT, LSD or Magic mushrooms than having to meditate for decades first.
- pcarolan 5y ago
  Ray Manzarek from The Doors (named after this book) used to say something like "I don't need drugs any more because the doors are open". Here's a similar quote: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/ray_manzarek_307478 https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/ray_manzarek_307478
ArtWomb 5y ago
>>> atone us with our fellows in a glowing exaltation of affection The idea is: what happens with psychedelic experimentation at mass scale? Do we morph into an empathic nation of Deanna Troi's overnite ;)
- hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
  Massive chaos. All traffic stops. All services are disrupted and finally nothing works anymore. You cannot even count on water and electricity being available. The fact that some people have bad trips and become paranoid becomes the least of your problems. It would be very, very different from limited, occasional, "recreational" use.
  - mc32 5y ago
    So, like massive tent encampments but without the social services?
    - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
      In areas with moderate climate (no cold winters and hot summers) and with access to potable water, I guess it could go on for some time until they run out of food.
  - GameOfFrowns 5y ago
- b3morales 5y ago
  One of Huxley's fiction books, Island, is a thought experiment about the choices a very explicitly spiritual (Buddhist in origin) society would take. Among other things the coming of age ceremony involves taking a small dose of psilocybin.
- carapace 5y ago
  Have you ever heard of "Rainbow Gatherings"?
scarecrowbob 5y ago
I see this idea a lot, and in the main, I wholly agree with the understanding that it's personal work and not drugs which help people develop their understanding of the world. At the same time, this mode of saying "at most" undercuts the actual value of a psychedelic experience: that kind of experience is so profound that I often liken it to discovering sex for the first time. Knowing how to bring yourself and/ or a partner into some state or other isn't in itself useful, it's awkward and confusing to become initiated into that practice, and there are a myriad of ways where becoming sexually activated is violent and traumatic. But done well a) these experiences can be fun/useful as ends in themselves and b) these experiences are often the ones which open up entire realms of possibility for our minds and bodies. For instance, without a psychedelic context I certainly would not have had a way of parsing the effects of kundalini yoga, and I might not have even been inclined to work in that direction if I didn't have a first hand understanding of how dramatically our physiology can so directly impact our perceptions. And I find the people who discount the profound impact of initiation into that realm of experience almost tautologically fall into two camps: people who have moved past psychedelics as a mode (which is a legitimate and good mode, in my epereince) and people who have never had psychedelic experiences (which is also a wholly legitimate way to be in the world). The thing is, the first camp often seems (at least to me) to understate the actual impact of psychedelia in their development and the second camp doesn't have the personal experience to make those claims at all. While I am happy at your personal development and ability to enter states of bliss or ecstasy without psychedelic drugs, you may consider that this general bend of argumentation (that the drugs aren't valuable and may be unhealthy in general in this movement) is just as much of a shortcut as thinking that the psychedelics in themselves can lead to some sort of enlightenment.
- aksss 5y ago
  I think this is a very appropriate comparison. At risk of forcing the analogy, there's some balance between (dis)trusting society at large with the liberation of attitudes towards psychedelics while maintaining some guardrails against the objectification, or cheapening, or hyping (miracle cure-all style) or even institutionalization of the experience/tooling. Society seems to be very tolerant of the risks/consequences of liberalized sexual morality. I'm not in any way interested in judging that as a positive or negative right now, just the observation that a) there are consequences; b) Western society has given priority to the benefits over the consequences; c) the boundaries and dimensions of the issue, benefits, consequences are still being explored; d) that exploration has largely been hands-off and organic, addressing problems in an arguably reactive posture. With psychedelics I think the risks/consequences are potentially greater and so would say simply as a comparison, societies need to be a little more careful, a little less reckless with this one. I instinctively project my own positive experiences with psychedelics onto others and so imagine positive outcomes to be more accessible or certain for society at large. This instinct - I know from observation as I've grown older and have seen more of the world and its inhabitants - needs to be checked. There are a lot of broken people out there, a lot of vulnerable people, a lot of self-interested influences that are either uncaring or malign. I have trouble articulating my full thoughts on this, but I don't think Western and particularly US culture has done a good job managing mental health and particularly in fostering positive mental health during formative years of human development. Not specifically talking about acute diagnosable disorders, but even the level of chronic anxiety, depression, and hopelessness that is experienced and amplified when passed cyclically over generations. The causes are interesting but beyond the scope of my comment, though it does influence my skepticism about throwing a grenade of recreational psychedelics into the gen-pop and letting it work itself out. I know someone is bound to say that nobody is talking about recreational psychedelics in a conversation about therapeutical use, but I would say that's precisely my starting point - a) it's hard to avoid more recreational use of psychedelics when normalizing it socially even in a clinical setting; b) figuring out how and where to set up appropriate guardrails should be deliberate; c) the experience with sexual liberation can probably inform the conversation in valuable ways, particularly in a critical approach. This is not an easy problem to solve in a secular, diverse, free-market democracy since the levers of influence are less centralized and arguably incentivized towards disruption, live experimentation, and deconstruction.
mekoka 5y ago
The typical gatekeeping through Appeal-To-Nature fallacy. I've heard some mystics speak about psychedelics. It sounds like what some gurus use to say about people like Krishnamurti who were profoundly influenced by their deep study of philosophy. Their arguments are moot because, although they have indeed invested a lot of time in their own practice to reach alternate states of consciousness, they often have very little experience with psychedelics. Actually, scratch that. We all have so little experience and so much to learn still about them. I'd agree that to reap the most benefits from a transcendental experience, whether through psychedelics, meditation, breathwork or other, you should also invest in nurturing yourself spiritually and philosophically. However, when I pin your argument downplaying the importance of psychedelics, against the results obtained in psychiatry, in end-of-life care, and even in spiritual awakening for the layperson, I don't think it holds. But that's my opinion.

whalesalad 5y ago

If you can reach enlightened states on your own - more power to you. I don’t think it’s fair to put down psychedelic drugs though. They rapidly accelerate the journey if used with the right amount of respect and intention. Your experience is yours. Don’t invalidate the experiences of others.

8bitsrule 5y ago
I found the book (and many more) following the experience, and so Huxley's pitch was welcomed but 'not needed'. Agreed:respect and intention may indeed lead to very helpful insights. That said: as always in life, if you can't trust the source, you may find yourself misled.

mylons 5y ago

Maynard Keenan from Tool had a good line about this he’d use in interviews. Something like, “you get a shortcut to transcendence that you spend the rest of your life developing the ability to get their naturally“

b3morales 5y ago
Precisely this. This is something that Huxley himself emphasized in his writing. The substance is, like any medicine, an aid to the natural process, not a substitute for it.
GameOfFrowns 5y ago
I think Alan Watts stated something similar in one of his famous speeches. The question is if the value of that experience is the same if it's "unearned" by taking the easy path or if it's better to experience profoundness earlier in life through consuming DMT, LSD or Magic mushrooms than having to meditate for decades first.
pcarolan 5y ago
Ray Manzarek from The Doors (named after this book) used to say something like "I don't need drugs any more because the doors are open". Here's a similar quote: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/ray_manzarek_307478 https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/ray_manzarek_307478

ArtWomb 5y ago

>>> atone us with our fellows in a glowing exaltation of affection The idea is: what happens with psychedelic experimentation at mass scale? Do we morph into an empathic nation of Deanna Troi's overnite ;)

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
Massive chaos. All traffic stops. All services are disrupted and finally nothing works anymore. You cannot even count on water and electricity being available. The fact that some people have bad trips and become paranoid becomes the least of your problems. It would be very, very different from limited, occasional, "recreational" use.
- mc32 5y ago
  So, like massive tent encampments but without the social services?
  - hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
    In areas with moderate climate (no cold winters and hot summers) and with access to potable water, I guess it could go on for some time until they run out of food.
- GameOfFrowns 5y ago
b3morales 5y ago
One of Huxley's fiction books, Island, is a thought experiment about the choices a very explicitly spiritual (Buddhist in origin) society would take. Among other things the coming of age ceremony involves taking a small dose of psilocybin.
carapace 5y ago
Have you ever heard of "Rainbow Gatherings"?

scarecrowbob 5y ago

I see this idea a lot, and in the main, I wholly agree with the understanding that it's personal work and not drugs which help people develop their understanding of the world. At the same time, this mode of saying "at most" undercuts the actual value of a psychedelic experience: that kind of experience is so profound that I often liken it to discovering sex for the first time. Knowing how to bring yourself and/ or a partner into some state or other isn't in itself useful, it's awkward and confusing to become initiated into that practice, and there are a myriad of ways where becoming sexually activated is violent and traumatic. But done well a) these experiences can be fun/useful as ends in themselves and b) these experiences are often the ones which open up entire realms of possibility for our minds and bodies. For instance, without a psychedelic context I certainly would not have had a way of parsing the effects of kundalini yoga, and I might not have even been inclined to work in that direction if I didn't have a first hand understanding of how dramatically our physiology can so directly impact our perceptions. And I find the people who discount the profound impact of initiation into that realm of experience almost tautologically fall into two camps: people who have moved past psychedelics as a mode (which is a legitimate and good mode, in my epereince) and people who have never had psychedelic experiences (which is also a wholly legitimate way to be in the world). The thing is, the first camp often seems (at least to me) to understate the actual impact of psychedelia in their development and the second camp doesn't have the personal experience to make those claims at all. While I am happy at your personal development and ability to enter states of bliss or ecstasy without psychedelic drugs, you may consider that this general bend of argumentation (that the drugs aren't valuable and may be unhealthy in general in this movement) is just as much of a shortcut as thinking that the psychedelics in themselves can lead to some sort of enlightenment.

aksss 5y ago
I think this is a very appropriate comparison. At risk of forcing the analogy, there's some balance between (dis)trusting society at large with the liberation of attitudes towards psychedelics while maintaining some guardrails against the objectification, or cheapening, or hyping (miracle cure-all style) or even institutionalization of the experience/tooling. Society seems to be very tolerant of the risks/consequences of liberalized sexual morality. I'm not in any way interested in judging that as a positive or negative right now, just the observation that a) there are consequences; b) Western society has given priority to the benefits over the consequences; c) the boundaries and dimensions of the issue, benefits, consequences are still being explored; d) that exploration has largely been hands-off and organic, addressing problems in an arguably reactive posture. With psychedelics I think the risks/consequences are potentially greater and so would say simply as a comparison, societies need to be a little more careful, a little less reckless with this one. I instinctively project my own positive experiences with psychedelics onto others and so imagine positive outcomes to be more accessible or certain for society at large. This instinct - I know from observation as I've grown older and have seen more of the world and its inhabitants - needs to be checked. There are a lot of broken people out there, a lot of vulnerable people, a lot of self-interested influences that are either uncaring or malign. I have trouble articulating my full thoughts on this, but I don't think Western and particularly US culture has done a good job managing mental health and particularly in fostering positive mental health during formative years of human development. Not specifically talking about acute diagnosable disorders, but even the level of chronic anxiety, depression, and hopelessness that is experienced and amplified when passed cyclically over generations. The causes are interesting but beyond the scope of my comment, though it does influence my skepticism about throwing a grenade of recreational psychedelics into the gen-pop and letting it work itself out. I know someone is bound to say that nobody is talking about recreational psychedelics in a conversation about therapeutical use, but I would say that's precisely my starting point - a) it's hard to avoid more recreational use of psychedelics when normalizing it socially even in a clinical setting; b) figuring out how and where to set up appropriate guardrails should be deliberate; c) the experience with sexual liberation can probably inform the conversation in valuable ways, particularly in a critical approach. This is not an easy problem to solve in a secular, diverse, free-market democracy since the levers of influence are less centralized and arguably incentivized towards disruption, live experimentation, and deconstruction.

mekoka 5y ago

The typical gatekeeping through Appeal-To-Nature fallacy. I've heard some mystics speak about psychedelics. It sounds like what some gurus use to say about people like Krishnamurti who were profoundly influenced by their deep study of philosophy. Their arguments are moot because, although they have indeed invested a lot of time in their own practice to reach alternate states of consciousness, they often have very little experience with psychedelics. Actually, scratch that. We all have so little experience and so much to learn still about them. I'd agree that to reap the most benefits from a transcendental experience, whether through psychedelics, meditation, breathwork or other, you should also invest in nurturing yourself spiritually and philosophically. However, when I pin your argument downplaying the importance of psychedelics, against the results obtained in psychiatry, in end-of-life care, and even in spiritual awakening for the layperson, I don't think it holds. But that's my opinion.