6 ms·

Some have speculated psychedelics like psilocybin played a pivotal role in Homo Sapiens consciousness development. If true, the poetic symmetry of AI inventing

Some have speculated psychedelics like psilocybin played a pivotal role in Homo Sapiens consciousness development. If true, the poetic symmetry of AI inventing psychedelics and smart drugs to fuel the next jump in human development is fascinating. Is there a genre of scifi for this yet?

tedivm 3y ago
What you're referring to is called, no joke, the Stoned Ape Theory. It is not really taken seriously at the moment, as it completely lacks in evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoned_ape_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoned_ape_theory
- gamepsys 3y ago
  However listening to it's originator Terence McKenna explain the stoned ape theory while intoxicated on the correct substances is a very fun experience.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  The author must have wrote that book when he was high on shrooms.
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  An animal in the wild will try to eat everything and learn through trial and error what is good to eat and what isn’t. Selection might even lead to behavioral changes that naturally predispose one to one substance over another. I don’t see why humans would be any different.
  - gitaarik 3y ago
    Trial and error? I think most animals have an instinct of what they should eat when. I think humans have that too, but kind of forgot about it, or at least we are out of touch with these things and mostly judge intellectually.
    - kjkjadksj 3y ago
      For many animals that instinct is to chew something and either swallow or spit it out. See a tiger shark. They basically probe the entire environment through constant trial and error. Bite it all should a small portion bleed, they have concluded.
spiritplumber 3y ago
Does the 2001 movie count?
Rugos 3y ago
Did you see Lucy (2014)?
SamBam 3y ago
I have always been fascinated in the fact that psychedelics, and, indeed, any plant-based molecule that can mimic a neurotransmitter, exists. Us and plants aren't creating the same molecule because we share a common ancestor. There are far too many other plants that don't create cannabinoids or opiates or whatever, and far too many other animals that don't create them, for this to be at all likely. It had to have evolved multiple times. It's not any kind of symbiotic relationship. Our ancestors didn't cause opiates to evolve by selectively eating and spreading their seeds. So it's a coincidental convergent evolution. But these are really complex molecules doing quite different things. Both cannabinoids and opiates evolved in plants to defend them from viruses and fungi. I don't know what other neurotransmitter-mimics are for, but they're not being used for plant nerves. I'm sure people know the answers to this, and I could read a book about it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  > I'm sure people know the answers to this I don't think they do. AFAIK most of your assertions above are unknowns. My theory, at least re: psilocybin and the like, is that a parasitic fungus developed neurotransmitter agonists as a way of manipulating its host. The complete cocktail that was needed to make the target species behave in a way that completed the fungus' lifecycle may be lost to time, but certain components of it still exist in the gene pool. And if you're going to have millions of spores (rather than the two or three offspring that, say, humans have) you can afford to set them up with a wider array of gene expression profiles. So you've got these fungi just trying stuff to see what works--now armed with neurotransmitter agonists as part of that "stuff". Later on you've got other organisms eating those mushrooms and behaving strangely. If you're a fungal spore, and you're in an animal's digestive tract, "strangely" is probably how you want it to be behaving. You're going to end up in a different place or with different nutrients or in some other situation which is abnormal for your host--you end up with greater habitat diversity. How specifically that host-behavior-strangeness would lead to a lifecycle that would reinforce the inclusion of psychedelics to the point where P. Cubensis is reliably psychedelic, rather than just the occasional mutant, I have no idea, but when you've got billions of years to play with, it's not hard to accept that some pretty weird animal-fungus interactions came up here and there.
juggertao 3y ago
How would that be passed down the genetic line? Today's babies don't require psilocybin to become conscious.
- simple10 3y ago
  It's not a well supported theory, but fascinating. Possibly an epigenetic influence? Much more likely a cultural effect, if any, that nudged early humans down the path of spiritual pursuit as a sort of cultural glue. The more spiritually inclined you were, the more likely you were to thrive in the societal hierarchy. Use of psychedelics could have helped accelerate an individual's "spiritual" development and therefore afforded them additional offspring. So the correlation, if any, might be a favoring of genes that paired well with the effects of psychedelics. Pure speculation on my part. As for AI, it seems highly likely a new class of designer drugs will emerge, tailored to a specific individual to enhance societal adaptation. We've already seen this in play over the past 40+ years in the pharmaceutical industry. AI will only accelerate it IMO.
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    Imagine your cognitive abilities today if no one ever spoke a language to you through your childhood. Cultural influence is able to significantly improve this. Thats not a genetic factor but an environmental one that is predominantly responsible for this phenotype of a developed and modern adult.
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  Todays babies rapidly grow their brain while learning new languages. Kids who wind up feral for whatever reason have severe cognitive issues from a lack of learning language at a critical age. It makes you wonder how this brittle system got its start. Considering everyone today needs this language kick start induced by cultural practice, maybe the initial kick was also some cultural practice that also introduced new ideas where there wouldn’t be otherwise. Maybe that practice at one time was a shamanic like experience considering the proliferation of these practices in the most basal religions we have around the world. Its really hard to say what came first, the language or cultural practices such as ritualized drug taking, considering what archaeological evidence we have seems to suggest these things were happening at the same time.
Anotheroneagain 3y ago
Yes, it's nonsense. The neocortex doesn't work from the lack of lead, and psychedelics appear to start it up in some way. People didn't used to need to be drugged up on shrooms to be conscious.

tedivm 3y ago

What you're referring to is called, no joke, the Stoned Ape Theory. It is not really taken seriously at the moment, as it completely lacks in evidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoned_ape_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoned_ape_theory

gamepsys 3y ago
However listening to it's originator Terence McKenna explain the stoned ape theory while intoxicated on the correct substances is a very fun experience.
aurareturn 3y ago
The author must have wrote that book when he was high on shrooms.
kjkjadksj 3y ago
An animal in the wild will try to eat everything and learn through trial and error what is good to eat and what isn’t. Selection might even lead to behavioral changes that naturally predispose one to one substance over another. I don’t see why humans would be any different.
- gitaarik 3y ago
  Trial and error? I think most animals have an instinct of what they should eat when. I think humans have that too, but kind of forgot about it, or at least we are out of touch with these things and mostly judge intellectually.
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    For many animals that instinct is to chew something and either swallow or spit it out. See a tiger shark. They basically probe the entire environment through constant trial and error. Bite it all should a small portion bleed, they have concluded.

spiritplumber 3y ago

Does the 2001 movie count?

Rugos 3y ago

Did you see Lucy (2014)?

SamBam 3y ago

I have always been fascinated in the fact that psychedelics, and, indeed, any plant-based molecule that can mimic a neurotransmitter, exists. Us and plants aren't creating the same molecule because we share a common ancestor. There are far too many other plants that don't create cannabinoids or opiates or whatever, and far too many other animals that don't create them, for this to be at all likely. It had to have evolved multiple times. It's not any kind of symbiotic relationship. Our ancestors didn't cause opiates to evolve by selectively eating and spreading their seeds. So it's a coincidental convergent evolution. But these are really complex molecules doing quite different things. Both cannabinoids and opiates evolved in plants to defend them from viruses and fungi. I don't know what other neurotransmitter-mimics are for, but they're not being used for plant nerves. I'm sure people know the answers to this, and I could read a book about it.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
> I'm sure people know the answers to this I don't think they do. AFAIK most of your assertions above are unknowns. My theory, at least re: psilocybin and the like, is that a parasitic fungus developed neurotransmitter agonists as a way of manipulating its host. The complete cocktail that was needed to make the target species behave in a way that completed the fungus' lifecycle may be lost to time, but certain components of it still exist in the gene pool. And if you're going to have millions of spores (rather than the two or three offspring that, say, humans have) you can afford to set them up with a wider array of gene expression profiles. So you've got these fungi just trying stuff to see what works--now armed with neurotransmitter agonists as part of that "stuff". Later on you've got other organisms eating those mushrooms and behaving strangely. If you're a fungal spore, and you're in an animal's digestive tract, "strangely" is probably how you want it to be behaving. You're going to end up in a different place or with different nutrients or in some other situation which is abnormal for your host--you end up with greater habitat diversity. How specifically that host-behavior-strangeness would lead to a lifecycle that would reinforce the inclusion of psychedelics to the point where P. Cubensis is reliably psychedelic, rather than just the occasional mutant, I have no idea, but when you've got billions of years to play with, it's not hard to accept that some pretty weird animal-fungus interactions came up here and there.

juggertao 3y ago

How would that be passed down the genetic line? Today's babies don't require psilocybin to become conscious.

simple10 3y ago
It's not a well supported theory, but fascinating. Possibly an epigenetic influence? Much more likely a cultural effect, if any, that nudged early humans down the path of spiritual pursuit as a sort of cultural glue. The more spiritually inclined you were, the more likely you were to thrive in the societal hierarchy. Use of psychedelics could have helped accelerate an individual's "spiritual" development and therefore afforded them additional offspring. So the correlation, if any, might be a favoring of genes that paired well with the effects of psychedelics. Pure speculation on my part. As for AI, it seems highly likely a new class of designer drugs will emerge, tailored to a specific individual to enhance societal adaptation. We've already seen this in play over the past 40+ years in the pharmaceutical industry. AI will only accelerate it IMO.
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  Imagine your cognitive abilities today if no one ever spoke a language to you through your childhood. Cultural influence is able to significantly improve this. Thats not a genetic factor but an environmental one that is predominantly responsible for this phenotype of a developed and modern adult.
kjkjadksj 3y ago
Todays babies rapidly grow their brain while learning new languages. Kids who wind up feral for whatever reason have severe cognitive issues from a lack of learning language at a critical age. It makes you wonder how this brittle system got its start. Considering everyone today needs this language kick start induced by cultural practice, maybe the initial kick was also some cultural practice that also introduced new ideas where there wouldn’t be otherwise. Maybe that practice at one time was a shamanic like experience considering the proliferation of these practices in the most basal religions we have around the world. Its really hard to say what came first, the language or cultural practices such as ritualized drug taking, considering what archaeological evidence we have seems to suggest these things were happening at the same time.

Anotheroneagain 3y ago

Yes, it's nonsense. The neocortex doesn't work from the lack of lead, and psychedelics appear to start it up in some way. People didn't used to need to be drugged up on shrooms to be conscious.