5 ms·

Is there any evidence of MDMA making users better people, other than self reports? For each individual who says psychedelics have made them a better person, th

by Camillo 12y ago

Is there any evidence of MDMA making users better people, other than self reports? For each individual who says psychedelics have made them a better person, there are hundreds who make the same claim about religion. And I think we can all agree that the risk of biological side effects is much lower with religion. If I were going to follow your advice and try MDMA, shouldn't I follow my father's advice and try religion first?

leot 12y ago
You only have to try MDMA once. Its acute effects will last around six hours. I've met many people who have attested to the profound effect it's had on their lives. Religion is a bit more of a commitment. And, for it to have the desired effects, often requires you to change what you believe about the world.
curtis3389 12y ago
> Is there any evidence of MDMA making users better people, other than self reports? Generally, no. You can't become better by taking a drug, but they're not talking about bettering themselves. They're talking about healing. If your intention is to better yourself with the aid of psychedelic drugs[1], you'll only get out what you put in, and psychedelics will mostly only inspire you to put forth the effort. edit: You still have to work at improving yourself through other means. > For each individual who says psychedelics have made them a better person, there are hundreds who make the same claim about religion. Well, not that many people are willing to try psychedelics. > And I think we can all agree that the risk of biological side effects is much lower with religion. Every year more people are killed in the name of religion than by psychedelics. Psychedelics kill noone. Their LD50 is usually too high. > If I were going to follow your advice and try MDMA, shouldn't I follow my father's advice and try religion first? Sure, but please try more than one religion, and check out philosophy too. You can choose whether or not to try MDMA in the same way that you can choose whether or not to go sky diving. [1] This is not an inherently misguided idea, but in uncontrolled environments, psychedelics can be quite dangerous.
- electronvolt 12y ago
  > You can't become better by taking a drug I'm going to mostly point out that although this is an appealing idea: that we only get out of ourselves what we put in/etc./etc. there's no reason for it to be true. In fact, I'd expect that for some drugs, it's probably not true: if you're talking about a substance that has dramatic, longer term effects on the functioning of seratonin/dopamine systems in the brain. Moving away from the kind of nebulous 'better person' realm and into a slightly more measurable/agreed upon "normal person" realm, it's patently untrue for those with nonstandard brain chemistry (and completely backed by scientific+medical consensus--drugs are a baseline treatment for bipolar disorder or schizophrenia), and so I think there's no reason why drug use should not improve the experience/behaviors of people with what our society has deemed 'normal' or 'normal-enough' brain chemistry. I don't think there's something so different about people with what are considered diseases with a larger genetic component which have lasted for centuries: they are likely caused by a combination of otherwise beneficial traits coming together in a less than beneficial way. Also, since the diseases I mentioned often do involve long term maintenance medication taken on a daily basis (such that there's always some amount of it in a patient's bloodstream), I think it's worth also mentioning that there are treatments for otherwise drug resistant depression such as electroconvulsive therapy which are effective when used every few months or only once or twice. I don't think it's unreasonable to assert that there are likely compounds that have impacts on people's brain chemistry that last longer than the life of the drug in the bloodstream. I'd like to note, though, that I'm not advocating going and taking psychedelic drugs in an attempt to better oneself. They're compounds which have debatable (and unresearched) longer term effects on those who imbibe them, and which have fairly established negative impact on people who take them and are at risk for developing a serious mental illness. (family history, etc.) I think that the appropriate thing to do is to pressure govt. and push society to allow for actual, well founded scientific research into the matter. (I say this as someone who has taken a psychedelic drug once, and wouldn't attribute any long term betterment or changes in personality/etc. to it. However, as someone fairly familiar with mental illness and its treatment, I think that it's reasonable to assert that drugs with strong impacts on brain chemistry--and certainly on the functioning of the seratonin system, which is often implicated in depression, bipolar disorder, and psychotic disorders might have beneficial uses in treatment of some individuals, and perhaps betterment of those with more 'normal' brain chemistry.)
adrianN 12y ago
I don't think I could "try religion" like I can try a drug. I can't just make myself believe in things that I think are impossible and without true belief, religion is just social interaction.
- wpietri 12y ago
  Depends on what kind of religion you mean. I'll occasionally pop in to Zen or Insight meditation sessions, and I've definitely found them helpful. You'd be hard pressed to say that Zen isn't a religion, but since it's not theistic, I don't think belief is particularly necessary for the experience. You might also check out Sam Harris's latest book. A noted atheist, he's recently written a book called, "Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion". I haven't read it, but I heard him on the radio last night, and it sounds like it is aimed squarely at your concern.

by Camillo 12y ago

leot 12y ago

You only have to try MDMA once. Its acute effects will last around six hours. I've met many people who have attested to the profound effect it's had on their lives. Religion is a bit more of a commitment. And, for it to have the desired effects, often requires you to change what you believe about the world.

curtis3389 12y ago

> Is there any evidence of MDMA making users better people, other than self reports? Generally, no. You can't become better by taking a drug, but they're not talking about bettering themselves. They're talking about healing. If your intention is to better yourself with the aid of psychedelic drugs[1], you'll only get out what you put in, and psychedelics will mostly only inspire you to put forth the effort. edit: You still have to work at improving yourself through other means. > For each individual who says psychedelics have made them a better person, there are hundreds who make the same claim about religion. Well, not that many people are willing to try psychedelics. > And I think we can all agree that the risk of biological side effects is much lower with religion. Every year more people are killed in the name of religion than by psychedelics. Psychedelics kill noone. Their LD50 is usually too high. > If I were going to follow your advice and try MDMA, shouldn't I follow my father's advice and try religion first? Sure, but please try more than one religion, and check out philosophy too. You can choose whether or not to try MDMA in the same way that you can choose whether or not to go sky diving. [1] This is not an inherently misguided idea, but in uncontrolled environments, psychedelics can be quite dangerous.

electronvolt 12y ago
> You can't become better by taking a drug I'm going to mostly point out that although this is an appealing idea: that we only get out of ourselves what we put in/etc./etc. there's no reason for it to be true. In fact, I'd expect that for some drugs, it's probably not true: if you're talking about a substance that has dramatic, longer term effects on the functioning of seratonin/dopamine systems in the brain. Moving away from the kind of nebulous 'better person' realm and into a slightly more measurable/agreed upon "normal person" realm, it's patently untrue for those with nonstandard brain chemistry (and completely backed by scientific+medical consensus--drugs are a baseline treatment for bipolar disorder or schizophrenia), and so I think there's no reason why drug use should not improve the experience/behaviors of people with what our society has deemed 'normal' or 'normal-enough' brain chemistry. I don't think there's something so different about people with what are considered diseases with a larger genetic component which have lasted for centuries: they are likely caused by a combination of otherwise beneficial traits coming together in a less than beneficial way. Also, since the diseases I mentioned often do involve long term maintenance medication taken on a daily basis (such that there's always some amount of it in a patient's bloodstream), I think it's worth also mentioning that there are treatments for otherwise drug resistant depression such as electroconvulsive therapy which are effective when used every few months or only once or twice. I don't think it's unreasonable to assert that there are likely compounds that have impacts on people's brain chemistry that last longer than the life of the drug in the bloodstream. I'd like to note, though, that I'm not advocating going and taking psychedelic drugs in an attempt to better oneself. They're compounds which have debatable (and unresearched) longer term effects on those who imbibe them, and which have fairly established negative impact on people who take them and are at risk for developing a serious mental illness. (family history, etc.) I think that the appropriate thing to do is to pressure govt. and push society to allow for actual, well founded scientific research into the matter. (I say this as someone who has taken a psychedelic drug once, and wouldn't attribute any long term betterment or changes in personality/etc. to it. However, as someone fairly familiar with mental illness and its treatment, I think that it's reasonable to assert that drugs with strong impacts on brain chemistry--and certainly on the functioning of the seratonin system, which is often implicated in depression, bipolar disorder, and psychotic disorders might have beneficial uses in treatment of some individuals, and perhaps betterment of those with more 'normal' brain chemistry.)

adrianN 12y ago

I don't think I could "try religion" like I can try a drug. I can't just make myself believe in things that I think are impossible and without true belief, religion is just social interaction.

wpietri 12y ago
Depends on what kind of religion you mean. I'll occasionally pop in to Zen or Insight meditation sessions, and I've definitely found them helpful. You'd be hard pressed to say that Zen isn't a religion, but since it's not theistic, I don't think belief is particularly necessary for the experience. You might also check out Sam Harris's latest book. A noted atheist, he's recently written a book called, "Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion". I haven't read it, but I heard him on the radio last night, and it sounds like it is aimed squarely at your concern.