[Kroniker]

One of my favorite Terrence McKenna quotes:

"Once you've gotten the message, hang up the phone."

Hallucinogens may deliver you the message, but you need to know to take it once you have it, and not go crazy taking more and more. I have a friend who fell down that rabbit hole. Doesn't seem to end well.

[Animats]

In "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman", Feynman describes using LSD at the encouragement of John Lily, who claimed it would improve his thinking. Feynman tried it, and thought he'd solved a problem he was working on. As he was preparing to give a talk on the solution, he realized that he hadn't solved the problem; he'd only hallucinated that he had solved the problem. He was furious. That ended his experimentation with LSD. He wrote "I like to think, and I don't want to break the machine."

[SiVal]

I loved that story in the book, because it was so much like my own experience with simple dreaming. We often hear about the brilliant creativity of our dreaming minds and the deep answers that await us if we'll pay attention to our dreams. I figured that was safer than drugs, so I kept a dream journal, because it was supposed to help you remember your dreams better (it does) and unleash the genius of your unconscious.

Over time, I had several instances of making some progress on a question (programming logic design, for example) as I was on the border of awake and asleep, but these were essentially just the result of awake-enough thinking through of a problem as I lay there just before I fell asleep.

But I did have a few instances of real solutions in my sleep that I thought were major breakthroughs. The funny thing was that almost the instant I woke up, I saw fatal flaws in those "breakthroughs" that had been completely invisible to the triumphant, celebrating genius that I was in the dream. Literally seconds after regaining consciousness, I would see how ridiculous my brilliant idea was because of something I had completely overlooked in my dream state but was instantly obvious in my waking state. (Waking up literally does bring some crucial part of your reasoning back online.)

After a few of these, I put away the dream journal with a chuckle and got another good laugh when I read about Feynman's experience with LSD. After my own experience, I can easily imagine how you might feel as though your intoxicated mind was somehow operating on a "higher plane" when cut free of the restraints of reality, but it doesn't mean that what you discover there is of any real value back in the world of reality.

As much fun as it sounds, with no benefits beyond the entertainment value and the serious risks involved--a top student and mentor of mine back in school raised his consciousness so high that he lost the ability to feed or dress himself in the real world ever again--I'll just stick to actual consciousness.

[fulafel]

There are anecdotes about successful breakthroughs as well. The more famous one is Francis Crick coming up with the double-helix of DNA while on LSD.

Then there's a well known psych experiment from the 60s that claims pretty good results: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelics_in_problem-solvin...

[psyc]

I learned OpenGL during an LSD trip. My subjective experience was that the information just went in without any resistance. I've since written a lot of OpenGL code, and I can run it all and see that it objectively works. Of course, I've learned hundreds of other things without taking any drugs. But, again subjectively, it's usually more incremental and seems like more of a struggle with attention and comprehension. At least, I can say that I didn't get anything wrong with OpenGL. I didn't hallucinate that I learned it. The programs I wrote immediately following the trip worked fine.

[civilian]

I agree. I got the message, and hung up the phone.

My friend is also have difficulty leaving the path. A couple of months ago my buddy & I got some urgent texts from him-- he had taken a really large dose of LSD and ended up spending the next 12 hours in a emergency room's psych ward.

I think that part of the reason that we have this B.S. propaganda around psychedelics (i.e. "They're the key to enlightenment!") is that it can be pretty hard to encourage people to try drugs. And while they aren't the key to enlightenment, they are just such a _different_ experience that it can be... interesting, or help personal growth, in some lesser but still substantial ways. But that's not a great soundbite.

Marketing is much harder than we give it credit for.

//edit although on further googling, I think the quote is from Alan Watts and it's about sober meditation after a trip.

> "Psychedelic experience is only a glimpse of genuine mystical insight, but a glimpse which can be matured and deepened by the various ways of meditation in which drugs are no longer necessary or useful. If you get the message, hang up the phone. For psychedelic drugs are simply instruments, like microscopes, telescopes, and telephones. The biologist does not sit with eye permanently glued to the microscope, he goes away and works on what he has seen..."

[NotSammyHagar]

> it can be pretty hard to encourage people to try drugs

I think that in our society we have a problem with people taking too many drugs already. Deadly smoking of tobacco is decreasing but still too common (killed my mom). Booze and coffee are things people tolerate but use to adjust their mood. Pot seems to finally becoming accepted by law abiding society. But do we need to encourage more than this? As a parent of a teenager who is generally tolerant of such things, I'm suddenly feeling I want society to have less drugs ;-)

Seriously, would society be improved with more psychedelics?

[civilian]

I think you should read (or listen to) Sam Harris talk about psychedelics. (I really enjoy him, but my dad thinks that he's boring as shit. Either way, you can be reassured that he's not someone who jumps to conclusions-- he's a methodical person.) https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/drugs-and-the-meaning...

The key paragraphs are:

> I have two daughters who will one day take drugs. Of course, I will do everything in my power to see that they choose their drugs wisely, but a life lived entirely without drugs is neither foreseeable nor, I think, desirable. I hope they someday enjoy a morning cup of tea or coffee as much as I do. If they drink alcohol as adults, as they probably will, I will encourage them to do it safely. If they choose to smoke marijuana, I will urge moderation.[2] Tobacco should be shunned, and I will do everything within the bounds of decent parenting to steer them away from it. Needless to say, if I knew that either of my daughters would eventually develop a fondness for methamphetamine or crack cocaine, I might never sleep again. But if they don’t try a psychedelic like psilocybin or LSD at least once in their adult lives, I will wonder whether they had missed one of the most important rites of passage a human being can experience.

> This is not to say that everyone should take psychedelics. As I will make clear below, these drugs pose certain dangers. Undoubtedly, some people cannot afford to give the anchor of sanity even the slightest tug. It has been many years since I took psychedelics myself, and my abstinence is born of a healthy respect for the risks involved. However, there was a period in my early twenties when I found psilocybin and LSD to be indispensable tools, and some of the most important hours of my life were spent under their influence. Without them, I might never have discovered that there was an inner landscape of mind worth exploring.

[collyw]

Psychedelics have far less harm on health than the legal drugs you listed.

[saiya-jin]

in place where such an evil thing as alcohol is legal and widely accepted, there is no good enough excuse to have psychedelics banned by state.

I am not saying everybody should do them, far from it, but people shouldn't be banned from access on their free will under threat of destroying the life by jail time - that's beyond ridiculous.

[tejaswidp]

Alan watts said that. Terrence Mckenna would probably say the opposite.

[Alex3917]

Terence McKenna used that quote a lot actually, but it was from Watts.

[metaphorm]

there were two Terrence McKenna's.

One was a carnival barker, a demagogue, and showman who preaches to the choir about all kinds of things that excites them. those people bought tickets to hear him speak, and indeed, he gave them what they wanted.

the other was a deeply insightful and contemplative man who was a scholar, philosopher, and mystic. he said what he meant and what he believed to be true, regardless of what the audience might have thought about it.

there were two Alan Watts as well, of course. he was a public persona just as much as Terrence ever was. More-so actually.

[hosh]

It's true even if you don't take psychedelics. There's a tendency to confuse peak experiences (however that comes about) and awakening.

Bonnie Greewall, who wrote her PhD dissertation on specific form of spiritual emergence in the field of transpersonal psychology is one person who teaches this. She speaks of people who, having confused those peak experiences with "enlightenment", goes on trying to seek out greater and greater experiences. There is a kind of withdrawal effect that happens when the next big thing doesn't show up. This is in contrast to awakening, in which one is aware of true nature as awareness. This awareness is available in all states, whether blissful or wrathful, with or without psychedelics.

At the end of the day though, it's still about awareness, whether that is in the ceremony or in the ordinary life.

I think the psychedelics gives the kick out of the nest some people need. I know a lot of folks roll their eyes at some of the things being said in the article, but having participated in ceremonies and hanged out with the folks who go, they are not as far-fetched as you might think it is. Both the cringe-inducing quotes and the folks who roll their eyes are, I think, representative of the the spiritual miasma and dis-ease in modern society.

And since I got into some drama here the last time I said something like this, I'm going to try to write as clearly here: while there are some people who can answer what these peak experiences and these spiritual paths do for themselves as individuals, we as a human species and a race _as a whole_ still have not figured out the place and purpose of spirituality in modernity. Modernity was first the separation, and then the complete disassociation of spirituality. A Dagara medicine man friend of mine puts it, "there were the Keepers, the Breakers, and the Menders". The Keepers are traditionalists. The Breakers are modernists. The Menders are only emerging.

Modernity broke the traditional views, with some proponents seeing themselves as heroes for doing so. Although it isn't as if all traditional views were all that great, in the glee to toss everything out that smacked of traditional, we left a big gaping hole in our beings. We don't even have the language in modernity to speak of this without feeling cynical, or opening ourselves to being attacked for being superstitious.

This is the hole that traditional spirit medicines like Ayahuasca helps now -- despite, as the article says, it wasn't traditionally used that way. It just happens to be something a lot of us need, even if we don't always know we need it.

But since we don't have modern (or post-modern) language or framework to speak about spirituality in a coherent way ... well, let's just say we're all engaged in a grand discussion about that, groping together towards the answer. Ayahuasca is part of that ongoing groping we humans are doing.

Whatever we come up with, it's going to radically include both traditional and modern view, both rational -- and yes, irrational and transrational things about our world.