[willmhorne]

My question is:

If drugs "remove the long standing subconscious filters and biases that one has built over their life," what replaces them? Does one simply continue living into posterity without filters? I argue not, and in fact that, over time, the filters tend to come back without repeated exposure to drugs and drug-thought, and one is given a choice: return slightly-modified to regular life, or commit to taking drugs regularly, whereby one absorbs new filters/biases that change one's relationship with the world and are almost equally limiting. These "drug" filters/biases may generate beliefs such as the following: reality lurks behind what you see; we are all deluded; society is a myth; money is a myth; we are all one; we are being tricked into believing in this reality and, therefore, someone is tricking us (paranoia); etc.

While I agree that psychedelics do offer the important function of removing the filters/biases, I caution against presenting them as a uniformly positive method of doing so. I think they replace those filters with ones of their own making, and while thus leading to a different schema than sober exposure to regular life, they do not necessarily lead to a "better" one.

[short_sells_poo]

> If drugs "remove the long standing subconscious filters and biases that one has built over their life," what replaces them?

Perhaps I should've phrased this better. These filters are removed temporarily (for the 8-12 hours that the drug is active), then it is up to the individual to do what they will with the findings while the filters are gone. I don't think one needs repeated exposure either. I have seen many cases among my friends, most have never felt the need to repeat the experience.

There are risks of course, and a change for the worse is a distinct possibility. A dramatic change like delusions and paranoia are fairly rare, but are ostensibly a risk. There is a reason why every sensible source advises to do mental prep-work, and in a clinical setting, the whole treatment is overseen by a professional.

Like any mind altering substance, they can be abused.

[drilldrive]

>I think they replace those filters with ones of their own making, and while thus leading to a different schema than sober exposure to regular life, they do not necessarily lead to a "better" one.

Yes, partially along this line of thought I have consciously decided to not take any psychedelic drugs at all (or drugs other than coffee really). I am quite happy with my status quo, and taking psychedelic drugs may pull me out of it. I do realize that psychedelics do dissolve the ego, but I find having an ego is quite helpful in life in that most of my main accomplishments thus far have been by me standing up for myself and taking a shot in the dark. And I couldn't have done so without an ego.

[chillwaves]

I just want to add, these kind of knowledge comes from within. It is not sufficient to communicate the ideas with words. You likely know this, but people reading may not understand. One of the foundational concepts to me is the difference between abstractions like language, and real experience and also the inherent limitations of language and the idea of false knowledge that comes from reading instead of experiencing.

[cwkoss]

An interesting analogy I heard for psychedelics:

Your brain is like a snowy hill. As you ride a sled down it, you develop ruts/grooves in the snow. Eventually, no matter where you start sledding from, you'll end up at one of only a few locations at the bottom of the hill.

Psychedelics are like a fresh coat of powder, they let the brain reset some of the ruts, so certain starting conditions will end up in new resulting locations.

[willmhorne]

Interesting. This reminds me of Freud's Mystric Writing Pad: http://cscs.res.in/courses_folder/dataarchive/textfiles/text...