Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 258 posts

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#201

Post by rpearl »

tinalumfoil wrote: post #185
Sosh101 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think one thing it can do is allow you to view things with fewer of the biases, assumptions and other mental stuff you've accumulated over the years. Having a fresh (childlike?) view of things can give you a newfound appreciation for many things (e.g. the environment). > You know you're taking a drug that reliably induces feelings of "oceanic connectedness". Why should you change your worldview as a result? Isn't t…

> Isn't that a little bit like saying that you shouldn't change your views after reading a book, if you are aware that the book commonly changes views? No, it's closer to changing your belief from "chocolate is bad for you" to "chocolate is good for you" after having a particularly good-tasting piece of chocolate. Unlike reading a book on the health benefits of chocolate, your change in belief does not logically foll…

experiences and emotions are relevant evidence which can change your beliefs

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#202

Post by rpmisms »

mostertoaster wrote: post #79
tasty_freeze wrote: post #65

At the risk of being "that guy", it has to be said that this kind of study is unreliable. Posting a bunch of messages to r/drugs and r/psychedelics to come take their survey is going to suffer from all sorts of statistical biases. It is still better than the lowest for the study, the sample size of one: "Well this is what I experienced". Yet here I go. I have always been a materialist, and I've also never done drugs…

You should try going to an Orthodox Church and see how weird it is. It definitely makes you think of the spiritual meaning of things. THC alone makes me all spiritual feeling, and often in a good way. I think psychedelics would just take me to a scary spiritual place, not a euphoric one.

Specifically one of the old buildings where they use the most traditional music. It's quite literally trippy.

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#203

Post by tasty_freeze »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #130
klyrs wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't help but keep rereading this. The statement "I've never done drugs" juxtaposed with "20 and 30 experiments" is kinda funny to me.

He ment before that "experiments".

precisely. I should have written "I had never" instead "I have never".

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#204

Post by klyrs »

filoeleven wrote: post #184
klyrs wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, no. Drinking alcohol is "doing drugs." The imagery you're evoking is propaganda. Don't validate it.

So is drinking coffee. “Drugs” as an umbrella term is either too broad or too politicized to have much meaning without referring to specific substances. Even classing them by category can be tricky: caffeine and cocaine are both stimulants, for example.

Classifying drugs is, itself, a problem. For example, fentanyl is used in medical settings. The US has pushed an international categorizations of "no medical use" which paradoxically has prevented research into drugs that would find medical uses (research with a hypothesis that "drugs are bad," however, was allowed). We're finally seeing research into positive effects of what were once seen as recreational drugs. And that's why I dislike OC's statement about not using drugs -- it's playing to the propagandized distinction that drugs are evil (but coffee, nicotine, alcohol, thorazine and gabapentin are all fine)

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#205

Post by srcreigh »

I know of three spiritual teachers who describe psychedelics as a door to the spiritual world.

Ram Dass the Jewish Psychology Professor at Harvard/Hippie/Hindu. See his famous book Be Here Now. [1] He passed away last year

Fr. Stephen De Young and Fr. Stephen Damick (PhD), Eastern Orthodox Christian priests. Psychedelics are mentioned near the end of episode 2 of their podcast. [2]

[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41580312-be-here-now

[2]: https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/lordofspirits

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#206

Post by jklinger410 »

malermeister wrote: post #189
jklinger410 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X ray vision, heat vision, electron microscopes all exist and translate things outside of our visual ranges into something we can perceive. None of those validate LSD induced hallucinations. If you have some ideas that those technologies are wrong, go enter the field and prove it! Until then this conjecture is intellectually lazy.

All of those readings enter your mind through your senses. All the x-ray, heat, whatever readings all have to pass through your audiovisual senses before you know about them. If your eyes and ears deceive you, all the fancy technology outside your eyes and ears can't help you.

We can know things outside of what the mind can process with results such as: if this thing is hot and you touch it you will catch on fire and die. The brain cannot incorrectly perceive that.

You are trying to find data to prove your theory, not simply study what is observed. It's not science. It's just conjecture.

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#207

Post by gavinray »

dylan604 wrote: post #200
tasty_freeze wrote: post #65

At the risk of being "that guy", it has to be said that this kind of study is unreliable. Posting a bunch of messages to r/drugs and r/psychedelics to come take their survey is going to suffer from all sorts of statistical biases. It is still better than the lowest for the study, the sample size of one: "Well this is what I experienced". Yet here I go. I have always been a materialist, and I've also never done drugs…

>The first time I did ... a very close relative to psilocybin,.... It was a 25mg-ish dose.... It was far more intense You think? Jeebus! Terrance McKenna would call 10mg of psilocybin a heroic dose. Some of the most intense visuals I have ever seen were on 10mg of psilocybin. So if close relative means that it requires 2.5x more, then okay, but if they are anywhere near 1:1, then that was a freaking monster dose.

25mg of 4-AcO-DMT taken orally is roughly equivalent to ~1/8th ounce of mushrooms.

Potency isn't quite as much as crystalline psilocybin (4-HO-DMT).

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#208

Post by tasty_freeze »

dylan604 wrote: post #200
tasty_freeze wrote: post #65

At the risk of being "that guy", it has to be said that this kind of study is unreliable. Posting a bunch of messages to r/drugs and r/psychedelics to come take their survey is going to suffer from all sorts of statistical biases. It is still better than the lowest for the study, the sample size of one: "Well this is what I experienced". Yet here I go. I have always been a materialist, and I've also never done drugs…

>The first time I did ... a very close relative to psilocybin,.... It was a 25mg-ish dose.... It was far more intense You think? Jeebus! Terrance McKenna would call 10mg of psilocybin a heroic dose. Some of the most intense visuals I have ever seen were on 10mg of psilocybin. So if close relative means that it requires 2.5x more, then okay, but if they are anywhere near 1:1, then that was a freaking monster dose.

According to the psychonaut wiki, 25mg is the boundary between common and strong doses.

https://psychonautwiki.org/wiki/4-AcO-DMT

In writing this message, I went back to my notes and see that I had taken 20mg, not 25mg, that first time.

I abbreviated my history of experiments in my original message, but I had actually had first tried a different tryptamine in a series of ramped experiments a few weeks apart. It was 4-aco-det, aka ethacetin or ethylacybin. 4mg, then 10mg, then 18mg, then 30mg. I chose that one because my reading indicated it was less intense than 4-aco-dmt. All were underwhelming, with little body load, no open eye visuals, and mild, gossamer closed eyed visuals.

When I switched to 4-aco-dmt I should have ramped as well, but the previous experiments led me to believe that I was a low responder to tryptamines, so I started at 20mg. That is when I learned my lesson to not make assumptions: always ramp with a new substance from a very low dose.

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#209

Post by jklinger410 »

pmichaud wrote: post #188
jklinger410 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X ray vision, heat vision, electron microscopes all exist and translate things outside of our visual ranges into something we can perceive. None of those validate LSD induced hallucinations. If you have some ideas that those technologies are wrong, go enter the field and prove it! Until then this conjecture is intellectually lazy.

Suppose for a moment that you and the people talking to you in this thread are talking past each other. What do you imagine the other people are trying to communicate to you, in their own terms?

They are positing a that all reality is unknowable because our senses can be fooled, and our brain is an unreliable narrator (if you will).

No matter what evidence I bring to the table, they will simply say "but what if you are being fooled?"

Re: Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs

#210

Post by dr_dshiv »

scubakid wrote: post #183
namlem wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think being familiar with the basics of the standard model of physics (very basic, I don't claim to know much at all) influences one's perception of the experience induced by psychedelics. I would say that I am still more or less a materialist, though with greater appreciation for the idea of panpsychism, but really what I believe is that these ideas are not in conflict. The ephemeral, empty nature of all things is…

For me, panpsychism has never landed at all, though it is a fun idea to think about. I tend to see animals/humans as exceedingly complex (and most likely deterministic) systems, of which what we call "consciousness" is an emergent property. From that viewpoint, applying consciousness down the chain to the lower-level building blocks doesn't make a lot of sense.

You don’t have to go down the chain, you can go up, too. E.g., groups, organizations, ecosystems, etc.

It’s not that individual electrons need to be conscious. Instead, for instance, free energy minimizing systems might be conscious— and those are pervasive in the universe at large and small scale.

Post reply on HN