Live data from Hacker News

A Philosopher on Drugs

wired.com

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#31
Just for the sake of drawing ideas from far afield, I will make reference to the Hermetic axiom of "as above, so below; as below, so above" for the purposes of this entry.

Interpreted through a lens where the "above" corresponds to the mental, ideal, immaterial, the rational and the irrational, what can be very loosely referred to as "the psyche;" and the "below" corresponds to the physical world, governed by the laws of nature; this maxim can be understood to mean, "as exists in the psyche, so in the physical world; as exists in the physical world, so in the psyche."

Our psychological state influences our course of action in the physical world, and the response we get from the physical world in turn influences our psychological state in a mutually reciprocal relationship. What is more significant than just one or the other is the relationship between the psychological and the physical; how thoughts can precede actions, and how actions can cause reactions within the psyche (this is how I understand what Daniel M. Ingram refers to as "Cause and Effect" in his text, "Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha" [0]).

Reality exists between these two poles, in that we interpolate between the discrete, moment-to-moment perceptual data we receive from the five sensory organs, as well as the intellectual, intuitive, & psychological data we receive from the sixth "sense door" of mind, in order to construct a continuous view of the world. Thus, I would hazard to claim, if we wish to alter (at least our subjective, or "microcosmic" lens on) our reality, we have the option of either perturbing our psychological state (the way of the Jungian analyst, the mystic, the Yogi, the devotee, and so on), or our physical state (by altering our mundane life circumstance, diet, lifestyle, and so on).

I view psychedelics as instrumental in probing the boundary between these two poles of this mutually reciprocal relationship between mind and body, being chemical (physical) agents that induce immediately apparent effects within the psyche; they allow one to explore the ways in which perception and our internal, psychological reactions to that perceptual data are related. Psychedelics are a unique tool that allow one to alter (however crudely, imprecisely, and quantifiable only in the loosest of senses) their psychological parameters in such a way that allows for, at the very least, the base realization that:

there is more than one way to think about and perceive the world.

To the extent that our thoughts and perceptions about the world influence our actions within it, and the feedback we receive from it, it is at least interesting to temporarily inhabit different ways of apprehending it, to come to a more diverse view of reality that has appreciated it, if only briefly, from multiple different angles. The insights we may or may not arrive at, having contemplated our view of reality from a different vantage point, may reconfigure our internal psychological state in a way that influences future action.

The alchemical goal of the transmutation of base metal into gold was more than a physical pursuit; it was a spiritual one, whose object was the reconfiguration of the base psyche, victim to the whims and vicissitudes of the urges and desires of the animal self, into "enlightened" consciousness, continuously aware, present, and able to choose on a moment-to-moment basis the next course of action, however subtle. Through the reconfiguration of one's psyche in a permanent and lasting manner (the "magnum opus"), by the Hermetic axiom aforementioned, one is able to forever reconfigure their relationship to the physical world and (purportedly) act within it in a manner that more closely coheres with one's personal view of "what is right."

[0] https://www.mctb.org/mctb2/table-of-contents/part-iv-insight...

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#32

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

Here’s an excerpt from Michael Pollan’s book How to Change Your Mind. The psychologist here is a woman approximately his age (early 60s at the time) who he describes as a prominent psychologist:

>Specifically, the psychologist felt that LSD gave her insight into how young children perceive the world. Kids’ perceptions are not mediated by expectations and conventions in the been-there, done-that way that adult perception is; as adults, she explained, our minds don’t simply take in the world as it is so much as they make educated guesses about it. Relying on these guesses, which are based on past experience, saves the mind time and energy, as when, say, it’s trying to figure out what that fractal pattern of green dots in its visual field might be. (The leaves on a tree, probably.) LSD appears to disable such conventionalized, shorthand modes of perception and, by doing so, restores a childlike immediacy, and sense of wonder, to our experience of reality, as if we were seeing everything for the first time. (Leaves!)

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#33

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

Psychedelics don't show you some deeper truth, they show you that everything is false and THAT in a sense is some deeper truth. IMO psychedelics completely annihilate epistemology.

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#34

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

Likely because a pint of Ben & Jerry's will not quiet down your default mode network as much as some psychedelica do..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_mode_network#Modulatio...

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#35

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

> but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chemistry in a specific way?

People think all kinds of weird things, and if you've got some delusions, when you take these kinds of drugs you'll either get more delusions, or you'll get shaken out of the delusion, but they aren't ever going to validate them, because they're delusions!

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#36

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

2 Points to consider. 1. Brain scan shows that the brain activity is acutally decreasing on psychedelics. 2. Most people hold a hidden assumption that the sober state is more truthful, which really can't be proven.

But it can be proven: that’s what science does. We perform experiments to verify in multiple ways that the theories about the world that we’ve developed are consistent with the evidence.

In contrast, if you believe that e.g. the machine elves some people see on DMT are real, there are all sorts of experiments you could do to test that. But not many people bother to try, because at some level they know they’re not real.

Of course, you can speculate that these mental realms are a different aspect of reality and not subject to the same constraints, etc., to which the obvious answer is that’s right, they’re called fantasies or delusions.

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#37
post #3

Quite a read. I enjoyed it. He describes the point of view you get in certain altered states very well, poetically and with subtly that matches my experiences. I’m sure strict materialists will find his characterization of them unsatisfying, and maybe he should have railed against the other extreme (psychedelic woo woo mystics) a bit more to balance it out — he has one quick comment at the end warning against that si…

Why should our reaction be dread? Why not awe, or joy, or something else?

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#38

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

I don't think anyone assumes that! Or very few. Once you've tried it, you can become convinced it's true but that's not an assumption that's an update. The assumption, drilled in from school at least in my case, is that all drugs represent a dangerous yet somehow also cowardly, lazy break from reality

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#39

> But goodness, here I am, still philosophizing like a stoned undergrad in a black-lighted dorm room. Mhmm. Genuine question, and maybe it's just something I'd have to experience to really understand, but why is it so common for people to think psychedelics are opening us up to what is ""real"" or some deeper truth, instead of assuming that the experiences are just what happens when you completely overload brain chem…

Here’s an excerpt from Michael Pollan’s book How to Change Your Mind. The psychologist here is a woman approximately his age (early 60s at the time) who he describes as a prominent psychologist: >Specifically, the psychologist felt that LSD gave her insight into how young children perceive the world. Kids’ perceptions are not mediated by expectations and conventions in the been-there, done-that way that adult percept…

That's such a great way of putting it.

Re: A Philosopher on Drugs

#40
It's a good read, but, eh, I don't know. I've been there, done that, when it comes both to hard materialism and far-flung spirituality; I don't know what the answer is, I also don't know if taking excessively high doses of psychedelics actually helped me get there or if it just helped me chill out and stop being so neurotic. I guess, in the end, I'm comfortable now with not knowing, and that's enough--but that doesn't mean I'll stop asking questions.
Post reply on HN