Community of Infinite Colour

[chilli]

Well maybe that comment did lower the tone a bit but to be honest I was a bit annoyed that Greg had called me a douchebag and written off what I was saying as inane.

Still, I can be a bit caustic at times.. I genuinely apologize if I hurt your feelings Greg.

However!

I don't trust people who claim to be a mystic by way of introduction, or any self-styled religious leaders/guides/gurus/whatever.

I don't like the disingenuous way you make out like you are above seeking followers, when that is quite obviously exactly what you are here to do.

I resent the way you are encouraging a for me/against me mentality and encouraging division because it raises your esteem in some people's eyes.

It turns me off when you get so defensive at those who question or doubt your motives, and make out like they have a problem that has nothing to do with you.

It also sets off alarm bells when you take such offense when you are insulted, and then act like a martyr and milk it to again foster division and get people "on your side"

I don't like the way you promote an us/them mentality when you claim to be a nondualist.

I am very wary of religious people who are looking for financial support, or try to connect their religion with getting money.

I think your new religion and crusade against the government have more to do with feeding your ego than you may consciously realize.

Basically, I am really suspicious of people who act the way you have in this thread, your behavior reminds me of all the goofball cult leaders and religious predators I have ever known or read about, and I think people are naive and misguided to trust you.

I find it disheartening that the way this discussion has been interpreted by others here is a whole lot of jerks and douchebags who irrationally hate Greg, when in reality there has been only two or three of us who have said anything negative, and have copped a lot of shit for doing so.

If you were part of any religion other than a psychedelic, non-dualist one I think you would have a very different reaction from people in this forum.. in other words, if what you were saying and claiming didn't pander to the a priori belief structures of a lot of people here I think you would be held to a very different standard. People mock and insult Christians and Muslims frequently on these forums and it is not seen as a problem.

I am not ashamed of any of this, despite your implication that I should be, but I am sorry again if what I said about being lonely seemed harsh Greg.. I think living in the bush would be awesome, and it is my long term goal! That comment was intended as mockery, but I didn't think it would cause such a strong reaction. But it was also self-mockery as I consider myself something of an internet junkie, as you can probably tell from my post count.. actually I thought most people who frequented the net were lonely and bored. It was meant like "so mr religious big shot, you are just the same as the rest of us internet junkies," bt I can see that didn't really come across in my haste to offend you.

I see nothing wrong with a good insult or mockery now and again, for instance although I used to defend them on the grounds of religious tolerance I now love to join in mocking the silly beliefs and absurd behavior of fundamentalist Christians and Muslims.. they deserve everything they get. And again, if someone from one of these religions had been proselytizing here and looking for financial support they would have been pissed on and laughed out of the door.

My aim is to confront, challenge and yes even cause offense, but not (consciously) to hurt people's feelings.. there is a fine line though and sometimes I get the two mixed up, and perhaps I have overreacted to what is really something qute innocuous because of my own personal problems with religions in the past, but it is only by painful trial and error that I have learned to trust my bullshit radar and intuition about people, it has served me well so far.

Still, I hope you can forgive me for hurting your feelings.

Edited January 17, 2012 by chilli

[FancyPants]

IMHO, Paul Tobin's "Rejection of Pascal's Wager" (http://www.rejection...scalswager.net/) is the best site on the web for those looking for a position that is sceptical, yet respectful of Christianity. It is thoroughly researched, superbly referenced and written in a straightforward and easy to understand manner. I've relied extensively on it over the years. It also covers a huge swathe of issues. For example, the answer to your particular inquiry can be found here: http://www.rejection...s.html#teaching

I highly encourage you to buy his book, http://www.bookdepos...n/9780755204618, particularly if like me, you enjoy inviting Mormons and Jehovahs into your lair...

Charles Manson committed his crimes in 1969, while LSD had already been made illegal in October 1968, so the damage was largely done by the time he came onto the scene. I love it when people mention Manson as the epitome of their LSD concerns. My response goes something like this:

"So you are saying that despite millions of people using it over the last few decades, LSD is so dangerous that you have to go back over forty years for an example of someone doing something bad with it? What are the odds that I could come up with an example linking alcohol to multiple murders in just the last forty days?"

Even without knowing that over half of murders are linked to alcohol, most people are smart enough to not push the point.

There is no evidence that Manson's followers were tripping when they committed their crimes. I've certainly never seen any reference to it in descriptions of the court proceedings (although if I'm wrong, please let me know). In fact, a 1972 article, "Homicide During a Psychosis Induced by LSD", P Reich and R Hepps, reported that their search of the Medical literature had identified only three previous homicides associated with LSD (their's made four) and Manson wasn't mentioned.

 

Thanks for the links and book rec (which I'll try to get to when I'm less hectic)

My ignorance of the Manson shit is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making. Insinuating I'm not smart is not a smart way to address the issues of poorly handled criticism.

No doubt you're a smart guy, Greg, and I wouldn't be so silly as to enter a debating argument with you; but you still haven't allayed the justified fears of some here who don't care to see another form of Ideology which may or may not arise to infamous popularity - at the detriment to ANY SINGLE PERSON.

[SunChaser]

lol, there really is no point entering a debate with our friend Gregory, fancy pants. Even if you had an IQ that smashed the 150 barrier. Since he'll just label you as a troll or a fool or whatever and ignore you the second you get on top of him.

His deeply intrenched in a drug induced fantasy of his own superiority and has convinced himself he can change the world with LSD and mushrooms. None of this is ever going to go anywhere and the crash is inevitable. I kind of feel sorry for the bloke.

Might as well just indulge the delusion and treat it with a grain of salt. I just personally hope he doesn't crash to hard when the novelty of the drugs wear off and the reality of the situation knocks him to the ground like a bag of bricks.

Gregory, psychedelics are awesome and also lots of fun to indulge in, well we wait out our home coming that is coming to us all. But they ain't as significant as you think, they are not going to change the world. The Australian government ain't going to change there stance on hallucinogens in our life time either. It's just how it is. But I guess your going to have to go on your own journey and learn the hard way, like I did and like I'm sure many other members here did.

But like I said in another post, try not to let them drain all your energy and passion as you come to the realization. Because for some people, it can be a killer.

Peace

Edited January 20, 2012 by jabez

[Amazonian]

His deeply intrenched in a drug induced fantasy of his own superiority and has convinced himself he can change the world with LSD and mushrooms.

psychedelics are awesome and also lots of fun to indulge in,

But they ain't as significant as you think, they are not going to change the world.

Peace

 

I probably shouldn't comment here as i haven't been following this thread 100%, but my opinion is that maybe psychedelics could change the world? Like, imagine a mass dose, a good dose, world wide. It couldn't hurt , could it ?. Might be like living in the 60's if nothing else.

[SunChaser]

So how's that all going? You know, with Timothy Leary's little acid fueled utopia and all those other hippies that were going to change the world with LSD and psychedelics.

Peace

[Psylo]

....making as much progress as the Occupy movement.

[dionysus]

jabez, those guys and gals did change the world, albeit not to the extent they were hoping. with out them, it is likely that a lot of us would not know many of the plants we are here to learn about and grow and may not even have ever heard of 'lsd and psychedelics'. all forms of the art, from written word to music theater and visual arts have taken on a great change and some of my personal favourite stuff has been produced by people in some way affiliated with the 60's hippie seen, and they have influenced me greatly. sure, we may not all my running round hugging eachother exchanging berries drugs and vegetables in a world of peace of sex, but what they did achieve is still impressive, i think.

[SunChaser]

I'm not getting into a debate about this my friend. You talk to me like I haven't studied this stuff my whole life and don't love psychedelics with an obsessive passion. I'm more than well aware of the positives psychedelics can have. I lecture everyone I meet about it constantly, it's almost the only thing I talk about.

But there are always two sides to a story. There is also a very real negative side to it when people start to take it all to seriously. Like broken lives, psychosis and even suicide as an example.

But like I said, people who have convinced themselves they can create a utopia on earth, simply by taking really fun and creative enhancing drugs, will just need to go on there own journey and learn the hard way.

Peace

[sapito]

I think a lot of trippers forget that tripping is not for everyone. IMO a mass dose world wide would be chaos. Even in cultures where these plants are considered sacred its not as if everyone in the culture is into. Its easy to romanticize something you are a passionate about.

Just want to point out too that this current topic is a tangent and not something Greg is promoting.

[whitewind]

I probably shouldn't comment here as i haven't been following this thread 100%, but my opinion is that maybe psychedelics could change the world? Like, imagine a mass dose, a good dose, world wide. It couldn't hurt , could it ?. Might be like living in the 60's if nothing else.

 

We all take homeopathic doses on a daily basis, especially those of us who are constantly playing with plants!

Perhaps we should just make people play with plants a bit more. It's usually those people who have never had any interaction with the natural world who are so damned afraid of it and seem to want to trash it most.

[7baz]

i often do wonder if DMT itself is whats going to be the root cause in such a shift in human consciousness.

i mean the rate of people experiencing DMT is climbing and its climbing fast.

all walks of life and in all four corners of the globe.

i cannot possibly suggest , imply or conclude a DMT experience is going to make people think " oh so there is a god "

Rather i would look at it more like.. " oh.. there is so much more then we can possibly perceive with our 5 sensors "

the term GOD is simple a term of expression, a concept of nature we simply do not comprehend nor understand.

there is no proof of this being or entity called god , it has never been proven scientifically.

it doesnt matter how many churches we go to or mystical states we experience on drugs.. it still simply does not prove or pin point any directions to this so called GOD.

we justify our understanding of life and all things by using this being or entity called " GOD" because we have no other way to explain such things with rational thoughts.

we cant even be sure the universe began with the big bang.. hence why its called a theory.

heck science still does not fully understand the human brain , let alone the universe.

i believe we will know the answers when we die.

until that day comes we can only hope , speculate , wonder and dream of what is outside the box we call real life.

Edited January 22, 2012 by 7baz

[GregKasarik]

Well maybe that comment did lower the tone a bit but to be honest I was a bit annoyed that Greg had called me a douchebag and written off what I was saying as inane.

 

I most certainly did not call you a douchebag. What I said was:

I have no problem with people doubting me, doubting my motives, or suspecting that I'm a phoney. indeed, I expect it. I do have a problem with them being douchebags about it.

 

You would only need to feel that I called you a douchebag, if you had acted like one. Did you?

Still, I can be a bit caustic at times.. I genuinely apologize if I hurt your feelings Greg.

This isn't about hurt feelings. It is about treating others with respect and empathy.

However!

I don't trust people who claim to be a mystic by way of introduction, or any self-styled religious leaders/guides/gurus/whatever.

 

So, like so many other people throughout history, you distrust mystics?

Or perhaps you just don't know what a mysticism really is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysticism

And as far as being a leader or guru is concerned, I'm not sure what the problem is. Do you really dislike everyone who has a vision for a better world, or merely those who are spiritual? Would you really like to live in a world where nothing ever got done and where everyone simply milled around like confused sheep?

I don't deny that I'm a leader. It is part of my temperament. But with respect to the whole legalisation thing, I have come further in a year than many have in decades, with the Victorian Department of Health now willing to review the literature on Transcendent Compounds.

If I lead, I do so by example. I don't ask people to do things, or make sacrifices that I haven't already made.

I don't like the disingenuous way you make out like you are above seeking followers, when that is quite obviously exactly what you are here to do.

This is your problem, not mine and the result of your own baseless assumptions. If you start out by assuming that everything I say is a lie, then all you will every hear are "lies".

Once again, I am not looking for "followers".

I don't deny that I am seeking people's support and see nothing wrong with doing so. Only a fool would think that they can achieve anything worthwhile on their own.

I resent the way you are encouraging a for me/against me mentality and encouraging division because it raises your esteem in some people's eyes.

It turns me off when you get so defensive at those who question or doubt your motives, and make out like they have a problem that has nothing to do with you.

It also sets off alarm bells when you take such offense when you are insulted, and then act like a martyr and milk it to again foster division and get people "on your side"

I don't like the way you promote an us/them mentality when you claim to be a nondualist.

 

It would be much easier for many here if I simply accepted whatever pettiness and abuse was hurled my way, instead of holding out for a higher standard.

Sorry, but ad hominem isn't argument. Pettiness and snide remarks aren't either. If you expect me to simply to skulk off with my tail between my legs, rather than defend myself, then you will be sadly mistaken.

You appear distressed that I don't engage in the sort of flame war that you would like and instead do my best to respond in a calm and measured manner. If this is "acting like a martyr" and if people respect me for doing so, then might I suggest that you adopt a similar manner? It might go well for you.

As I have said before, how we conduct ourselves is a reflection of who we are and what we value.

I think it reflects badly on you that you'll happily attack me for posting as I have done, but are silent when faced with this: http://www.shaman-au...showtopic=30465

I am very wary of religious people who are looking for financial support, or try to connect their religion with getting money.

 

Good. If more people had your wariness, then there would be less harm done by religious cults that aim to defraud and control.

However, I would remind you yet again, that my "religion" is quite different from most. My aim is to encourage people to think for themselves and to not simply believe something because I say it is true. It was no accident that my homepage (www.kasarik.com) contains the statement:

 

"While my views on the nature of the Divine are relevant, nobody should believe them purely because I believe them."

Yes, there will be some people who believe what I believe because I believe it, just as there are some who believe what the Pope believes because he believes it. That is human nature and beyond my control. What I can do is to try to limit the number.

I don't deny that at some point, I will most likely be asking people for support and that some of this may need to be financial. My advocacy has made it very difficult to find work and if I am to achieve my goal of legalisation, I am not going to be able to do so on my own. Meeting, greeting and influencing isn't cheap and if people chose to pay me for representing their interests, then why should you care?

But to claim that obtaining money was my intention when I posted here is a pure misrepresentation. I have not asked anyone here for money, and you won't even find a spot for donations on my website.

But from the sounds of it, you simply object to me because my message is overtly spiritual.

I think your new religion and crusade against the government have more to do with feeding your ego than you may consciously realize.

This might be true. It might also not be true. But how could you know?

Of course, ego is something that I also address on my homepage and you could have just asked me why I have embarked upon this "crusade".

Basically, I am really suspicious of people who act the way you have in this thread, your behavior reminds me of all the goofball cult leaders and religious predators I have ever known or read about, and I think people are naive and misguided to trust you.

 

Good. Be suspicious. You don't know me from a bar of soap and suspicion is a perfectly healthy response to the unknown. I am certainly not going to give you a hard time for being suspicious.

I will, however, give you a hard time for being rude.

I find it disheartening that the way this discussion has been interpreted by others here is a whole lot of jerks and douchebags who irrationally hate Greg, when in reality there has been only two or three of us who have said anything negative, and have copped a lot of shit for doing so.

Who's the martyr now?

There have been more than "two or three" who have expressed concerns about me and my aims. The difference between those who have "copped a lot of shit" and those who haven't is way in which those concerns were expressed. Had these comments been addressed with temperance and respect, nobody would have batted an eye.

Of course, even if those comments are addressed respectfully, I would still argue the point with those who I disagree with, but we'd all have more fun.

[GregKasarik]

If you were part of any religion other than a psychedelic, non-dualist one I think you would have a very different reaction from people in this forum.. in other words, if what you were saying and claiming didn't pander to the a priori belief structures of a lot of people here I think you would be held to a very different standard. People mock and insult Christians and Muslims frequently on these forums and it is not seen as a problem.

I am not ashamed of any of this, despite your implication that I should be, but I am sorry again if what I said about being lonely seemed harsh Greg.. I think living in the bush would be awesome, and it is my long term goal! That comment was intended as mockery, but I didn't think it would cause such a strong reaction. But it was also self-mockery as I consider myself something of an internet junkie, as you can probably tell from my post count.. actually I thought most people who frequented the net were lonely and bored. It was meant like "so mr religious big shot, you are just the same as the rest of us internet junkies," bt I can see that didn't really come across in my haste to offend you.

I see nothing wrong with a good insult or mockery now and again, for instance although I used to defend them on the grounds of religious tolerance I now love to join in mocking the silly beliefs and absurd behavior of fundamentalist Christians and Muslims.. they deserve everything they get. And again, if someone from one of these religions had been proselytizing here and looking for financial support they would have been pissed on and laughed out of the door.

My aim is to confront, challenge and yes even cause offense, but not (consciously) to hurt people's feelings.. there is a fine line though and sometimes I get the two mixed up, and perhaps I have overreacted to what is really something qute innocuous because of my own personal problems with religions in the past, but it is only by painful trial and error that I have learned to trust my bullshit radar and intuition about people, it has served me well so far.

Still, I hope you can forgive me for hurting your feelings.

 

I accept your apology, but question your need to insult and mock others. Do you really believe that it is OK to cause needless hurt and offence? Would the world be a better place if everyone treated you thus?

More to the point, why even bother trying to communicate if you are going to sabotage your message so effectively?

[Psylo]

Hi Greg, where have you been ? How have you been ?

[GregKasarik]

But that was supposed to be a little segway in to what I was meaning to say. It's your use of the words Divine and in particular God that brings back all the old religious associations Greg, together with discussion of the community. Change a few words here and there - like God with The Universe, and I will be a happier bunny.

Anyway, that's just trying to suggest that we're not douchebags if we have knee-jerk reactions to the idea of a religious community in our midst. We have some damn good reasons to ensure it doesn't happen.

 

Firstly, let me say that I don't regard anything that you have said as being offensive, or obnoxious. You disagree with me, which is fine, but you have been respectful and mature in that disagreement.

I appreciate your candour and empathise with the situation that you found yourself in. What you describe is the evil of certitude. The irrational belief that one has all the answers, that there is only one true path and that everybody should be twisted onto that path. It is a complete repudiation of the Principles and if anything, highlights precisely why they are so important.

But what would you have done, or thought, if your dad had told you that he adopting a religious philosophy with the fundamental tenet that whatever you happen to believe is almost certainly wrong, that you have to figure things out for yourself and that trying to force your understanding of the universe on others is pointless. It wouldn't even matter if you decided that you didn't believe in God, because not even god could ever know if god was "God" and if god couldn't have the answer, they why would you? Oh, and that you no longer needed to follow all of the arbitrary and rules and dogma of the Catholic Church (unless you wanted to), because the Ethical Principle was simply to "Act with Empathy". But, because of the Generosity Principle, there would be a downside: He would be giving more to people in need (less toys for you!) and would be encouraging you all to do some volunteer work to help the disadvantaged in your local community.

Would you have been scarred for life, or awed by the responsibility and trust so suddenly thrust upon you?

I discuss the Principles within a spiritual context, because that is the way in which I experience them. If this makes it harder to communicate my message to some, then this merely means that I have to try harder and be more patient. In any case, if I communicated them from a secular perspective, I'd probably run into the same problem with those of a spiritual bent.

I appreciate that people may have had bad experiences with organised religion and religious nutters (I've had my fair share) and that trust might be a little bit thin on the ground. I expect that and accept that and don't have a problem with people disagreeing with me, or being suspicious of my motives. If someone has a problem with something that I have said, or done, I encourage them to post a concrete example (rather than mere, idle speculation) of it here and get it out in the open. What I neither expect, nor accept is abuse, insult and other obnoxious behaviour parading as discussion.

In any case, it appears that the people who were acting in that way have either left the discussion or moderated their tone.

[GregKasarik]

Hi Greg, where have you been ? How have you been ?

 

I'd like to say that I've been hard at work, gathering the articles for the Department of Health, but in reality, I've also been procrastinating, reading and generally wasting time! People have provided me with so much new material that it is daunting to get through it all and write it into some sort of coherent submission.

So, generally, I'm doing well, although I've found it a bit hard to motivate myself of late. Less caffeine and more sleep and exercise should do the trick! :-)

[GregKasarik]

Thanks for the links and book rec (which I'll try to get to when I'm less hectic)

My ignorance of the Manson shit is entirely irrelevant to the point I was making. Insinuating I'm not smart is not a smart way to address the issues of poorly handled criticism.

No doubt you're a smart guy, Greg, and I wouldn't be so silly as to enter a debating argument with you; but you still haven't allayed the justified fears of some here who don't care to see another form of Ideology which may or may not arise to infamous popularity - at the detriment to ANY SINGLE PERSON.

 

Hey! Sorry if you thought I was calling you stupid for not knowing about Manson! Not my intent in any way, shape or form. I happen to know about the guy, because I researched him a few years ago when it came up in a discussion and I was unprepared.

Let me make it clear: In no way is being unaware of something to ever be considered stupid, especially when you consider how little any of us really know.

My point about "stupid" was that most people aren't silly enough to force the point about Manson, LSD and violence, when alcohol is responsible for such a huge amount.

I can't say that my philosophy won't end up hurting some people. Indeed, I can see that those with a high psychological need for certitude and need to have the "answers" will find the Uncertainty and Divine Principles very unsettling, although it is most likely that they would simply discount them.

However, the moment someone goes to war to spread the Principles, is the moment that they've lost track of the whole point of what I am attempting to communicate. Empathy cannot be spread through violence, hate and discrimination.

Like everyone else, I can only do what I believe is right, even though it is a near certainty that someone, somewhere and somewhen will find a way fuck it up for everybody.

But why set the bar so high for me? Can you think of a single human discovery, invention or idea that has been perfect? I certainly can't.

[GregKasarik]

With respect to the ability of psychedelics to change the world, I'd say both yes and no.

They are powerful mind altering substances, but are not suitable for everybody, if for no other reason than personality and temperament. Some people simply don't have the mindset that is conducive to their use. One of the most commonly reported negative side effects is the fear of losing control, or of losing one's self. For many this can be terrifying and although people with this fear,could be able to take low doses without too much distress, I couldn't see them ever getting into the experience. It is no accident that every traditional society that has used these has done so within a supervised setting, with a trusted elder to act as a guide. Even if it were possible, releasing LSD into the water supply would be an unmitigated disaster (and unethical...).

I am not aware of any research reliably demonstrating psychedelics causing psychological problems and there is certainly nothing to connect their use to increased risk of suicide. Invariably, when people get into psychological difficulties when using these compounds, it turns out that there was a pre-existing condition that has been exacerbated. This is most often a problem with unsupervised recreational use, where set, setting and dose are highly variable.

These compounds will not magically make someone a better person. Some people are just arseholes. They might be sociopathic, or suffer from a personality disorder, or even just be a run of the mill, obnoxious, disagreeable sod. There is no evidence that psychedelics are going to suddenly change these people into warm, fuzzy fluffy bunnies, with love and care for all. Certainly, these types might come away from an experience with additional personal insights, but this will mean nothing if they fail to incorporate these insights into their lives. More likely, they would (as already happens with many overtly religious mafia types), incorporate the experience into their lives by simply using it to justify their destructive behaviour. For example, Leary's Prison experiment of the 1960's demonstrated no reduction in recidivism amongst its participants.

Having said this, there is every reason to suspect that increased use of psychedelics could be hugely beneficial to many people and society as a whole. The experiences generated by these compounds are often no different to that encountered in a traditional mystical, or transcendent experience and this is undeniably powerful. Even research conducted within secular settings, such as that recently undertaken by America’s renowned John Hopkins Hospital, routinely uncover the spiritual connection. In a paper published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology (see csp.org/psilocybin for links) the researchers reported:

 

At the 14-month follow-up, 58% and 67%, respectively, of volunteers rated the psilocybin-occasioned experience as being among the five most personally meaningful and among the five most spiritually significant experiences of their lives; 64% indicated that the experience increased well-being or life satisfaction; 58% met criteria for having had a ‘complete’ mystical experience.

Crucially, this sort of dimension is often what is lacking in the lives of people in today’s world. Despite the preponderance of social media, far too many people are disconnected, isolated and alone. They feel no connection with themselves, their families or with their communities and left unchecked their despair can easily reach the epic proportions that generate the sorts of riots that we have recently seen in London.

It may come as a surprise, but the research didn't demonstrate massive personality changes among the participants. Using the Five Factor model of personality (http://en.wikipedia....sonality_traits), only the dimension of "Openness" was significantly altered. Personally, I expected conscientiousness to be lowered, but this probably just a reflection of my own haphazard approach to life.

So, while an increased use of psychedelics wouldn't magically fix the world, it would in all likelihood lead to a different culture, in which people were more spiritual, less religious and more open to new experience. This would hopefully lead to a cultural shift, in which the virtues of tolerance, inclusiveness and charity predominated. Or perhaps not. Modern New Agers (who often claim to embody these traits) are notoriously selfish, tending to focus more on their own "Enlightenment" than the welfare of others. Research reliably shows that for all of their other faults, traditional religious believers are still more likely to give to charity, volunteer and contribute to their communities.

At the end of the day, the sort of shift in culture that we would probably all be hoping for is not going to occur overnight. Much like humanism, the Enlightenment of the 1700s, and nearly every other major cultural shift, it will hundreds of years for the seeds we plant today to bear fruit. Certainly aspects may come to dominate within our lifetimes, but just as "Creation Scientists" are still fighting evolution 150 years after the fact, those who oppose any new psychedelic cultural shift, will be fighting a rearguard action for many generations to come, if for no other reason than their god tells them to.

[chilli]

This is where I get into a long, detailed self defense. It quickly gets boring and makes me sound like a cunt.

Edited September 24, 2012 by chilli

[SunChaser]

i often do wonder if DMT itself is whats going to be the root cause in such a shift in human consciousness.

i mean the rate of people experiencing DMT is climbing and its climbing fast.

all walks of life and in all four corners of the globe.

i cannot possibly suggest , imply or conclude a DMT experience is going to make people think " oh so there is a god "

Rather i would look at it more like.. " oh.. there is so much more then we can possibly perceive with our 5 sensors "

 

Some very interesting ideas 7baz. My only honest question is, what next?

What I mean is, you've smoked some DMT and experienced the most powerfully significant feelings you've ever witnessed in this world and have come to the conclusion that, as you say, there is so much more to this world than we can perceive using just our 5 censors. But where do you go from there? You can't just keep on smoking more DMT to get that same perspective again for the rest of your life, right?

Don't we inevitably have to eventually just go back to a seemingly boring and repetitive world to do our 8 hours days in a modern world, day after day, month after month, year after year. Back to a world where anything other than our basic 5 censors are of no real significance? 

Seriously not trying to belittle your interesting theory, it's just a question I have pondered for many years, without reaching any definitive answer.  

the term GOD is simple a term of expression, a concept of nature we simply do not comprehend nor understand.

there is no proof of this being or entity called god , it has never been proven scientifically.

it doesnt matter how many churches we go to or mystical states we experience on drugs.. it still simply does not prove or pin point any directions to this so called GOD.

we justify our understanding of life and all things by using this being or entity called " GOD" because we have no other way to explain such things with rational thoughts.

 

Just for the record, you do realize that the concept of God, (a all powerful & knowing being or entity) is an incredibly new concept by man, which has seemingly evolved in perfect sync with mans perception of our own superiority over all other living things, right?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the concept of spirituality has been around since the first hominoid kicked a few burning leafs into a pile and realized he could control it. But the first evidence of man using the term "God" as a single being or entity seems to have risen from the nomadic Jewish people, as a way of giving there wondering nomadic way of life reason and purpose. The first homo sapiens who were truly bound to there natural environment (the aboriginals, for example) seem to have mostly considered there the actual environment as divine, rather than worshiping some single being or entity.

I personally view the scientific method as humans going back to that original form of spirituality. As in finding all truth and meaning within the world around as, rather than some entity which can not actually be defined in any logical manner.      

There is no evidence that psychedelics are going to suddenly change these people into warm, fuzzy fluffy bunnies, with love and care for all. 

 

Is that how you view yourself Greg? A warm fuzzy and fluffy bunny, with love and care for all. lol.

Anyway, I think it's still very premature (to say the least) to claim you've done more than most people have to reform drug law policy in Victoria. I mean, what about all the people who have worked together to achieve minimizing the criminal aspect of drug laws and have actually managed to have drug offenses viewed as more of a health issue? What about the needle exchange programs? Or even the cautionary system when it comes to minor cannabis offenses?

I'd still be very interested to see if you get another response from the vic government. But all they've actually done is replied to you with a courtesy letter, clearly stating they have no intention on changing there stance on drug law policy, nor have the power.

I mean, where talking about a government who used the topic of banning bongs, as a policy to win the last election. That's the kind of ignorance your up against.

Also, I'm not personally denying you may have a personality, which may very well have natural leadership attibributes. But I don't think that automatically gives you a title of a leader to anyone.

When I was a young kid at high school, I used to be a leader of sorts, I guess you could say people looked up to me. That is till, a teacher made me aware of this fact and it went straight to my head (he most likely made me aware, for that very purpose, he was a smart cookie, that old bloke). I went around telling everyone how brilliant I was and informing them of my clearly intelligent & independent personality. That was about the time that people stopped looking up to me and started resenting me, probably now viewing me as just a big headed loser.

The point I'm trying to make to you greg is, the more you think it wise to go around informing people of your own superiority and natural leadership abilities, is the more people will view you as the exact opposite, whether you actually posses these attributes or not.

Hope I'm not coming across as trying to attack you greg. Just pointing out that if you want people to look up to you, or you want to be a true leader within your community, then modesty is probably the most important attribute you would need to possess, IMHO. 

I'd also be very interested to know why you think what your trying to do is any different to the failed  philosophies of the 60's and why your ideas (if successful) wouldn't just end up as the same as Timothy Leary's. Which was a flawed drug induced illusion, that took down many naive people and halted any real scientific study into the drugs you speak of till this day?

Although I won't hold my breath for an answer. Since i can admit, that my posts came across as a little erratic and even disrespectful when you first posted about your new religion. 

Peace

[EntheoAssassin]

Wow this was one intense thread but one cannot experience life while adhering to any one philosophy. Even a new age philosophy. If people want to be spiritual then they need to discover their own. Being a part of a 'group' will always 'lead' people to follow.

What we need is a community that shares openly all the philosophies of various religions, not the writings of just one.

In saying that

The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology - Albert Einstein

 

 

Namaste

EA

p.s. Greg, where do I fit in to your group? I believe all the Gods/God were extra-terrestrial beings and that we were created from them, care of Sumerian writings, and the only reason we have 'spirit' is due to the process required to make an intelligent creature.

Edited February 7, 2012 by EntheoAssassin

[chilli]

Love you Greg you big jerk!

(Oh and where the fuck are you anyway, hope you didn't get yourself arrested already)

Edited September 24, 2012 by chilli

[whitewind]

Actually, I have been thinking about Greg myself recently, wondering what he was up to, hoping he was alright.