Do you suffer from a mental disorder?

[XipeTotec]

Positive thinking is generally quite unsophisticated, and it is of no surprise that it has brought a lot of bad research results.

has it?

[XipeTotec]

Quantum Physics and shiz, it's all probability waves and consciousness manifesting 'reality' along these highly personal (yet universally connected), highly subjective waves refracting into dissonance and harmony as things fall apart or all come together.

yeah, probably

[XipeTotec]

id better stop now i guess

[indigo264nm]

I believe that the use of psychedelics have helped me grow more awareness of a pre-existing condition - unfortuantly it's one that is long term but at the same time I have learnt how to deal with fluctuating states and my responses to those states, and to listen to myself as well most importantly.

In regards to HPPD.. it's generally not too distressing if you're able to distinguish why such perception distortions are happening. Seeing halos, brighter colours and the occaisional tracer isn't much of a bother - if anything it makes you appreciate natural surroundings a bit more.

[Lachy]

still in experimental phase, after thousands of years?

Good things take time...

Besides, I'd say science and medicine is about constantly learning and updating knowledge. The experiments are an ongoing part of this process.

[chilli]

Idiosyncratic connections between self and SELF lead me to uncertain "conclusions" of reality as a transrational, paradoxical, Objective Unchanging Oneness as Experienced by infinitely ever-changing individual subjective perspectives.

...which paradoxically has happened to express itself in mundane, predictable and orderly ways for billions of years... until some cheeky and clever (for an ape) ape ate a few mushrooms and felt like a god. But then nothing really changed after all, except in the poor overblown ape's head.

[ThunderIdeal]

we have physics, which has mostly explained the nature of energy and it's interactions. part of that explanation lies in quantum physics, which virtually says that everything is loose as all fuck. thus what the dude says is not very far-fetched.

these experiences don't make you feel like a god, they allow you to see through reality, into your nature - god. you and me man, we're different people but we're the same being.

[Guest shroomnoob]

into your nature - god. you and me man, we're different people but we're the same being.

Again, pure speculation.

It is no different to the guys who interpret other beings and other dimensions on dmt.

For all we know, we are not observing the raw energy field of existence on psychadelics and are no where near observing close enough to witness quantum phenomena and are seeing nothing more than a scrambled visual cortex caused by the numerous misfirings brought on by a flurry of molecules shaped like a neurotransmitter.

I dont think it gives any great insight into the nature of the mind, god, universe, self, nonself, or the connected or disconnected nature of us as individuals any more than messing with your computers graphics card reveals ultimate reality when you mess with its visual matrix.

Its just a bunch of nonsensicle static of a faulty peice of hardware. It only feels relevant and all meaningful because you are the hardware and its your whole subjective experience that is being scrambled.

[chilli]

Again, pure speculation.

It is no different to the guys who interpret other beings and other dimensions on dmt.

For all we know, we are not observing the raw energy field of existence on psychadelics and are no where near observing close enough to witness quantum phenomena and are seeing nothing more than a scrambled visual cortex caused by the numerous misfirings brought on by a flurry of molecules shaped like a neurotransmitter.

I dont think it gives any great insight into the nature of the mind, god, universe, self, nonself, or the connected or disconnected nature of us as individuals any more than messing with your computers graphics card reveals ultimate reality when you mess with its visual matrix.

Its just a bunch of nonsensicle static of a faulty peice of hardware. It only feels relevant and all meaningful because you are the hardware and its your whole subjective experience that is being scrambled.

Yeah sorry to say it but I have to agree with "shroomnoob's" apparent point about the futility of speculation, with regards to concluding anything meaningful to anyone but yourself and those who already agree with you or are inclined towards your way of thinking... it's nice to sit around the fire saying "wow man" while your mate plays the guitar and espouses his latest revelations, but it seems obvious to me that its pointless to be dogmatic about speculative and intuitive beliefs, as well as fields of knowledge that are still in their infancy, and its always annoying when people hijack science to support their metaphysical orientation, whether they are young earth creationists, militant atheists or burned out hippies, so please spare me the "what the bleep do we know" BS psuedo-science routine. Thanks for the advice about how drug trips make me feel TI, or did you mean to say that is how it feels to you?

[ThunderIdeal]

i didn't intend to generalise. it thought it was unfair to say that tripping makes dude feel like a god. it makes it sound like he becomes megalomaniac. i'll rephrase what i said and i'm putting words in his mouth here but if i understand him properly i'm not getting it wrong - tripping makes dude feel like there is only one being (experiencing ITSELF from countless angles).

"its always annoying when people hijack science to support their metaphysical orientation"

that's a joke bloke. it's no different from an atheist "hijacking" science to support their orientation. i just want to make it clear to people that haven't read any science books lately, that science has only become more and more whacky. it's not really that relevant. science can prove that psychadelics just scramble your head, and it can say whatever it wants to about the universe, it can't ever prove whether god (the way i perceive this notion) is or is not (i think both)!

anyway, i'm not trying to feed anybody dogma. i was just replying to this "which paradoxically has happened to express itself in mundane, predictable and orderly ways for billions of years" which is basically a load of toss because you can't even observe anything properly let alone predict it properly. read up on your beloved science 8) this is why an incredible scientist (and believer in god, although his notion may have been a bit mistaken) stated that 'god does not play dice' and wasted the rest of his career trying to prove it. einstein believed that god's universe would be predictable, i do not and neither does modern science.

[Guest shroomnoob]

that science has only become more and more whacky. it's not really that relevant.

lol

You dont understand science therefore science is whacky and irrelevent.

[ThunderIdeal]

yeah that came out badly, i somehow meant to say it's not that relevant to my viewpoint.

also, i just realised brain i didn't need to say this "it's no different from an atheist "hijacking" science to support their orientation." because you were already saying it... but to me it seemed like you were using science to naysay the possibility of mystical realities, and it doesn't seem right.

shroomnoob i've always had an avid interest in science. i have no issue with it except where it fosters an attitude of all-knowing which, let's all agree, has not been earned, and where it fosters a destructive attitude by assuring us that we are removed from nature.

[puck]

...the futility of speculation, with regards to concluding anything meaningful to anyone but yourself and those who already agree with you or are inclined towards your way of thinking... it's nice to sit around the fire saying "wow man" while your mate plays the guitar and espouses his latest revelations, but it seems obvious to me that its pointless to be dogmatic about speculative and intuitive beliefs

Okay - now can we please generalise this point? Because it's getting awfully annoying hearing one 'side' (gotta joke at the apparent polarities, when I'm as pantheistic as TI) occasionally make concessions after being castigated, and the other 'side' being fucken dogmatic and uncompromising just because it has the scientistic common-denominator hegemonic viewpoint. Wake up peeps - whatever belief system you subscribe to, to the point of having faith that cogito ergo sum, or that you actually exist at all, it is not rationally provable to a really satisfactory point. Every conclusion you could possibly reach is necessarily based on a circular logic at base: ie, that what you see before you is real, that you are not a complete nutter, etc.

And there ain't no way, if we're gonna reason on a level where we can all agree on the rules (you gotta get really metaphysically basic to get to a point where all these weirdo philosophies can even speak the same language), that we can rationally justify fucken anything.

That said, I am comfortable with my subjectivity. I am willing to accept a lot of weird trippy things on faith, simply because I accept that any experience I have, no matter how much it fits in with the common consensus, is ultimately a faith-based matter. I could be wrong. I probably am. Give a fuck? No - cuz in my convenient metaphysics, I'm God so even falsity is a kind of truth.

But to extrapolate beyond my own being? Ridiculous! Convince anyone to share my beliefs? Ludicrous! Sure makes for innaresting conversations with people fucked up enough to share them, plus the jokes are a lot more sophisticated, but only if they do share them, can we self-congratulate on how we are where it's at. But it's everywhere...

Summary: throughout history, almost everything that anyone has ever thought turned out to be wrong. Why anyone might suppose that this is no longer the case - that's beyond me. Science is ever evolving, and (thanks, Kuhn) revolting. Don't fucken tell me that science has got all the answers, cuz the answers stimulate questions, and the answers to those make us realise the original question was based on a falsehood, stimulating different questions which need answers, etc - ad infinitum, for all we know.

Hell, maybe not. Maybe one of us here, out of everyone who ever lived, actually knows what's what. I sure as hell ain't gonna raise my hand and say it's me. Unless it's around a campfire, listening to ThunderIdeal play the guitar and espouse his latest revelations.

[ajna]

I dont think it gives any great insight into the nature of the mind, god, universe, self, nonself, or the connected or disconnected nature of us as individuals any more than messing with your computers graphics card reveals ultimate reality when you mess with its visual matrix.

what, and this isn't subjective speculation? and what experiences helped you come to this conclusion? couldnt be psychedelics, since they dont give you any insight into the nature of mind, right?

maybe you should be hanging out on a computer graphics forum instead then ;)

[ThunderIdeal]

ahhh puck, you have all the words that i need to look up in a dictionary.

[Guest shroomnoob]

what, and this isn't subjective speculation? and what experiences helped you come to this conclusion?

What are you saying? You have insight to how your mind comes about after tripping? Or some deep metaphysical understanding on how existence exists after tripping? I am yet to hear one tripper say anything remotely truthful about the true nature of mind, matter and the universe other than speculation about god, energy and interconnectedness. I think it makes people feel wise, but upon questioning there is no wisdom to be found beyond basic philosophy.

We hear trippers all the time ranting on about their limited understanding of quantum physics but how many trippers really witness quantum phenomena directly and even understand what they are seeing to a point where they can deduce the natural probailities and behaviours of particles better than phycisists?

As far as i am concerned, tripping is less about emperical or subjective witnessing of the true nature of reality but can be useful for accessing the subconscious mind. So less yoda and more dr phil lest be found a gibbering uneducated idiot.

[ThunderIdeal]

"What are you saying? You have insight to how your mind comes about after tripping?"

i don't think he said that at all. he asked how you can make such a statement since you claim psychadelics don't give anybody such insight. well, how can you make such a statement? you must be ahead of the scientific curve, since they haven't really had much opportunity to look into these matters.

no wisdom to be found?... onemind, wisdom isn't really something that can be shared unfortunately. upon questioning? you may pose questions but you don't really ask, because that would imply you are open to different answers.

now, i havent heard many trippers, or anyone, ranting on about quantum physics, but "how many trippers really witness quantum phenomena directly" how many PEOPLE can witness quantum phenomena directly? i'll answer that for you, since it is YOUR understanding that seems to be limited. none. quantum phenomena occurs on a miniscule scale, witnessing it directly would be impossible. i only brought it up as a possible means for the expression of mystical realities without defying the laws of physics.

"I am yet to hear one tripper say anything remotely truthful about the true nature of mind" how many scientists, then?

[ajna]

What are you saying?

i'm saying the conclusions you've drawn about psychedelics are just as subjective as the conclusions TI or the dude has spoken of, and since you've all had psychedelic experiences then those experiences have obviously given some insight in to your respective conclusions, no matter how scientifically sound or metaphysical they may be.

"So less yoda and more dr phil lest be found a gibbering uneducated idiot"

so... more like dr phil, and less like a gibbering uneducated idiot?

[Guest shroomnoob]

Ok, if you want to be pedantic. There may be some guy out there who after dropping some acid has altered his neurochemistry in the precise way to allow him to gain complete and omniscient enlightenement that is beyond words and reason and cannot be shared but must be experienced directly and unicorns may exist as i cannot claim that they dont since they could exist somewhere in the universe and god may exist but i cant prove that he doesnt and there may be UFO's at area 51 and george bush may be be a fourth dimensional lizard shapeshifter. All highly unlikely but a true skeptic must be careful not to make such blanket statements like i did previously.

IF you guys are using psychadelics for some kind of chemical enlightenment then excuse me for leaving the conversation here.

how many PEOPLE can witness quantum phenomena directly? i'll answer that for you, since it is YOUR understanding that seems to be limited. none. quantum phenomena occurs on a miniscule scale, witnessing it directly would be impossible.

You completely missed the point. Someone in this thread specualted that they were witnessing quantum phenmena and i said that was highly unlikely then i asked if trippers could get a better understanding of quantum reality than physics can. Physicists may not view it directly but they have many mathematical and even emperical tools for gaining a more sophisticated understanding with their particle accelerators and electron microscopes than some neo shaman who sees fluro particles after munching on some shrooms.

[chilli]

...it thought it was unfair to say that tripping makes dude feel like a god. it makes it sound like he becomes megalomaniac.

I didn't say that about dude, but about a hypothetical proto-human living millions of years ago FFS.

"its always annoying when people hijack science to support their metaphysical orientation"

that's a joke bloke. it's no different from an atheist "hijacking" science to support their orientation.

Are you on something today? Atheists were the second example of people I gave who do exactly that, besides atheists hardly have a monopoly on science... perhaps you need to use words more more carefully, going in and out.

As for the rest of your post, you have apparently done exactly what I said was annoying ie. hijacked science to support your own metaphysical position.

*EDIT* okay maybe I am on something, because I didn't read the rest of the post... glad we are all clear though, although you seem to still be a bit suspicious of me... please don't jump on Dude's bandwagon with words like "naysaying" etc... most of what he believes about what I believe is wrong, so you may as well just form your own impressions, instead of going by someone else's mistaken assumptions.

Edited March 17, 2008 by IllegalBrain

[chilli]

so... more like dr phil, and less like a gibbering uneducated idiot?

Haha LOL, I wondered about that one, too.

[Guest shroomnoob]

so... more like dr phil, and less like a gibbering uneducated idiot?

Do i really need to over explain everything i say and spell everything out to you guys?

For those of you who dont understand the little metaphor, I was saying, my use of psychadelics was for more psychological purposes rather than deep all knowing metaphysics or spiritual enlightenment.

If you look at the work of stanislav grof, timothy leary, "the secret chief" etc etc they were all psychologists interested in psychidelics for therapeutic and subconscious purposes, not for yoda like insight into the nature of the force and they left that to naive jedi knight wannabes here

[ajna]

well i did offer you the same courtesy when you need stuff spelled out. regardless i got what you were trying to say, doesn't mean i don't find it funny the way you said it

now, apart from the fact that Grof was a proponent of TRANSPERSONAL psychology (that is, "the study of humanity’s highest potential, and with the recognition, understanding, and realization of unitive, spiritual, and transcendent states of consciousness" <Lajoie and Shapiro, 1992:91>) and Leary was one of the most overtly spiritual psychologists of those days, it's naive to assume that because you don't experience any spiritual insight, anybody who does is losing their marbles. i think it's your understanding of 'spirituality' which gets in the way of a lot of this...

ah fuck it, we've been though this enough times now onemind, my head isn't making this brick wall any softer. as Vert said somewhere - "you have fun in there"

til next time you come back from being banned to stir shit, i guess

[Guest shroomnoob]

doesn't mean i don't find it funny the way you said it

Well i guess dr phil was a poor choice I only just got the sarcasm about dr phil being an uneducated gibbering idiot, lol

it's naive to assume that because you don't experience any spiritual insight, anybody who does is losing their marbles

Don;t get me wrong man, i have experienced what trippers call ego death on dmt and other trips but even so, the experience itself is another question and not an answer. That feeling of oneness or connectedness is brilliant and that is why i continue tripping but at the same time, i am not any wiser having experienced it and the explanations and interpretations various trippers come out with are nothing mroe than subjective speculation. I am not saying these experiences dont happen, i am just saying that they are not the ultimate conclusion.

til next time you come back from being banned to stir shit, i guess

I'm not shit stirring this time, i thought it was a fair convo and it is my head that is hitting a brick wall with all these ludicrous claims on this forum.

[ThunderIdeal]

my head isn't making this brick wall any softer.

heheh.

i may be mistaken, but wouldn't 'psychological purposes' entail gaining insight into the nature of mind? which i believe you were trying to say is not achievable with psychadelics. so, i dunno man, i don't really care for this joust any more, let me just say that THE WAY in which you post really gets under my skin, and that i doubt anybody is mistaking you for an adult. your posts almost seem to come from an adult but so did mine when i was 16, there is just a naivete underneath that can't be mistaken for the naivete of an older chap.

i have to give puck credit for making more sense than any of us in this thread.

and brain, i really do like you. what you say is usually stimulating, i guess i just prefer the dude's side of the fence and you guys are always fighting. if you ask me both of you have impressive minds, and perhaps an excess of passion.

BATTLE!

by the way i've never seen what the bleep do we know, and i still think hawkings was mad to think unified field theory was within his grasp. science has some staggering leaps to overcome, i actually keep myself informed on these issues though not to the extent where i can rattle off explanations, but if you think that there aren't plenty of theories that lend themselves to comparison with spiritual concepts, then get a grasp on both and see what i mean. for example, i think of the yinyang duality like tranquility and motion. some taoists would agree. so, compare brane theory which holds that quantum fluctuations could cause a brane (universe as we know it) to spontaneously appear and disappear (or take hold) like steam bubbles in boiling water, with my notion that the universe is like a temporary bubble of activity arising from an infinite (inactive) void. that void happens to be my concept of god, by the way, and though perfectly formless it contains all form. anyway, without going into more of my ideas, i can list numerous respectable theories that seem, at face value, whacky as fuck: shadow universes, holographic universe, imaginary time, hidden dimensions. the hilarious thing is that one of the books i have is called 'universe: the cosmos explained', although to read it you would think anything but