which came first?

[Zen Peddler]

Pretty much everyone I know who has indulged in the occasional salvia wandering, D breakthrough or licks of the old Syd are pretty intelligent and highly cluey individuals. Which recently got me wondering. Perhaps these individuals gained an improvement in their synpatic processes and intelligence as a result of these substances - or are smarter people more likely to want to experience something like this?

[Slybacon]

I wish I could say that is totally true, but for me the majority of acid heads these days dont come off as smarter then the average.

[sapito]

I think its dangerous ground when you start to compare your intelligence or whatever against others. Its not uncommon that frequent trippers see themselves as smarter or in someway elite to society. This often seems to be a result of the use pf psychs rather than an actual higher intelligence.

Having said that there is also people you meet that consider psychs to have opened up their learning processes and increased their intelligence without a bulging ego. The other side is that there are lots of people that eat handfuls of these things and are still total knob heads without any thoughts of compassion or concern for others. These substances can give you insight into many things that you may not have otherwise considered but they also dont automatically raise you above society as a whole.

Could it be that you see other trippers as smart because you relate to, or share their ideas more easily? Or maybe you are just lucky and have a brainy bunch of friends.

I do think these things can raise intelligence if used with the intention of improving intelligence

[∂an]

yeah intelligence might not be the best word to use, as psychedelics are also associated with creativity which is typically a different quality to intelligence. so perhaps psychedelics enable increased mental capacity, and to which faculties this is directed depends on the individual.

I would say inquisitive people are drawn to psychedelics, irrespective of their intelligence.

[Sir Jeans]

I agree with the above very good points. In addition, I think it sounds plausible that people with higher IQ would tend more so to be attracted to exploring and developing their minds through psychedelics. On the other hand though, I'd expect lower IQ to correlate with less "noble" uses of these substances. Of course it depends on lots of other variables, such the "Big 5" personalty construct known as Openness to Experience (if I remember correctly, this correlates with higher IQ). The definition of intelligence is also key. The most dominant theory (CHC theory) posits several facets to intelligence. Some, like processing speed and fluid intelligence, I'd expect to remain stable or perhaps even decline through psychedelic usage (through heavy use). But other "kinds" of intelligence, such as the creative component in Sternberg's Triacrchic theory I would expect to increase.

[ThunderIdeal]

sir jeans from out of fucking nowhere. some of that knowledge would have been handy in some older threads before you registered. feel free to expand and maybe throw in some wiki links.

sapito

[Distracted]

I've found both intelligence and life experience to be a factor in how much someone can take away from the experience but you can have all the life experience in the world and if you're not intelligent you may not get the most out of it.

I've found a few people I wouldn't consider as intelligent to become much more interested with the colours they see rahter than the metaphors they experience.

Like everyone, i've met smart people who've never used psychadelics and plenty of dumb people who have used them. I think you just surround yourself with intelligent people Zen

[botanika]

I would say inquisitive people are drawn to psychedelics, irrespective of their intelligence.

 

this ^ ...but also 'intelligent' nations have a large drug trade making access to the substances or information on them easier (ie europe, US) and perhaps more spare time to experiment with such things. Some people or cultures will use pyschedelics simply because they are there directly in their environment in relative abundance (ie american native tribes).

BTW I dont think creativity is seperate from intelligence, it is an aspect of it.

[Legba]

Speaking for myself I'd have to say intelligence hasn't come yet.

[CβL]

I have always been reasonably intelligent, but it took psychedelics for me to realize how stupid/ignorant/arrogant I am. For that - I am eternally grateful.

[FancyPants]

^^^ Yeah, me too.

[paradox]

maybe thats mostly what it is... psychedelics can just help you realize how stupid & ignorant you are..

once you unerstand that, you've made the first step towards actually become a little more intelligent..

but to even take that kind of lesson (or any other deep & meaningful stuff) from an experience then you probably have to have a basic level of intelligence in the first place... i think maybe it's the old thing they say about psychedelics just enhancing what you've already got... if you're pretty switched on already you might take it deeper, if you're already psychotic you might get more psychotic, if you're stupid then you're just gonna stay stupid.. of course all this is kind of pointlessly generalized..

but anyway 'intelligence' is only a relative thing & subjective & if defining yourself as such is wholey dependant on someone else being stupid then i don't really see the value of the definition..

& to define yourself as intelligent based on this & actually believe it, i think would be a very unintelligent thing to do..

& no i'm not trying to sound intelligent

[chnt]

being in altered states helps me gain so much more from, for example watching movies or tv shows that are extremely profound/have a lot of symbolism, what ever, rather than watching them when not altered, i have learned countless things from these experiences, they have really opened my mind.

there are other examples too, experiences that have helped define who i am, my attitudes and values, my goals in life..

who knows what i'm trying to say, something about minds and opening..

[faustus]

to me, intelligence is high working memory capacity + joining the dots in a novel way ("creativity"). insofar as psychedelics help you in the creative process, give you a new and different perspective on matters that enter your mind i suppose they do enhance some component of "intelligence". on the whole i gravitate towards this community cos i've always personally found trippers to be a clever and insightful lot. or at least a bunch of people who are interesting to me.

at the same time, i really think this sort of sentiment breeds what i coin "psychedelic snobbery" , convincing yourself that you're one of the select few who "gets" it and anyone who doesn't is nowhere near as clever as you are. it's really an insidious attitude to take.

so i riddle you all this:

is there such a thing as a DMT bogan, and would you believe me if i told you that me and my compadres have witnessed with our own two eyes such a marvelous mythical creature?

[Gunter]

I am not sure I believe in the myth of the intelligent human.

I mean, how would you know?

As for the people I have seen drawn to psychedelics, well I can't say they aren't varied.

Being one of the dumbest people I know I still realize that human assessments of intellect are themselves fraught with flaws.

We have a conflict of interest in regard to evaluating our selves, others and our species.

In general those who are confident about their intellectual capacities seem to be those who often have the smallest intellectual range, despite frequently being well spoken.

In an academic setting pseudo-intellect is regarded as intelligence.

I find it ironic that in dogs some people measure intelligence by the obedience of the dog, I would think the opposite, that those who are the most obedient and the most able to conform to the expectations of authority are the least intelligent. The dog that doesn't listen is the smarter one, it knows you aren't the boss.

I have seen psychedelics cause some people to suspend reason, kind of like Christians, if the bible said 2+2=9 then a lot of Christians I know would believe it and never think about it.

Any acceptance of authority in an absolute sense implies stupidity, this is the most clear in those who believe themselves to be intelligent, thus perceiving their own authority and not questioning it. Anyway I have seen some psychonauts do the blind faith thing where a trip tells them that 2+2=9 and they believe that they have gained some valuable insight.

Certainty in our species seems to be the hallmark of stupidity.

[Evil Genius]

The lower the educational level, the higher the percentage of smokers. Same applies for the IQ but this could also have to do with the educational background. I mean poor people sometimes just dont have access to a comparable Education what also influences the risks of getting in contact with some more common drugs. Psychedelics are simply more expensive than the common drugs like Booze and Cigarettes. There was a study of it few years ago. It wasnt very kind to smokers i must say.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Evil Genius

[∂an]

'intelligent' nations have a large drug trade making access to the substances or information on them easier (ie europe, US) and perhaps more spare time to experiment with such things. Some people or cultures will use pyschedelics simply because they are there directly in their environment in relative abundance (ie american native tribes).

BTW I dont think creativity is seperate from intelligence, it is an aspect of it.

 

to me, intelligence is high working memory capacity + joining the dots in a novel way ("creativity"). insofar as psychedelics help you in the creative process, give you a new and different perspective on matters that enter your mind i suppose they do enhance some component of "intelligence". on the whole i gravitate towards this community cos i've always personally found trippers to be a clever and insightful lot. or at least a bunch of people who are interesting to me.

 

very good points. I guess the word 'creative' sprung in my head the image of a reclusive, socially inept - but brilliantly creative - artist, while the word 'intelligent' conjures an image of a well spoken, clean-cut individual with lots of 'classical' knowledge and wisdom. but these are only cultural stereotypes that I was guilty of accepting, subconsciously.

what does it really mean to be intelligent then? I think it should mean someone who can calmly assess the state of the world/universe around them, and then set out on a path that will provide the largest possible benefit to the program of life in the universe. By this definition, creative people such as musicians, artists and poets are perhaps highly 'intelligent', in that they are lifting the hearts of all those that lay eyes and ears on their work. And if shamans/psychedelic voyagers really do work with the energy fields that lie behind 4D existence, deftly weaving together the reality we experience - which I believe they do - then they certainly are on a path that seeks to benefit the program of life in the universe.

Sp to the extent that psychedelic experiences allow you to assess your path and then make changes based on your intuitions as what is best for you and the universe, then yes they promote 'intelligence'.

is there such a thing as a DMT bogan, and would you believe me if i told you that me and my compadres have witnessed with our own two eyes such a marvelous mythical creature?

 

I have seen this creature. They like to watch wheel of fortune with a VB in tow and hit a spice pipe... true story.

Actually I think bogan is a derogatory term - ask anyone you meet what a bogan is and they will just point to someone lower on the socioeconomic pyramid than themselves.

[PsillyBean]

In my opinion psychadelics give perspective and its how you decipher that percpective thats important.

Regarding if drugs and intelligence have some connection, from what i have read, new neural pathways are made every time we experience something new. The more we experience that new stimulus the stronger the pathway becomes. So I suppose if the new pathway created through a particular drugs use, is of use, then you have become more intelligent. I can imagine it gets scrambled sometimes though.

Edited September 10, 2011 by PsillyBean

[botanika]

The biggest factor in selecting intelligence in humans is environment/climate. The most intelligent races are from the northern hemisphere where thousands of years of dealing with cold climates plus an abundance of rich protein (animals in Eurasia/seafood in east Asia) selects intelligence (although through the spread of predominantly northern hemisphere technology and knowledge other factors have come into the equation in contemporary times). In the southern hemisphere hotter or tropical environments a big energy sapping brain is inefficient and a smaller brain = survival. In northern hemispheres so much planning and technology is required to survive ice ages and hunt big energy rich animals (mammoth/whale) that a larger brain = survival. If Psychedelics  play a role in helping a group survive they will be beneficial and may lead to an increased intellectual or communal capacity but maybe not to the extent of other factors like latitude, climate or diet. It all comes down to whether traits are beneficial or chosen enough to pass on genes.

If a dog disobeys it's owner (or wolf disobeys it's alpha) it's less likely to be used in breeding or pass on it's genes. Whether intelligence in domesticated dogs is selected is mostly subjective to it's owners. Some dogs are selected simply for cuteness, some for their aggressiveness, some for their superior sense of smell and others for their intelligence. Domesticated animals are somewhat different to wild animals because traits are usually selected by humans and not just environmental factors.

The fact that a small percentage of some animals and most human groups seek out forms of inebriation suggests it does play a role (even if temporary) in group survival - nature observation, recreation, conceptualizing new ideas or group bonding.  

Edited September 10, 2011 by botanika

[Sir Jeans]

If anyone is interested, a simple Google search will reveal articles about CHC theory and Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of intelligence (although the wiki articles for both are quit confusing).

Most all definitions of intelligence I've encountered (I'm doing a degree in psychology) emphasize that intelligence is applied. That is, it is adaptive, or useful, for achieving some kind of valued end or goal. I personally value fluid intelligence and creativity much more highly than other forms of intelligence. Encyclopedias contains lots of facts, and in humans this is comparable to "crystallized intelligence". But I think intelligence is more than this. What I personally value as intelligent is what academics call fluid intelligence, or the ability to reason and solve new problems regardless of prior experience. If anyone's interested, the following wiki article distinguishes crystallized and fluid intelligence:

http://en.wikipedia....ed_intelligence

Botanika, this claim of yours interests me:

The biggest factor in selecting intelligence in humans is environment/climate.

 

I've never heard this theory - do you have any sources to back it up? It seems to make sense, and I'd love to learn more!

[∂an]

The biggest factor in selecting intelligence in humans is environment/climate. The most intelligent races are from the northern hemisphere where thousands of years of dealing with cold climates plus an abundance of rich protein (animals in Eurasia/seafood in east Asia) selects intelligence (although through the spread of predominantly northern hemisphere technology and knowledge other factors have come into the equation in contemporary times). In the southern hemisphere hotter or tropical environments a big energy sapping brain is inefficient and a smaller brain = survival.

 

hmm I have to disagree on your assumption about intelligence, specifically that the creation of 'pretty things' by the eurasian peoples such as clothing, advanced tools, agriculture and general engineering of the environment makes them more intelligent than primitive hunter gathers. are the australian aboriginals not intelligent for living in symbiosis with nature in a sustainable way for the better part of 100,000 yrs? my point is that intelligence is not a simple concept.

[Sir Jeans]

I might point out that the correlation between human brain size and intelligence test scores are not as large as one might think. Most studies find a correlation of about .4. Squaring this number gives an indication of how much variance in intelligence is explained by brain size. In other words, the size of the human brain seems to account for only about 16% of how well someone performs on an intelligence test. Furthermore, this correlation is very poorly understood, and it cannot be stressed enough that correlation does not imply causation. For example, it might be socioeconomic status (SES) that accounts for both. Perhaps having low SES (being poor, living in a slum etc) causes people to be both malnourished (leading to smaller brain size) and also have poor access to education and opportunities (leading to lower intelligence). In a case like this, small brain size would not be the cause of lower intelligence, even though the two correlate.

Please don't think that I'm not saying that your theory is wrong, botanika! Perhaps brain size does cause lower intelligence. Like I said, the relationship is very poorly understood, and further complicated by issues such as how to define intelligence.

[botanika]

hmm I have to disagree on your assumption about intelligence, specifically that the creation of 'pretty things' by the eurasian peoples such as clothing, advanced tools, agriculture and general engineering of the environment makes them more intelligent than primitive hunter gathers.  are the australian aboriginals not intelligent for living in symbiosis with nature in a sustainable way for the better part of 100,000 yrs?  my point is that intelligence is not a simple concept.

 

Living in symbiosis is stability and balance, not high intelligence. Intelligence does not equal survival unless the environment requires it. We have never been and never will be separate from the environment.

Australian aboriginals were forced to live in a relatively sustainable way. Australia is the 'lucky country' because of its environment. Had Australia experienced ice ages like Europe Australian aboriginals would have had a different evolution. The same in Africa - the reason why megafauna survived there is because the Africans never learnt how to hunt big game as effectively as northern hemisphere ice age hunters (Inc Neanderthal/heidelbergensis). 

One could argue very persuasively that a big brain or intelligence is often a liability for survival. But given the propensity for intelligent people to divide and conquer having a sustainable primitive life offers little survival defense. So in the history of human evolution it's not always the smartest or most stable that survive - but the most adaptable or the lucky.

[botanika]

hmm I have to disagree on your assumption about intelligence, specifically that the creation of 'pretty things' by the eurasian peoples such as clothing, advanced tools, agriculture and general engineering of the environment makes them more intelligent than primitive hunter gathers.  are the australian aboriginals not intelligent for living in symbiosis with nature in a sustainable way for the better part of 100,000 yrs?  my point is that intelligence is not a simple concept.

 

Living in symbiosis is stability and balance, not high intelligence. Intelligence does not equal survival unless the environment requires it. We have never been and never will be separate from the environment.

Edited September 11, 2011 by botanika

[faustus]

most twin studies indicate that intelligence is ~50% environmental and 50% genetic.

pffffft...... what pseudo-intellectual hacks!

every cunt worth his salt knows that intelligence is determined by subtle contours on the frontal bone.