...

[Ishmael Fleishman]

...

Edited August 16 by Ishmael Fleishman

[Micromegas]

This is well put. I'm interested, however, in the sudden jump from point 1 to points 2-6.

 

It is well established that our experinece of material reality is a representation rather than an exact copy of a self-subsisting reality, however, that representation is derived from engagement with material things and can be verfied or falsified empirically. That doesn't mean these are absolute things in a reductionist sense, but they do provide support for the objectivity of judgment.

 

But when you jump to level 2, you are now describing religious revelation that has no material ground, and in that context I'd like to know how you determine that is not also another (very supercharged) representation, or "delusion" constructed out of you own subjective experinece and cultural milieu - after all, "multiverse" is a rather westernised idea...

 

Which is to say, I think your rundown is potentially very close to the "truth" and well articulated, but what I am interested in are the grounds you use to determine that that experience is a "full comprehension" and not a subjective experinece predicated on personal faith?

 

The analogy of the cave is an interesting one to use in that respect. Plato said you must meditate on the Ideas, or Forms, suprasensible essences of things, the highest of which in the Form of the Good, to get out of the cave. But actually all Plato produced was a subjective opinion that he couldn't verify, after all, what really is the Form of the Good, or "Beauty in itself" which he claims to know? He also talks about a "Godhead".

 

It does seem really important to tap into that "space" one way or another, but how can you demonstrate whether it is actual or not? Conversely, the creative potential and lessons learned from that space can always be grounded in tangible things.

 

 

Edited October 31, 2023 by Micromegas

[Ishmael Fleishman]

...

Edited August 16 by Ishmael Fleishman

[Scarlet Dragon]

A worthwhile discussion, I think, no matter how many times it occurs in these cyberspaces! And despite the large numbers of thinkers entering this philosophical fray based on plant medicine experiences it is always worthwhile to consider what those titans of philosophy from our past have concluded. It is unfortunate I think that some have mystical experiences but don't see the value in actually studying what has been said before about these experiences and then using these past thinkers to re-consider their own experiences in light of this.

 

So I applaud your invitation to consider what the Buddha and Plato, for example, had to say about all this. We then can factor in our plant-based medicine experiences into their theories. Of course, the problem that then arises is the difficulty of understanding these great thinkers and the tremendous effort that has to be invested in order to do so. On top of that difficulty, there is another one: these great thinkers of the past, Buddha and Plato particularly, thought that it is impossible to understand their teachings in their entirety without practicing certain exercises (like meditation) in very precise ways, with tremendous vigor and dedication, over a prolonged period of time!

 

So, it is worth adding this particular consideration to this discussion: according to both the Buddha and Plato (i.e., Socrates) one needs to first live a spiritual life in order to gain the mental capacity to know things as they truly are. What is the spiritual life that they describe? Unfortunately it is virtue. I say unfortunately because our current culture and education discredits virtue and leaves us with very little experience and inclination towards developing virtue. What is virtue? Unfortunately it is morality (do unto others, including the Earth herself, as you would have them do unto you--to put something complex into a simple package). I say unfortunately again, because becoming morally good is laughed at within our culture and age as the foolishness of those who deny the harsh nature of reality. That is, we have received an education that is first and foremost grounded in the survival mentality: i.e, "I need to get enough to survive because otherwise no one else will do that for me." This fear-based orientation makes a serious consideration of morality as more than a social nicety (a collectively determined idea put into law so that there is order in society) very difficult. Much more so, actually living according to moral standards. Nonetheless, both the Buddha and Plato were very clear that virtue (of which morality is a defining part) is the first step in the process of waking up, so to speak, to what is actually real and what is not. And without that development, such a waking up is simply not possible.

 

Maybe, however, plant medicines can jump start this process perhaps by giving some experience that leads one to gain a sentiment towards others necessary for developing a truly moral, virtuous life? That's the really interesting question when considering what the Buddha and Plato had to teach at least.

[-RC-]

Surely one of the most profound benefits of the psychedelic experience is realising there is SO much you don't know, sometimes to the point where you question whether you 'know' anything at all...