This has a very "virgin writing about sex" quality to it, which has been a problem with academic writing about psychedelics since the early days. Do you try them, and lose your "objectivity" or do you not use them and act like a Cold-War era Professor of Soviet Studies who has never visited the USSR?
One of the problems with much of the literature about psychedelics is that it is written by people who want to write more than "well, they're sort of fun." The people who have this attitude rarely write very much. Many of them work professional jobs and they go to things like Burning Man, Grateful Dead shows, Contemporary Art events, Raves, etc. They do it because it's a fun experience, not because they think it means anything "spiritual." In fact, that all of the "spiritual woo" dominates much of the discourse is because academics are inclined to spiritual woo, the University itself being an invisible immortal entity. And many academics are "True Believers" in this aspect of the spirit realm.
The idea that psychedelic drug use is "pushed" is also fairly silly. Anyone who is remotely intellectually curious has heard of them, and there is ample evidence that they are quite harmless for the vast majority of people. Growing psilocybe mushrooms is very, very easy and has been for decades---historically, the most difficult thing was obtaining spores, and now, thanks to the internet and commercial retailers, and trading, the spores are easy to get.
Drugs like LSD are extremely easy to buy online now---if you have bitcoin, you can buy them. In my City, there are advertisements upon telephone poles indicating websites you can buy LSD, MDA, MDMA, DMT, etc. from. No one is "pushing" these drugs except in the sense that it's now more obvious than ever that they are available. Even twenty years ago, getting dosed meant being part of a "clique" but not anymore.
Finally, all of this has to be looked at from the backdrop of an alcohol-soaked society. If one is really and truly concerned about the pushing of substances, it's a truism that two wrongs don't make a right, but alcohol could probably be called a deliriant anaesthetic. It turns off the brain's executive function far more persuasively than LSD, psilocybin, MDA, DMT, etc. And it is a far more pressing social problem. We can be against all substance use, but that is not really likely to succeed. Plus, can the Grateful Dead fans really be wrong? Perish the thought.
A decent article, but I think that it is a bit one-sided.
I tested research chemicals (2c's, DOI/DOC, MXE/dissociatives, etc..) and grew cacti for 15 years. It opened dangerous doors and I was messing with entities I didn't know were dangerous until years after stopping and looking back. Even going back to try microdosing opened that door right back up.
I study the Bible now and talk with God sober, the psychedelic route is extremely spiritually dangerous. Those are real demons.
ReEnchantment is coming, but it's the wrong kind, not proper pre-enlightenment Tolkien/CS Lewis metaphysics, but drug-induced sorcery.
Also, I read that dude's article, ritualsitic violence is fairly common in most human communities, the rule of law tends to work prior to industrialism by making violent, ritual use of criminals, even for minor offenses you get corporal violence, e.g. pillory, whipping, etc. So this idea that there was this enlightened, nonviolent society in Europe at the time, because they were not degenerate mushroom freaks, is pretty silly.
The Inquisition was a thing at the time, I mean, unless you are going to go full trad-cath or whatever and say "yes, and it was a good thing, we need more inquisitors against witches, we are degenerate modernists tolerating witches!" then you think it was wrong and should not be repeated. So this weird idea that the nonviolent europeans found this system of horrible organized violence in the New World is silly. Europeans, who had a European, Christendom-centric system of ordered, organized violence, found a different system in the new world, that's all. And how did the Europeans come up with theirs, was it mushrooms? Maybe it's something ruling classes do in many societies, to inspire compliance?
Well, that is very interesting, but the problem is that not everyone reports discarnate entities. Not everyone does, but the people who do, it is very...they find it a powerful experience, often times. Indeed, it seems that people who hallucinate discarnate entities are more likely to have more powerful experiences, because, let's face it, that is pretty powerful.
It is not even a matter of dosage. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143 is a 2020 article that says, of an online sample, only 56% reported entity encounters. I mean, that is a lot, but it is not like a mountain, where basically 100% of people you expose to the mountain encounter it. So something else is going on.
Like, if you can talk to God, that is great, if God talks to you, that is great, hopefully he tells you to feed the poor, things like that. Most people I know who use psychedelics, and this is also a product of the selection bias in my friend-set, are middle class professionals. Most of them are also NOT religious, and no amount of drug use has made them have what they call "spiritual experiences," they almost always focus on it being aesthetic, or "merging into a tone" or something like that. There is no talk of discarnate entities.
Practically speaking, you have not said how the discarnate entities are dangerous, but, like, if you used these substances in a sort of social context, you would prob. realize that these are expressions of your own nervous system, and you have something to work through, or learn to cope with...but you think there are actual demons, fair enough. That is sort of a religious way of coping with sublimated psychiatric issues, no?
But what if they genuinely cure autism?
This shit sucks man
This has a very "virgin writing about sex" quality to it, which has been a problem with academic writing about psychedelics since the early days. Do you try them, and lose your "objectivity" or do you not use them and act like a Cold-War era Professor of Soviet Studies who has never visited the USSR?
One of the problems with much of the literature about psychedelics is that it is written by people who want to write more than "well, they're sort of fun." The people who have this attitude rarely write very much. Many of them work professional jobs and they go to things like Burning Man, Grateful Dead shows, Contemporary Art events, Raves, etc. They do it because it's a fun experience, not because they think it means anything "spiritual." In fact, that all of the "spiritual woo" dominates much of the discourse is because academics are inclined to spiritual woo, the University itself being an invisible immortal entity. And many academics are "True Believers" in this aspect of the spirit realm.
The idea that psychedelic drug use is "pushed" is also fairly silly. Anyone who is remotely intellectually curious has heard of them, and there is ample evidence that they are quite harmless for the vast majority of people. Growing psilocybe mushrooms is very, very easy and has been for decades---historically, the most difficult thing was obtaining spores, and now, thanks to the internet and commercial retailers, and trading, the spores are easy to get.
Drugs like LSD are extremely easy to buy online now---if you have bitcoin, you can buy them. In my City, there are advertisements upon telephone poles indicating websites you can buy LSD, MDA, MDMA, DMT, etc. from. No one is "pushing" these drugs except in the sense that it's now more obvious than ever that they are available. Even twenty years ago, getting dosed meant being part of a "clique" but not anymore.
Finally, all of this has to be looked at from the backdrop of an alcohol-soaked society. If one is really and truly concerned about the pushing of substances, it's a truism that two wrongs don't make a right, but alcohol could probably be called a deliriant anaesthetic. It turns off the brain's executive function far more persuasively than LSD, psilocybin, MDA, DMT, etc. And it is a far more pressing social problem. We can be against all substance use, but that is not really likely to succeed. Plus, can the Grateful Dead fans really be wrong? Perish the thought.
A decent article, but I think that it is a bit one-sided.
Consider it from the Lewis Ungit angle in light of what the Aztecs did after DMT trips.
https://lewisungit.substack.com/p/the-serpent-and-the-sacrifice-aztecs
Haunted Cosmos: The serpent gods
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrxaCTOusNw
I tested research chemicals (2c's, DOI/DOC, MXE/dissociatives, etc..) and grew cacti for 15 years. It opened dangerous doors and I was messing with entities I didn't know were dangerous until years after stopping and looking back. Even going back to try microdosing opened that door right back up.
I study the Bible now and talk with God sober, the psychedelic route is extremely spiritually dangerous. Those are real demons.
ReEnchantment is coming, but it's the wrong kind, not proper pre-enlightenment Tolkien/CS Lewis metaphysics, but drug-induced sorcery.
Symbolic World - ReEnchantment is coming
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7hTEzdJWDo
Also, I read that dude's article, ritualsitic violence is fairly common in most human communities, the rule of law tends to work prior to industrialism by making violent, ritual use of criminals, even for minor offenses you get corporal violence, e.g. pillory, whipping, etc. So this idea that there was this enlightened, nonviolent society in Europe at the time, because they were not degenerate mushroom freaks, is pretty silly.
The Inquisition was a thing at the time, I mean, unless you are going to go full trad-cath or whatever and say "yes, and it was a good thing, we need more inquisitors against witches, we are degenerate modernists tolerating witches!" then you think it was wrong and should not be repeated. So this weird idea that the nonviolent europeans found this system of horrible organized violence in the New World is silly. Europeans, who had a European, Christendom-centric system of ordered, organized violence, found a different system in the new world, that's all. And how did the Europeans come up with theirs, was it mushrooms? Maybe it's something ruling classes do in many societies, to inspire compliance?
Well, that is very interesting, but the problem is that not everyone reports discarnate entities. Not everyone does, but the people who do, it is very...they find it a powerful experience, often times. Indeed, it seems that people who hallucinate discarnate entities are more likely to have more powerful experiences, because, let's face it, that is pretty powerful.
It is not even a matter of dosage. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0269881120916143 is a 2020 article that says, of an online sample, only 56% reported entity encounters. I mean, that is a lot, but it is not like a mountain, where basically 100% of people you expose to the mountain encounter it. So something else is going on.
Like, if you can talk to God, that is great, if God talks to you, that is great, hopefully he tells you to feed the poor, things like that. Most people I know who use psychedelics, and this is also a product of the selection bias in my friend-set, are middle class professionals. Most of them are also NOT religious, and no amount of drug use has made them have what they call "spiritual experiences," they almost always focus on it being aesthetic, or "merging into a tone" or something like that. There is no talk of discarnate entities.
Practically speaking, you have not said how the discarnate entities are dangerous, but, like, if you used these substances in a sort of social context, you would prob. realize that these are expressions of your own nervous system, and you have something to work through, or learn to cope with...but you think there are actual demons, fair enough. That is sort of a religious way of coping with sublimated psychiatric issues, no?
Good stuff.