• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

Are the DMT experiences simply physiological?

salvia is the most uncomfortable thing I've ever done...felt like my brain was melting into the couch....in a not cool melting sensation....never again.
 
Wow that does not sound like something that could be useful for something good for a person. Have you seen any reports where that substance was used for a positive result?
 
[QUOTE=TheJamesMachine;12908191 Are dmt experiences; low dose, sub BT, and full BT simply the affects of physical changes in perception of what we already know,

How can we know?
 
What Do Know And That Is Factual Is DMT Is Exact Same Head Trip And Chemical Substance We Naturally Produce IN FAR SMALLER AMOUNTS IN OUR DREAMS CAUSING US TO DREAM AND HAVE R.E.M. Sleep And Melatonin And All that Good Stuff, Etc, Etc, Etc.
 
^You are aware that there is actually no factual basis for those ideas right?

Insightful Post Regardless :| ;)
 
willow11 said:
Nice :) <3 Are you a synaesthete?
Click to expand...

I like to cover all the ends, there are so many angles you can approach a subject from. Everything is an allegory to me, it is the basis of my reality.
 
TheJamesMachine said:
Hmm....well, to what do folks refer when they say salt?
Click to expand...

In this thread, I mentioned desciribng the taste of salt as an example of the inadequacy of language to describe experience.

I'm not sure if you are referring to drugs being referred to by their salts. For example, one could have DMT hydrochloride, with is DMT bound to hydrochloride ions. Hydrochloride could be called a salt. On the other hand, if you are smoking DMT, you wouldn't smoke the HCL form, you would smoke the freebase as it will vaporise better/lower temperature and is subjectively less harsh, which is DMT 'free' from its salt 'base'. DMT HCL is therefore theoretically less potent by weight then freebase. This is something shared by pretty much all drugs. Cocaine is generally cocaine hydrochloride, but crack is freebased cocaine.

Or they could be talking about sodium chloride or table salt :)
 
Well back to the original question...my input is that I think it is irrelevant in the end whether the experience is physiological or psychological or whatever...what's important is the ability of serotonin mimicking drugs especially to act as 'messengers' if you will...which scientifically speaking they do actually do this, though it is up to us as human beings to interpret the messages and make the experience profound.

It seems to be that the nature of human consciousness and language is based off of these serotogenic systems especially, but also many other chemicals and physiological functions within our nervous system and brain. And as some of you have mentioned, it is precisely this language that limits us in our ability to express ourselves....and in many ways language seems to work against us because in the western cartesian world of understanding it seems that the psychedelic experience is nothing more than 'physiology'...and "a bunch of chemicals"....we'll we shouldn't be so quick to assume that these chemicals like serotonin are lifeless mundane entities....because when we look at the bigger picture these chemicals are basically the building blocks of life...or at least they are the building blocks of human consciousness...and play an integeral role in nature, bridging the gap between plants, humans, and animals.

But I think there is a lot still to be learned about the connections between human consciousness and biochemistry....but we shouldn't assume that therefore the psychedelic experience is somehow less authentic or 'supernatural'...because these are cultural constructions that get in the way of what's actually important about the psychedelic experience.

Essentially I think psychedelics exist for a reason, plants (the natural masters of chemistry) in a sense use human beings as extensions...when you look at the human brain you see it is hardwired with particular receptors that have high affinity to certain substances (namely tryptamines, cannabinoids, opioids etc etc)...these substances all carry very different effects profiles, but share in common the fact that they elicit various behaviours which have profound ramifications in the human universe...how humans interact in the global scheme of things.

So I think the plants are definatley here to tell us something (using chemicals as messengers)...we as humans seem to be the most complex medium through which mother nature has expressed her self as of yet (at least it seems that way from our perspective). But plants may be equally as complex as we are...just in a different way.

I guess the moral of my post is really that it can be tempting to try and categorize the psychedelic experience as just a "drug induced experience"...it can be so overwhelming that we might think "oh, it's all just the effects of a drug..nothing more". But if we set aside our preconceptions...and perhaps take on the demeanor of a young child...we wouldn't be so quick to try and rationalize the experience, but rather just accept it for what it is...or whatever you believe it is. There's no right or wrong, reality is essentially a subjective thing...and that's what the psychedelic experience has brought to the table for me.

Governments of course don't want people to question the nature of their reality too much...so it's natural that the world of conservative rational thinking and following societal norms people would be hostile to the notion of the psychedelic experience...as it forces one to re-think the nature of reality and culture.

Then again, this is just my interpretation of the whole thing....but I genuinely think that psychedelics will play a key role in solving major global social and political conflicts in the future. Essentially the hippies were onto something big, but they got shut down by the military-gov complex....the revolution is just starting back up again, and this time it's here to stay (hopefully)...but I really see a lot of progress in clinical research and personal/spiritual growth....I think western science and aboriginal/indigenous schools of thought can co-exist...it's important not to fall into one school of thought, collaboration really is key in progressing with psychedelics.
 
"Are the DMT experiences simply physiological?"

Does the mind rule the body or does the body rule the mind or does it matter?
This question has no answer and doesn't need one, either.
Spiritually minded people will say no, while scientifically minded people will say yes.
Who is right?
They both are.
 
Dresden said:
"Are the DMT experiences simply physiological?"

Does the mind rule the body or does the body rule the mind or does it matter?
This question has no answer and doesn't need one, either.
Spiritually minded people will say no, while scientifically minded people will say yes.
Who is right?
They both are.
Click to expand...

In the end, I think everything is just a viewpoint based on personal experience. Some people just get confused when enough other people share their viewpoint and think it somehow becomes more 'real' than other viewpoints. Though if absolutely nobody knew I existed, could I even be considered real? All of our human experience is conveyed through the physiological, so I guess the question in the OP could be reformatted to the following: are DMT experiences conveyed to us from the "outside" or are the created on the "inside"? Well, you took a chemical which wasn't part of your nervous system before (in such quantities atleast) and introduced it into your body. You changed yourself, and suddenly what you consider as reality has changed, rather dramatically in this case. In the best case scenario, everything you knew including you has completely vanished and is perhaps replaced by something else. How do you choose what to believe in? I guess most people settle with the state they spend more time in, unless that experience sucks for them and they start escaping reality as the expression goes.
 
theres a part of it that its definitely true. amazing and life changing experience. what is true and real about the experience is hard to be certain, but im sure theres a lot of truth in the dmt experience
 
^Just to play devils advocate. Lack of evidence does not 100% disqualify an argument nor completely prove its counter argument.
 
willow11 said:
^Just to play devils advocate. Lack of evidence does not 100% disqualify an argument nor completely prove its counter argument.
Click to expand...

The only reason to believe anything is evidence. Believing something contrary to the evidence is foolish and childish. Could the world be ruled by invisible all powerful leprachauns? Well, you can't prove it isn't because you can't prove a negative. But believing it's true would be silly and counterproductive.
 
^I guess that there was not apparent evidence for the earths roundness 1000 years ago. I suppose that was my point. Knowledge is always limited. I was just being whimsical and a bit flippant. :)

Would you say that DMT being purely physiological detracts from the experience at all?

Doldrugs said:
The only reason to believe anything is evidence
Click to expand...

Evidence doesn't really explain what we believe about ethics though. There is a large part of human consciousness that is intuitive and instinctual and not readily available for the conscious mind to interact with. There's really no evidence for things emotion and yet we all believe in their existence and act as if they are real.

I just mean that not all knowledge is invalidated by lack of evidence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top