LSD- ever communicate with someone via thoughts alone!?

[Vurtual]

...There's two paths you can take now. One leads to mental illness and bad times. The other is to be rational and understand that drugs affect your mind and beliefs powerfully, and are obviously the source of this experience...

That's pretty ridiculous to claim it's your brand of rationality or the madhouse. People hold all sorts of beliefs about things like telepathy, rational or otherwise, without being mentally ill. For some people thinking too rationally and without enough 'irrational' emotion can lead to mental illness. Everyone's different.

 

[Jabberwocky]

3nlightenedon3, science is the wrong word, it's going to get people asking if they think it was real. You experienced it, so that's what I'd go on. Now if this is something you're trying to understand better, I'd go out and look for someone who claims to have had the same experience and see how it compares to your experience, until you find one that fits. You're doing it but maybe not in the best way. Many have had these experiences and books have been written about it. I doubt you're on a quest to prove telepathy is real. Whether telepathy is dangerous or not, I get that argument, if you look at it as a power unleashed on unsuspecting people, but that wasn't the case here. Sounds like you had an intimate moment with another person that was also sensitive to this and it was only positive, so I don't see the danger in that.

 

[whataboutheforests]

In the case of telepathy and psychedelics, tread very wearily. A friend of mine was hospitalized several weeks after a DOx trip for psychosis. Over the course of several trips he became increasingly convinced that he could project his thoughts to other people, and that others could hear his thoughts. The DOx was the straw that broke the camel's back, and unfortunately it took him half a year to fully recover.

You mentioned that you want some scientific data to explain what you have experienced. Simply put, there is no science to support claims of telepathy, nor is there any evidence of these "auras" that you mentioned. Perhaps you are underestimating the probability of coincidence. Given that you and your girlfriend are probably very close and share much in common, it is not that farfetched for you two to share similar thoughts.

the only rational person in this thread..

OP, telepathy does not exist, period. There are a number of variables that could have caused you to know what your gf was thinking, including facial expressions (which you mention) and subtle body language. I think you were just feeling a very strong sense of empathy. I think if you take a step back and analyze this experience, you will realize it was just LSD induced empathy...

Like EsInfinite already mentioned, everybody's life experiences are subjective. Science is objective, and there is no scientific evidence for telepathy. I'm not saying what you experienced didn't happen, just that there is a logical science based explanation that is different from what you think was happening.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I'm not saying what you experienced didn't happen, just that there is a logical science based explanation that is different from what you think was happening.

lol, I might not be rational enough to comment, but I agree completely. Science — by design — is not built to deal with consciousness. But when you ask a scientific question about a question that resides outside its domain, like consciousness, it doesn't work very well. So imagine examining someones brain using an EEG , and asking them to report a telepathic experience; perhaps you see a spike or something. Now you have to give a logical explanation. What is that explanation going to be if it is a scientific one?

 

[Boupstarnm]

You can do it sober. Have you ever astral traveled?

At this point in my life it's a cross between being promising and being a huge pain in the dick.

So like the electromagnet signal you are using is considered "sacred" to people so they expect you to act like it all the fucking time.

Women do it with each other all the time. People are told it's a family secret and only mother and daughter can do it, then when you have kids it's parent to child. Depending on your family and your traditions you may have been doing it your whole life without realizing it.

Ever think "why didn't I think of that?" It's cuz you didn't. You thought the question and someone or something hit you back with an answer.

People aren't always cognizant that they do it. Think of it like you're sending a question to the collective human thought cloud and an answer comes back.

Often the answers we don't want to hear. Sit up straight, don't do drugs, don't smoke, eat vegan...

Try it sober with your girl. Lovers often share a thought cloud.

 

[EntheoDjinn]

....I might not be rational enough to comment, but I agree completely. Science — by design — is not built to deal with consciousness. But when you ask a scientific question about a question that resides outside its domain, like consciousness, it doesn't work very well. So imagine examining someones brain using an EEG , and asking them to report a telepathic experience; perhaps you see a spike or something. Now you have to give a logical explanation. What is that explanation going to be if it is a scientific one?

This link below accesses a pretty good attempt by a friend of mine and two of his colleagues. What the OP has to bear in mind is that science is not a "thing", rather it is a method of enquiry. Now consciousness is a hotly-debated issue and scientific method is, as levelsBeyond wisely points out, very poorly equipped to pin it down, let alone prise it open to look inside

DISTANT PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL INTERACTION EFFECTS
BETWEEN RELATED AND UNRELATED PARTICIPANTS
Marios Kittenis, Peter G. Caryl, & Paul Stevens Koestler,
Parapsychology Unit, University of Edinburgh, Psychology Department, University of Edinburgh

http://www.parapsych.org/papers/06.pdf

E

 

[PriestTheyCalledHim]

You can do it sober. Have you ever astral traveled?

At this point in my life it's a cross between being promising and being a huge pain in the dick.

So like the electromagnet signal you are using is considered "sacred" to people so they expect you to act like it all the fucking time.

Women do it with each other all the time. People are told it's a family secret and only mother and daughter can do it, then when you have kids it's parent to child. Depending on your family and your traditions you may have been doing it your whole life without realizing it.

Ever think "why didn't I think of that?" It's cuz you didn't. You thought the question and someone or something hit you back with an answer.

People aren't always cognizant that they do it. Think of it like you're sending a question to the collective human thought cloud and an answer comes back.

Often the answers we don't want to hear. Sit up straight, don't do drugs, don't smoke, eat vegan...

Try it sober with your girl. Lovers often share a thought cloud.

What does telepathy have to do with astral projection or astral traveling?

 

[[éS]Infinite]

lol, I might not be rational enough to comment, but I agree completely. Science — by design — is not built to deal with consciousness. But when you ask a scientific question about a question that resides outside its domain, like consciousness, it doesn't work very well. So imagine examining someones brain using an EEG , and asking them to report a telepathic experience; perhaps you see a spike or something. Now you have to give a logical explanation. What is that explanation going to be if it is a scientific one?

I don't see how he said that science can not investigate consciousness, or why you feel that way. I also don't quite follow your hypothetical situation. You are observing through an EEG the electrical activity of an individual's brain, mostly the outer cortex. You ask them to recall a telepathic experience, and hypothetically see "a spike or something". How do you explain the activity you are observing? It would be important to note how this activity is different from the brain's typical activity, how long it was sustained, etc. It would also be important to acknowledge that EEGs are not appropriate tools for this sort of task, and that an fMRI would be a better choice in order to determine which functional areas of the entire brain are showing the activity. Once you know the function, you can explain the activity. "Oh, they are showing activity in the hippocampus as they are recalling the experience" or "Look, his auditory cortex is active, he must be thinking about something to do with sound". You can't just say "Oh I have no idea what that is, therefore I found the neurological basis of telepathy" without adequately investigating the claim and providing support for it.

 

[Doldrugs]

That's pretty ridiculous to claim it's your brand of rationality or the madhouse. People hold all sorts of beliefs about things like telepathy, rational or otherwise, without being mentally ill. For some people thinking too rationally and without enough 'irrational' emotion can lead to mental illness. Everyone's different.

It's not mine or anyone else's. It's science, there's no "version." If a thing can be independently verified by multiple unbiased sources in a controlled environment it's likely real. For example, the effect of psychedelic drugs on the mind. If it can't, it's likely not real, for example telepathy. Something that has been examined and tested forever and never, ever verified as remotely real.

Being rational and scientific has never led to mental illness, show me the peer reviewed study. Now you're just lying. You're feeding and encouraging both mental illness and lazy ignorance. The latter is unhelpful and disappointing, the former is dangerous.

 

[Vurtual]

You were saying that just by thinking a certain way about telepathy that someone would become mentally ill - i was saying that's bollocks. I wasn't saying anything about whether telepathy is real or not. I was also humourously suggesting that for some people, their mental illness might derive from too much of what they perceive to be rationality, leading to neglect of their emotional needs (i know this can be the case anecdotally, but don't have a study - show me peer reveiwed studies that show that believing in telepathy results in mental illness first ).

 

[murphythecat]

It's not mine or anyone else's. It's science, there's no "version." If a thing can be independently verified by multiple unbiased sources in a controlled environment it's likely real. For example, the effect of psychedelic drugs on the mind. If it can't, it's likely not real, for example telepathy. Something that has been examined and tested forever and never, ever verified as remotely real.

Being rational and scientific has never led to mental illness, show me the peer reviewed study. Now you're just lying. You're feeding and encouraging both mental illness and lazy ignorance. The latter is unhelpful and disappointing, the former is dangerous.

please tell me how you could observe scientifically telepathic communication
this is very important. if you claim that this could be verified, please explain how.
if there no such thing as a possible scientific test to verify OP's claim, the scientific approach is to hypothesize and not claim that because we cannot prove OP's veracity, that its necessary wrong.
imo, you dont sound like a scientist at all

I don't see how he said that science can not investigate consciousness, or why you feel that way. I also don't quite follow your hypothetical situation. You are observing through an EEG the electrical activity of an individual's brain, mostly the outer cortex. You ask them to recall a telepathic experience, and hypothetically see "a spike or something". How do you explain the activity you are observing? It would be important to note how this activity is different from the brain's typical activity, how long it was sustained, etc. It would also be important to acknowledge that EEGs are not appropriate tools for this sort of task, and that an fMRI would be a better choice in order to determine which functional areas of the entire brain are showing the activity. Once you know the function, you can explain the activity. "Oh, they are showing activity in the hippocampus as they are recalling the experience" or "Look, his auditory cortex is active, he must be thinking about something to do with sound". You can't just say "Oh I have no idea what that is, therefore I found the neurological basis of telepathy" without adequately investigating the claim and providing support for it.

you clearly have not understood levelsbeyond post.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I don't see how he said that science can not investigate consciousness, or why you feel that way.

Rational inquiry isn't just the domain of science. Mathematicians use it and they don't deal in the physical world. I'm saying science is for understanding the physical world. It works magnificently well for that. It doesn't help as much for navigating thoughts, emotions and altered states of consciousness because it believes everything has a physical explanation. Love and intimacy has a physical explanation that is scientific but I wouldn't go to a physical scientist to to solve my intimacy issues. Science as a foundation can be build into any number of professions, but the deeper you go the more they start turning into psuedo-sciences and the physical scientists often get offended . When you address something from a purely physical scientist perspective you get a projection of the truth about consciousness that may not be useful or helpful in other domains, even if it casts a physical manifestation and gives satisfactory explanations.

 

[[éS]Infinite]

you clearly have not understood levelsbeyond post.

Rather than state my lack of understanding, perhaps try to explain why I did not understand his/her post so that maybe I could understand it.

Rational inquiry isn't just the domain of science. Mathematicians use it and they don't deal in the physical world. I'm saying science is for understanding the physical world. It works magnificently well for that. It doesn't help as much for navigating thoughts, emotions and altered states of consciousness because it believes everything has a physical explanation. Love and intimacy has a physical explanation that is scientific but I wouldn't go to a physical scientist to to solve my intimacy issues. Science as a foundation can be build into any number of professions, but the deeper you go the more they start turning into psuedo-sciences and the physical scientists often get offended . When you address something from a purely physical scientist perspective you get a projection of the truth about consciousness that may not be useful or helpful in other domains, even if it casts a physical manifestation and gives satisfactory explanations.

Again I must be confused. Why mention that a physical scientist, one who deals with non-living systems, does not have anything to do with your psychology? Why even state that a physical scientist offers some sort of perspective in regards to consciousness, you must know this is incorrect.
Did you intend to state that you think the mind is something non-physical and separate from the body, and that it can not be studied through physical means? I would argue that the mind is generated by the brain, as there is adequate support for this notion. You take out a certain area of the brain, the mind loses whichever conscious function the area was responsible for. I don't mean to come off as rude if I am, I can acknowledge that I could be completely wrong about everything I know, including that I am conscious, but holding such a belief is not beneficial and there is little to support it.

 

[Doldrugs]

Science explains thoughts and feelings just fine. You don't need to turn to pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo.

You were saying that just by thinking a certain way about telepathy that someone would become mentally ill

No I didn't.

Encouraging or embracing delusional thinking will worsen existing mental illness. When someone takes drugs and brings their delusions outside of the drug experience, encouraging those delusions is frankly unethical.

please tell me how you could observe scientifically telepathic communication
this is very important. if you claim that this could be verified, please explain how.
if there no such thing as a possible scientific test to verify OP's claim, the scientific approach is to hypothesize and not claim that because we cannot prove OP's veracity, that its necessary wrong.
imo, you dont sound like a scientist at all

You fundamentally do not understand science.

 

[murphythecat]

there you go again. I guess you try to convince yourself with all your scientific non sense?

this thread is not about someone being delusional or people being unethical, its about people mentioning their drug experience and some people did acknowledge to have had same type of experience, me included.
you dont believe me? I could t care less. you think im delusional? I think the same of you with the need to provide evidence and I think your very close minded and a bit naive toward the illusion of science.

Science explains thoughts and feelings just fine. You don't need to turn to pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo.



No I didn't.

Encouraging or embracing delusional thinking will worsen existing mental illness. When someone takes drugs and brings their delusions outside of the drug experience, encouraging those delusions is frankly unethical.



You fundamentally do not understand science.

 

[snazzy_sn]

i mean if we're objects in space and our thoughts occur from object inside or outside or whatever in space somewhere doesn't this make sense? I mean naturally these things would be able to be interpreted...

Not to take the fun out of it or anything....

 

[MrYessir]

Science is not the approach to explain telepathy, but it can be used to a minor extent i'm sure. It has something to do with LSD giving you access to not only a universal consciousness but a special radius of subconscious powers is accessed for those in the area.

 

[Vurtual]

...No I didn't.

Encouraging or embracing delusional thinking will worsen existing mental illness. When someone takes drugs and brings their delusions outside of the drug experience, encouraging those delusions is frankly unethical.

I was referring to when you said: "There's two paths you can take now. One leads to mental illness and bad times." If you'd have said 'there are two paths (among many)' and 'one can lead to mental illness' i would have agreed. That you can make sweeping unqualified claims like this makes it sound like you don't understand science .

Is love rational or a delusion? Perfectly normal people live on all sorts of delusions everyday without being pathological - the day to day magical thinking that makes the world go round, like ideas of romantic love, fate or destiny, like 'i'm special if only everyone noticed' - many people need these comforting delusions - even the most scientific and rational of us (maybe more than most).

I accept the point you're making about it being a bad idea to encourage obviously delusional thinking in people who are already mentally ill/psychotic, but believing in telepathy doesn't qualify on its own (thinking you're telepathic with the telly and it's talking about you, maybe...) - all sorts of 'rational' people with intellects at least as large as yours have believed in telepathy over the years without ever being mentally ill.

 

[Doldrugs]

Believing in telepathy is either mental illness or ignorance. There's many forms of both, but that's what it boils down to.

 

[murphythecat]

OP didnt believe, he experienced it.

that what you dont understand doldrugs, you have not experienced everything bro and you cannot pretend that anyone who experienced somehting you didnt are crazy.

Believing in telepathy is either mental illness or ignorance. There's many forms of both, but that's what it boils down to.