Psychedelics & Telepathy

[wheelah]

You probably haven't watched someone give birth, but it still happens.
I have been inside my boyfriend's head multiple times. One thing about certain drugs, is that they open up some channels in your brain that are otherwise closed.

 

[Talisman]

You probably haven't watched someone give birth, but it still happens.

8)

 

[EgoTripper]

fastandbulbous:

As such, that'll mean that empathy is a bit of a stranger to you, so I can see why you'd be disbelieving of the idea (telepathy being like a direct form of empathy, not processed through all the psychological constructs mechanisms, but directly applied to the neurological structures).

Perhaps. I like your name, so I won't take that as an attempt to discredit my position by addressing the motives behind it

gloggawogga:

But your missing the point. When you tell people they are fabricating their experiences, instead of misunderstanding them, they are just going to shun you, and thats not going to lead to more understanding. A better way is to give them a rational explaination of their experience, not a condescending judgemental one.

I am blunt, unsympathetic and utterly unconcerned with wounded feelings. The only thing keeping me civil is the knowledge that patient, rational discussion is the best way to find the truth. Interpret my statements as you will, but don't make irrelevant attacks on their tone or insensitivity; I'm interested in nothing but the truth behind the claims I'm making.

Nonetheless, you claimed their experience was fabricated. I gave a rational explaination for their experience.

I did not claim their experience was fabricated; it happened. I claimed their experience was misunderstood as telepathy, and that if they were aware of the forgotten context of the experience (i.e. of all of the other times telepathy had failed them), they would be better able to see each isolated occurence as nothing more than a statistical anomaly.

You're right, though -- your explanation was rational, and equally probable. Considering all the anecdotal evidence ever presented for telepathy as a whole (which is what I'm doing), much of it will be due to selective memory. Are you contesting that? Is it your position that selective memory is not a real phenomenon? Your rational explanation will certainly account for a great deal of the anecdotal evidence as well; we're both right.

Winding Vines:

There is no psychological understanding. The mind, the human emotion, the human state of being will never be fully understood by science. And i personally prefer it that way.

Your forum name is appropriate. You fail to understand that there are only two choices when it comes to understanding objective reality: Science, or 'I dunno.' I would much prefer my psychiatrist adopt science as opposed to 'I dunno;' I suppose that's where we differ.

Talisman

Read The Conscious Universe.

I'd really rather not, since I have a rather long reading list ahead of me as it is. If you'd like to present specific evidence, I'd be happy to discuss it.

You might want to brush up on your QM. Saying that something operates on "quantum wavelengths" is meaningless.

For what must be the third time, I have a degree in physics, so let's not assume I'm ignorant of what are arguably the two most important words in quantum mechanics. "Quantum" can be used to refer specifically to quantum mechanical phenomena, or it can be used as an indication of size (i.e. describing something on a quantum scale). A telepathy system that exploited quantum entanglement to transmit complex images and messages would, at some point, have to be able to extract information from the resonance, which would require a sensitivity to fluctuations in the relevant wavefunctions -- a sensitivity to wavelength on a quantum level.

stoned_baby:

Well, the comparison with invisible leprechauns i suppose was meant to amuse. For example.
And i believe youre a bit arrogant to tell me i didnt read before posting.

A poor deflection; your amusement was allegedly at the idea that we were rejecting telepathy as impossible. As none of us were doing that, it was not arrogance to conclude you didn't read our posts.

wheelah:

You probably haven't watched someone give birth, but it still happens.

With a statement like that, you've lost any and all credibility you had for rational discussion.

To clarify, assuming you aren't being deliberately obtuse and truly don't understand: I am not demanding that I, personally, observe telepathy, but that credible evidence is presented of telepathy. To make telepathy analogous to birth, you'd have to argue that there is no credible evidence of birth. Is that what you're saying?

Let me plug my weblog right here in case any of you guys want to see my fairly offensive opinions on just about everything under the sun: http://www.egotripper.ca

 

[Kandy K]

My American friend and I had a conversation in Japanese on a low 4th plateau dosage. I don't know how that shit happened.

 

[Talisman]

For what must be the third time, I have a degree in physics, so let's not assume I'm ignorant of what are arguably the two most important words in quantum mechanics.

In that case, you might consider using more precise wording for those of us who care (and are able) to participate in the discussion (fwiw, I am published in a field related to quantum computing).

Let me plug my weblog right here in case any of you guys want to see my fairly offensive opinions on just about everything under the sun: http://www.egotripper.ca

Presumably your blog is meant for a 'sufficiently' intelligent and hard-to-offend audience. You realize, surely, that members of such an audience are highly unlikely to care about your rants on the stupidity of the world.

 

[Leprechaun]

I see a fundemental problem with this thread. There has been no context given to telepathy, nor its definition. It would seem that most people are arguing different semantics.

By definition:

Communication through means other than the senses, as by the exercise of an occult power.

Given the respective dictionary definition, we cannot discover it no matter how hard we try. Simply because all perception is an extension of sense. eg. XRay machines are functions that transform X-Rays into the visible spectrum. If we could find a machine/function that could convert Telepathic information into another form, then we could prove that some for of this information exists.

Intuition is also another form of understanding that is very difficult to define, simply because no one has defined it as an observable medium/language. It is an abstract medium of understanding.

Telepathy is close to intuition in definition.

 

[soul]

Telepathy is scientifically absurd; you will not find anyone with an intimate knowledge of the brain and its chemistry who will claim there is some means of direct communication between minds. While the intricacies of the brain are certainly not understood, a lot of people underestimate what we do know about the brain. The "people only use 5% of their brains" statistic is completely untrue; there neither is nor ever has been evidence that would suggest such a number -- and yes, the more common "10%" statistic is equally fictitious.

What is being described by telepathy is none other than the most efficient detector and the most elaborately evolved means of communication known to science. Contrary to popular belief, biological detectors do not shrink as they grow more sensitive: They increase in size. They become extremely elaborate. Sure, a dog has a more sensitive nose than we do -- but his nasal cavity has been expanded to fill his snout to achieve such sensitivity. The primitive radar system used by a shark extends the length of the animal's body.

And you'd like to present, in the face of all that absurdity, the idea that there exists an astronomically sensitive detector that is so efficient, so tiny, so masterfully designed that it has gone completely unnoticed throughout the history of medical or biological science? And not only that, but you also want this neurological miracle machine to directly manipulate frequencies of electromagnetic radiation that we can't even touch with the precision required for another device to interpret words and images? Imagine the scale of this thing; imagine the initial intensity of its transmission to be strong enough for reception at the other end. Whatever the transmission strength of the communicator, the receiver would have to be orders of magnitude more sensitive!

As for those suggesting a quantum entanglement theory of telepathy, this is something I know about (... degree in Engineering Physics ...). Firstly, you're either suggesting that our minds can somehow violate the Uncertainty Principle and extract information from quantum states, or that evolution has seated a quantum computer in our brain. While I suppose this latter idea is technically possible, it would be an unprecedented discovery in the history of science, and would completely redefine our understanding of a great deal about biology and evolution. Its complexity and intricacy would, like Adams' babelfish, stand as a fatal obstacle to evolution and the first real evidence-by-improbability of a supreme designer.

I am sure that all of you who believe you've experienced telepathy can also recall many times where you only thought you'd experienced it... only to be shown wrong down the road. Put enough chances for a hit into the mix and you're bound to get one. Then, combine all of these people into a forum about psychedelics and you're bound to get a load of anecdotal evidence. It's a simple sifting machine that gives us the good stuff and none of the overwhelmingly more abundant misses.

And all it would take -- all it would take -- for everyone to change their minds would be for a single mentalist to walk into a university and consistently perform a feat of telepathy in laboratory conditions. One. Single. Person.

The evidence against the idea of telepathy is simple: It doesn't exist. Unless you wish to suggest the existence of spirits, Earth mothers, crystal energy or God, telepathy is easily dismissed because it isn't scientific. Those of you who disagree with science... well, you probably shouldn't be ingesting drugs that "science" says are safe.

you seem to be an intelligent person, but in this case with telepathy you are simply wrong and to pursue this point of view of yours any further would only be a waste of your intelligence.

I speak from experience not theoretically so it's one thing to mutually agree with people through experience on the actual telepathic event itself, than to theoretically come to a conclusion that easily satisfies the dumbfounded and inexperienced mind on telepathic matters.

You should dig deeper Egotripper on the truth than to defend your debate where I will bluntly say is erroneous where validity is missing

 

[gloggawogga]

You're right, though -- your explanation was rational, and equally probable. Considering all the anecdotal evidence ever presented for telepathy as a whole (which is what I'm doing), much of it will be due to selective memory. Are you contesting that? Is it your position that selective memory is not a real phenomenon? Your rational explanation will certainly account for a great deal of the anecdotal evidence as well; we're both right.

No. I don't buy memory selection as an answer. Memory selection goes on all the time in everyone with regards to all memories, including yours. Thats not the underlying cause of what people are experiencing.

...I am blunt, unsympathetic and utterly unconcerned with wounded feelings....Let me plug my weblog right here in case any of you guys want to see my fairly offensive opinions on just about everything under the sun: http://www.egotripper.ca

Thanks. Now we know how your memory selection process works.

 

[tadfish]

i have had telepathy like event on lsa and lsd. on lsa once me and 2 friends to prodict what each other was thinking. there was no need to speak that night. i was amazing complete communication without words. as if we were speaking but we were not. that night others who were speaking not us 3 were thought they were so primative and that they couldn't envolve to this higher level of communication. i mean we tested it with thinking of numbers in our heads and shit. crazy stuff hey.

 

[EgoTripper]

A few points before I sign off from this discussion:

1) We aren't getting anywhere. There is a problem with this thread, and it's one that usually arises in any science vs. mysticism discussion. There are many people who accept things readily, based on anecdotal experience and gut feeling. Then, there are those people who reject unreliable evidence and only believe those things for which compelling evidence exists. These two camps never have and never will find common ground, so when it's obvious that those lines have been drawn it's time to back out of the discussion.

2) Some of you are quite sensitive. People have been getting fairly indignant in their posts, which puzzles me since things have been uniquely civil for what could have quickly become a heated flame war. I post what I think is right, and concede with apology when I'm wrong (which I've done a few times in this thread, unlike just about everyone else). That's a helluvalot better than most of the discussion you're likely to find on the web, I'm not ashamed to point out. I don't apologize if confidence is perceived as arrogance by those who like their intellectual discourse served with a delicate side of false modesty. We've had some good discussion here, which makes all this guarded hostility so unfortunate.

3) My blog was plugged because I thought some people may have appreciated the way I looked at telepathy and be interested in a similar take on other issues. A great many people write social commentary on the web; it's one of the popular uses of blogs. Mine is pretty good and I think it would be worth the time of anyone who happened to enjoy debating with me. Yes, I know that even suggesting I have a positive opinion of my work will instantly damn me as an arrogant bastard to those of you who can't conceive of pride as being virtuous, or who believe self-deprecation, under-representation and sycophantic humility are essential social graces, but I don't really want people like that writing comments on my site anyways

Anyways, for those of you who haven't yet convinced themselves that I'm a worthless egomaniac, let me offer some advice: When you have the rare opportunity online to debate with someone who is willing to be completely civil, who is willing to read and respond to every one of your rational arguments without wasting time in judgment of your motives or biased emotional state, return the favor.

And I'm still at a loss as to that selective memory dig, gloggawogga. Did I say something inconsistent that would imply that phenomenon at work? Or was that just more irrational hostility?

 

[Talisman]

EgoTripper:

Because I am not interested in debating the merits of existing evidence for psi with you on this forum (a more sophisticated (and FAR more ego-filled) forum for this topic can be found here), I will not be able to give you a summary of the evidence presented in The Conscious Universe. I understand you have a backlogs of books to read as it is, but in case you want to reconsider your opinion that psi is arbitrary and that no proper evidence exists for it, do check it out (here). If nothing else, it convinced me that there is more proper research being conducted in the field than I would ever have thought otherwise.

Very often does one encounter reasonably intelligent individuals with proclivities for rationalizing away experimental evidence on philosophical grounds. If, after careful consideration of the most up-to-date evidence, you are still convinced that psi is arbitrary, then I will accept that we have little more to discuss on the matter.

Cheers,
Talisman

 

[gloggawogga]

Dig? Are we being too sensitive? Its a fact that everyone has a selective memory, including you, EgoTripper.

 

[Blox]

in interest

either way, the material realist worldview of science (e.g. the universe exists regardless of a human being there to observe it; causality; determinism) has been employed for the last 400 hundred years, but quantum physics is in the process of setting a new paradigm for what exactly constitutes true science. you cannot separate the observed from the oberver, non-locality (instantaneous teleportation has been proved to exist), and psychic phenomena is quite possible.

One of the most famous psychologists of the early 20th century endorsed the notion that "man's vision was not simply a product of one's unconscious mind, but had bubbled up from a deeper level, from the collective unconscious of the human race itself" (p.60 Holographic Universe). Observations made on various subjects showed them displaying knowledge thousands of years old.

Before LSD was arbitrarily made illegal, psychologists would base their entire career around the effects of LSD on the human mind. Whilst tripping, subjects would describe being an insect or a fetus or some other item or being with such clarity and detail that there was something really special going on.

Altered states whether it be drugs, hynotism, medication, etc. also help people to delve into their minds and unconscious in ways not possible before. Phychologists have hypnotized people and then urged them to talk about past lives. These people couldnt recall anything about a past life if not in that hypnotic state. It takes alot of discipline to get to your inner self and the universe around you without the aid of props. This is why I am really practicing methods to increase my rates of lucid dreams.

Distant healing, remote viewing (experiments funded by the CIA at the Stanford Research Institute in the 70s & 80s), electromagnetic auras of each person among other "paranormal" phenomena are very real. But a scientist can't just coldly tell someone to do something amazing and always expect the same result (tell a girl on thr street to have sex with you and she'll probably say "no". there's no emotional connection). The felicitous occurence of such unexplainable phenomena oftentimes emerges during times of great stress, happiness, tragedy, or emotion in general. That's why a person tends to have a precognitive dream when something dreadful is about to happen. Like you have a dream of dying in a plane crash. But then you don't board the plane the next day (however the plane ends up in the pacific ocean upon departure). this is called retrocausality. This topic is amazing.

Not to mention "synchronicities" (called "coincidences" by most people) are miracles in themselves. No matter how much one wishes to enumerate the odds, the odds of some synchronicities are 0 or SO low that there's evidence of greater force or laws at work (i am not referring directly to a god).

The world isn't so black and white as people here in the West have been conditioned to think it to be. A strictly material realist view (consciousness comes from matter) of the world is now becoming very outdated. It's also a very cold and boring way to go about one's life. fortunately, the material realist view poses a superfluous amount of paradoxes that the new monistic idealist (consciousness is the basis of everything) view can solve most easily. There are no paradoxes in a monistic idealist view. Beginning in the last 80 years, science is finally starting to realize that Newton, Einstein, and the rest's theories are very fallible. Exit classical physics, enter Quantum physics. What's amusing is that what is finally being proved now "non locality", "electron being both a particle and a wave", "instantaneous communication" has been a fundamenal belief of many eastern philosophies since the beginning. Now western science if finally catching up with what eastern philosophies have been saying for thousands of years. haha.

Mysticism AND Science are merging together. The Western Dichotomy of the two will soon not exist.

Check out: "The Holographic Universe", "Limitless Mind", "The Self-Aware Universe", "Lucky You", "Mind over Matter", "Mysticism and the New Physics" if you're into what new science (quantum physics, mechanics) is proving.

 

[fastandbulbous]

I think the best way to go about investigative science is to take phenomena (be it analytically observed or anecdotal), come up with a hypothesis on how it could occur, then test it out. All you are doing is testing one theory to try and explain the mechanisms behind these observed events.

Ego Tripper:
I don't think you can write off a phenomenon, just because you can't find a model that works for you. For many years, a whole load of behavioural scientists thought that people reporting synesthesia were either mentally ill or full of shit because there was no way of 'proving' such a subjective phenomenon. It was only by lateral thinking (using a variation of the colour blindness cards with symbols insted of just dots) that it was possible to come up with an objective test; that in no way invalidates all the people who reported it before the objective test was created. Neuroscientists had theories as to how it may occur well before the objective test came into play, so why can't you conceed that it may be possible, just that we have yet to come up with the definitive, objective test (for telepathy between genetically similar individuals - I don't think psychedelics play any part in any telepathic communication).

After all, had this discussion been happening 30 years ago, you could easily have been laughing at those believing that synesthesia was a real phenomenon with exactly the same arguements, despite a wealth of 'anecdotal' evidence


In the words of (I think) one of the members of Spinal Tap:

"Just like, open your mind real wide man!"

 

[theghostofbillhicks]

^ Word.

 

[wheelah]

^ I second that wurd.

"you've lost any and all credibility you had for rational discussion"
I love that you're the one who can decide that for me. Thanks.
By the way, I have telepathically communication multiple times. It happens. Accept it.

 

[neal_cassady]

Interesting debate that I won't even attempt to dissect and respond to in any depth other than to provide a couple of statements that may be valid or may simply be non sequiturs worthy of ignoring...

As has been mentioned already the major issue here appears to be the definition of 'telepathy'. Whilst the version offered by Leprechaun (Communication through means other than the senses, as by the exercise of an occult power) is certainly valid, it's not the one I subscribe to. I'm more inclined to simply accept that 'telepathy' is communication via non-standard and as yet non-recognised means.

The scientific method - Love it, generally ascribe to it but fear the that the current focus on extreme reductionism allows important emergent phenomena to be lost. Pulp a book, apply spectrophotometric analysis, chemical analysis, look under a scanning electron microscope, perform whatever the most modern lab techniques will allow and you can prolly identify the species of tree from which the paper was made, you can provide a complete chemical breakdown of the ink, but at no point will you have any understanding of what the author tried to say. Scientific reductionism has its limitations.

I'm as sceptical as the next university educated science stream product but I too have had (although in 40 years only a couple) of experiences I would name 'telepathic' and they were all associated with altered states.

I simply believe that the different perspectives that psychedelics allow us to experience also allow us to process sensory input in ways that differ from consensual reality (accept data from sources normally ignored or excluded from baseline states and then process that data in novel ways that again differ significantly from those methods used at baseline states)...the result being we 'read the mind' of another or seem to know things that in a normal state we would remain ignorant of.

Telepathy from my perspective requires no 'magick', its simply the label we give to an experience that is outside the norm and cannot be easily described or justified using standard terminology. Because I take a very subtle non-verbal physical cue from a friend and add that data to the strength of a particular pheromone they currently emanate (none of which I could acknowledge or even be aware of in a baseline state - Huxley's 'reducing valve' function in play) and utilise that input to make an intuitive assumption based upon non-Aristotelian logical gymnastics I would consider indefensible at baseline, and if that result turns out to be absolutely correct?...well that's how I explain telepathy, no magic, nothing that denies science, simply a level of attunement between two people that is much higher than normal at that time for whatever reason.

And to finish, Athur C. Clarkes third law - 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'. Just because we cannot easily or readily explain this phenomena atm doesn't mean it actually relies upon the inexplicable, just that we cannot yet follow the logic.

 

[Splatt]

This is totally schizophrenic but...
(I am coming down from meth, MDA, salvia and nitrous combo)..

But has anyone ever had a ego loss/telepathic non-language connected trip with a friend. A friend of mine had the exact same trip as me, at the same time. we were in a interior realm and we were communicating with each other. We totally cracked. Some points during this "experiment" I would go into a 4 minute trance state (from the music and ...drugs ofcourse) which was seen by my mate. Where my head andf mouth and face were having in-perfectly-timed convulsions to the sound of some hard NRG set. This happened for about 4 minutes and apparently looked completely impossible physically, and totally fucking schizophrenic. Like HDS/solitary confiement insanity ward material...

Anyway, my question is... Please ignore me since I am still coming down if this is totally silly.

But has anyone else, had this same visual we shared while we were "linked" This all seemed like it was in a distance, yet so close.. but like 100m away at the same time... It cannot be described by 2D or 3D visuals. Anyway besides the bulbv patterning you get in the back ground. But there were two ovals or head type visuals.. connected by a thinm line between the upper heads. and the bulb fractals are bubbling and flowing around in perfect time to everything, while our subconscious thoughts were being transfered without language, at very high speeds.

I know.. this is completely schizo.. someone tell me if they';ve had something very simular.. or maybe don't tell. I was scared after I came out of this trip right.. then I had to tell my mate the whole thing, but we had the same thing to tell me. The visual I sent to him when we were sober (a badly drawn version done in 5 secs), the one we shared, he said it was very simular and we didn't tell each other the vidsual at the time.

Okay maybe I am cracking.

 

[Splatt]

^^ WTF Im leaving that post there to serve as a reminder to get sleep after psychedelic experiments and stop obsessing over them.

 

[fastandbulbous]

I believe we are all receptive to each other's energy fields, infact there is a magnetic field right now surrounding each of us, about 3 feet out. Maybe telepathy involves communication with this field

That's what I've been getting at as the basis of a theory as to how it could be possible (the other part being grounded in RF theory). Only the magnetic field will in fact extend out infinitely from each of us, only it diminishes according to an inverse square ratio, so there will be an effective 'cut-off' distance where the magnetic field becomes so weak it is lost/swamped by others and the Earth's magnetic field