Define "Psychedelic"

[Sentience]

And those that are saying datura, belladonna and other deleriants - they ain't psyches so yer cheating

You see things that are not there and talk to people who are not there and walk through strange lands that you are not in, all while you are awake and seem to be walking around but you are in a different reality.

How is that not a psychedelic?

The sum total of the plant cannot be reduced to the effects of a few of its alkaloids. Datura is a true psychedelic.

 

[Shambles]

Delirium and psychedelia are different things.

 

[Sentience]

Delirium and psychedelia are different things.

I think they offer a combination of Delerium and Psychedelia. Just because a plant is a deleriant does not mean that it isnt also a powerful psychedelic.

How are we defining psychedelic anyway? In my experience Datura is not merely making you so confused that you dont know whats going on, but once you get past that stage you enter full lucid dream state superimposed on reality whether you are awake or sleeping. You can think you are in the middle of the desert but actually be in the middle of the city, awake and walking around, and your vision is clear as long as you are in the dream. You can be awake in both worlds but only experiencing the other world, and yet seem to be operating in this world.

That goes way beyond just being a deleriant.

 

[kNOw1]

If we're considering datura, then that's at the top of my list. WORST EXPERIENCE EVER. Nothing can prepare the average person for the power of atropine/scopolamine and similar alkaloids. Never mind enjoy the effects.

As far as your usual psychedelics go, I'd say mushrooms. The cons just out weigh the pros for me now. I went "One toke over the line" with boomers I guess you could say.

 

[Listening]

IMO, dissociatives (K in particular) are more useful than all psychedelics combined.

Care to elaborate? (Different thread perhaps.)

 

[Sentience]

Isn't Datura (angel's Trumpets, Devil's Trombone, hell's bells) technically a deliriant?

In my opinion, it depends on how far you go with it.

In the lower stages the physical effects are delieriant instead of psychedelic. However, you get to a point where you start dreaming while you are awake. This is when the psychedelic effects kick in. You wake up from one world into the next, see people having conversations with people who are not there, talking to people who are not there, thinking they are in a different reality, and fading in and out between the dream world and this world and sometimes blend the two.

Low dose = Delerient
Moderate dose = A sort of psychedelic due to the dream state being superimposed on reality.
High dose = coma and/or death.

 

[ungelesene_bettlek]

In the lower stages the physical effects are delieriant instead of psychedelic. However, you get to a point where you start dreaming while you are awake. This is when the psychedelic effects kick in. You wake up from one world into the next, see people having conversations with people who are not there, talking to people who are not there, thinking they are in a different reality, and fading in and out between the dream world and this world and sometimes blend the two.

what you describe are deliriant effects.

 

[nearjat]

IMO, dissociatives (K in particular) are more useful than all psychedelics combined.

I might partially agree, although I've never approached them in the typical tripping way, the thought processes on say DXM have been very useful and easy to integrate afterwords .

 

[Sentience]

Is there an objective definition for psychedelic?

Once you get past the initial stages of Datura, you no longer have blurred vision or feel disassociated....unless you come out of the waking dream state, and you are back to it being a dissociative deleriant. In the waking dream state, you have a very clear sense of self and place and your perception seems normal but you are experiencing other worlds or things which are not really there superimposed on the world around you.

I dont think this drug fits neatly into any of the predefined categories out there. I think it has traits that fit into several categories.

 

[Jamshyd]

^ To me, "psychedelic" is a word with a pretty concrete definition: anything that mimics the effects of DOI (one of the most commonly used ligands in research) both in terms of measurable lab results (receptor affinity) as well as subjectively.

This means that Datura, Ketamine, Cannabis, and MDMA are NOT psychedelics. They may have psychedelic-like effects, but I wouldn't call them psychedelic. They each have other categories that they fit in better (Deleriant, Dissociative, Cannabinoid, Empathogen - respectively).

I noticed that people who use psychedelics often tend to "macrotype" (if I may invent a word). That is, they tend to want to make everything into everything... so everything is potentially psychedelic!

----

Listening: if you are interested, check out past posts of mine on the subject in any forum on BL

 

[Choronzon333]

If we are considering deleriants what about BZ? THat sounds truly terrible, like a more intense datura experience that lasts for 3 days...

 

[Jamshyd]

^ Yet another reason to limit the use of the label "psychedelic".

 

[Thou]

^ To me, "psychedelic" is a word with a pretty concrete definition: anything that mimics the effects of DOI (one of the most commonly used ligands in research) both in terms of measurable lab results (receptor affinity) as well as subjectively.

This means that Datura, Ketamine, Cannabis, and MDMA are NOT psychedelics. They may have psychedelic-like effects, but I wouldn't call them psychedelic. They each have other categories that they fit in better (Deleriant, Dissociative, Cannabinoid, Empathogen - respectively).

I noticed that people who use psychedelics often tend to "macrotype" (if I may invent a word). That is, they tend to want to make everything into everything... so everything is potentially psychedelic!

----

Listening: if you are interested, check out past posts of mine on the subject in any forum on BL

I agree with this.

Although you must admit the literal definition of the term psychedlic is pretty loose as far as definitions go.


'Mind-manefesting' can be broadened in a most convenient way to include any and all substances that have taken on that claim.


FWIW, dissociatives (Namely ketamine, but Nitrous and DXM not withstanding) are some of my favourite psyches. Not your traditional psyches, but nonetheless...

 

[Sentience]

While I think that is a pretty cool definition and very specific, I do not believe there is any consensus as to whether that is the objective definition of psychedelic. To most people, psychedelic basically means that it distorts perception and makes you see visions or hallucinate as a primary function (As opposed to causing hallucinations indirectly via sleep deprivation. ect).

That is a very cool and useful definition of psychedelic, but it is not really a universally accepted definition.

 

[Jamshyd]

I know it isn't.

That is why I started my post with "To me..." .

 

[psood0nym]

"Mind manifesting" is how I think of the term. I'll sometimes add "5-HT" as a prefix since it distinguishes a unique "high perceptual gain" type of altered state. I also classify saliva as a psychedelic rather than dissociative or deliriant, not because of its mechanism of action, but because I've relived actual childhood memories to the point of acting them out and had emotions that I've gone into the experience with amplified under its influence, as have others. I agree that the term "psychedelic" should ideally benefit from ever-higher degrees of qualification though, as it's implicated in some very fascinating but truly unruly phenomena.

 

[Thou]

Mind manifesting is the literal definition of the term.

 

[psood0nym]

Mind manifesting is the literal definition of the term.

Right, but what experiences should that include, and why? Such a word shouldn't simply be a synonym with "altered state". "Altered state" is hopelessly ambiguous. Jamshyd wants to define it instrumentally (the most practical way), and I sympathize strongly with that, but it's philosophically unsatisfying. Sounds like a thorny but fun problem that should have its own thread, and undoubtedly has.

 

[Sentience]

To me, "psychedelic" is not defined by whether the chemical has affinity for the 5-HT receptors. In fact, not all drugs that have that affinity are going to be psychedelic, so I think its a pretty arbitrary criteria. Trazadone have 5HT affinity and I would definitely not consider it psychedelic.
I prefer a more broad definition of anything that distorts your physical perception having at least mild psychedelic properties and anything that causes you to hallucinate and see visions is a full blown psychedelic.
Using this broad and general dictionary definition of the term psychedelic, Datura definitely qualifies and so does Salvia.

 

[psood0nym]

To me, "psychedelic" is not defined by whether the chemical has affinity for the 5-HT receptors. In fact, not all drugs that have that affinity are going to be psychedelic, so I think its a pretty arbitrary criteria. Trazadone have 5HT affinity and I would definitely not consider it psychedelic.
I prefer a more broad definition of anything that distorts your physical perception having at least mild psychedelic properties and anything that causes you to hallucinate and see visions is a full blown psychedelic.
Using this broad and general dictionary definition of the term psychedelic, Datura definitely qualifies and so does Salvia.

But Jamshyd's definition isn't constrained to only receptor affinity, it also includes subjective effects, which we still haven't explicated. "Subjective effects" in this case I imagine to be statistically prevalent reports of some consistent quality of experience across users that is distinct from those reported by dissociative or deleriant users. The origins of the term "psychedelic" lie with the classical 5-HT hallucinogens; while it is possible for, say, ketamine, to be a dissociative psychedelic, that's not the same as if it were a bare "psychedelic," whose etymology implicates 5-HT hallucinogens. Both the mode of thought and the conclusions derived via those thoughts are relevant to communicating the nature of an experience. If a drug operated through another biochemical mechanism that mirrored the psychological effect of the 5-HT hallucinogens it would be equivalently psychedelic. I don't mean to quibble, it's just that it would be helpful to have more precise experiential terms when discussing subject matter so elusive.