Does anyone really know "how" to take LSD anymore?

[Crashing]

That theory makes sense for LSD alone, but what about entheogens that have been used for centuries by various cultures all around the world? I have found LSD, mushrooms, and DMT (and presumably mescaline and other drugs) to all have a similar 'phenomena' going on, and this is not by any means a recent discovery.

For me, I never really knew much about it other than it would supposedly make me 'hallucinate'. That sounded fun, but i soon found out there was something much greater going on. At least, that was my interpretation. I then studied more about the counter culture in America, and later got more into studying ancient peoples of the Eastern world's use of psychedelics, which seemed to be a much more sort of 'wise' and more beneficial and coincidently even a more fun way to use them. Making it into a whole big experience is a blast, because applying all the techniques that the less urbanized societies throughout history have used have resulted in much richer experiences.

The difference for me has been night and day, and isn't really possible to convey in words. One either decides to delve deep, or ignore that aspect.

 

[alasdairm]

there are as many ways to take drugs, reasons to take drugs as there are people who take drugs, if not more.

i can obviously only speak for myself but i have no problem with the discussion of the idea that these drugs are a powerful tool and that tool can be used in various ways and to various ends. i do have a problem, however, when somebody says (or implies) that one approach is somehow objectively 'better' than another or that one choice is 'right' and another choice 'wrong'.

alasdair

 

[MonKeYDNA]

I feel like the people on this thread that oppose the OP's standpoint, or labelled others as "snobs" may have ignored that aspect. Isn't it odd how you can be way into your own trip, and then a buddy says something that completely turns you around and causes you to forget everything you were on to. I wonder how many have come down from a trip by choice and how many have come down to conform with the group.

 

[Crashing]

The point of right vs. wrong is completely moot. The only objective aspect of psychedelic drug use is that they can be very harmful depending on the person and situation.

I think everyone should be entitled to fully explain the reasoning behind their opinion on what they feel is safe for them, without anyone having any problems with it. If anyone is offended by that and lashes out rather than explaining their side and actually refuting something with experiential evidence, there may be a reason behind that and perhaps it should be given a second thought.

You can take any drug, heroin, lsd, nutmeg etc..., and the reasons for doing so are always going to differ at least a little bit. What doesn't change is the potential harm that the drugs carry, and that is what should be focused on. If you really think LSD has no potential for harm, that is another debate.

 

[alasdairm]

i understand what you're saying but, with respect, your earlier comments (and some of those from others) in the thread, read like (and i recognise that i'm paraphrasing): "i'm using these drugs correctly and you are using them incorrectly".

perception is reality? very often, yes.

alasdair

 

[webbykevin]

^ Agree, I think a better way to express it would be "The way I am using drugs is the correct way for ME to take them based on my own personality, expectations and needs right now".

 

[TheAppleCore]

i do have a problem, however, when somebody says (or implies) that one approach is somehow objectively 'better' than another or that one choice is 'right' and another choice 'wrong'.

Would you have a problem if I saw you attempting to chop down a tree with the back end of an axe, and corrected you by telling you to turn the implement around?

Drugs are tools, just like an axe.

 

[webbykevin]

Would you have a problem if I saw you attempting to chop down a tree with the back end of an axe, and corrected you by telling you to turn the implement around?

Drugs are tools, just like an axe.

What if the person then turned around to you and said "i'm not actually trying to chop down the tree, i am just trying to dislodge a few seed pods from the upper branches". ?

 

[TheAppleCore]

^ Nice response.

Yes, because we all have different purposes for using psychedelics, we all must use them in different ways.

My point is only this: if you want to have fun, you can have a LOT more fun with psychedelics by coupling them with a concrete project, like becoming skilled in some form of art, for instance, than by just taking drugs and watching the pretty colors behind closed eyes.

 

[jazz88]

Heya all,

The conversation rages on.

In modern (American) society, we have a general disregard for saying that things are "right" or "wrong". Its a central part of our post-modern, multi-cultural zeitgeist. That being said, I often heartily disagree with the impulse.

Let me play the devils advocate here and propose the idea that LSD should only be when administered and supervised by a well trained and experienced professional psychologist. So unfun right. Boooooorring. There goes all the rebellion, there goes all the baddass rock and roll connotations. All the sex and cache goes out the window.

What would we be left with in that situation? Stuffy academic, sterile psychedelic experiences. Maybe, yes. But we would also most likely have a drastically higher rate of properly integrated, safe, eye opening, and positive LSD experiences, and a far lower rate of psychotic breaks, physical injury and trauma done by the drug too.

I'm totally comfortable in saying I'd rather have the latter than the former. My Google alert for "LSD" brings daily bad news about young men doing stupid things on LSD, all of which are more "bricks in the wall" of the drugs negative reputation amongst the general population. Ever new story is a bummer. They harm the drugs reputation, and keep it from doing great good in our society amongst alcoholics, the terminally ill, and thrill seekers/spiritual seekers alike.

It might just be possible that the rock star rebellion, freedom at all costs, bad boy culture of LSD that is now inextricably linked to the drug, is the very thing that's keeping it relegated to the wild fringes of society.

jazz88

p.s. dude jumped of a bridge a day ago.. was he just "using the drug how he wanted to?"
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20130227/NEWS02/302270012/

 

[webbykevin]

Let me play the devils advocate here and propose the idea that LSD should only be when administered and supervised by a well trained and experienced professional psychologist. So unfun right. Boooooorring.

I can't think of anything worse

There goes all the rebellion, there goes all the baddass rock and roll connotations. All the sex and cache goes out the window.

Why do you assume that all LSD experiences outside of a clinical environment have to be like that ? People are perfectly capable of exploring the infinite facets and possibilities of the compound in there own way, in private.

What about the personal bonding that can occur between 2 people sharing great intimate psychedelic sex ?

How about an experience alone in a beautiful outdoor nature setting ? are you telling me that sitting on a hilltop overlooking an amazing sunset with the wind blowing in your hair the animals all squawking and chirping is not as good as sitting in a sterile environment talking to some dick in a white coat this is getting wages for being with you ?

What would we be left with in that situation? Stuffy academic, sterile psychedelic experiences. Maybe, yes. But we would also most likely have a drastically higher rate of properly integrated, safe, eye opening, and positive LSD experiences, and a far lower rate of psychotic breaks, physical injury and trauma done by the drug too.

So if someone is inexperienced or has the tendency to do stupid out of control things when high then for sure let them do it in a safe and supervised way, but for every nutcase that goes off the rails there are millions of people that can navigate through even a high dose experience without being physically out of control or in any danger of harm, so both methods are relevant in the appropriate situation, one isn't better than the other across the board.

I'm totally comfortable in saying I'd rather have the latter than the former.

Good for you.

My Google alert for "LSD" brings daily bad news about young men doing stupid things on LSD, all of which are more "bricks in the wall" of the drugs negative reputation amongst the general population. Ever new story is a bummer. They harm the drugs reputation, and keep it from doing great good in our society amongst alcoholics, the terminally ill, and thrill seekers/spiritual seekers alike.

Stop googling then !, Don't just consume opinions that are often sensationalized versions of the truth, Form your own through direct experience, I don't give a fuck if google, the BBC, national geographic and you tube are all awash with bad trip stories, they are awash with bad news on any subject, you don't see headlines like "An airplane full of tourists landed safely in Cairo today" you only ever get the crashes cos that's the way the media works.

Can you imagine fox news leading with "In mexico today 6 people tripped for 3 days to the point of anguish and ecstacy at an iboga clinic and overcame lifelong Heroine and Cocaine addictions ! - the group of heroes included 2 french junkies a chicago blues musician 2 british MP's, Bill Gates and a prostitute from slab city"

My personal experience with the psychedelic community is that 99% of the time people are fine and have a ball without any mishaps, so I'll take my truth over Rupert Murdochs version thanks.

 

[Flickering]

Not gonna read over 100 comments to this thread right now (sorry) but my thoughts on the OP's post are:

A substance is whatever it is to whoever uses it, and I don't believe any one purpose for LSD is objectively better than another. That said, personally, I feel tripping just to screw around with your own head is a waste of the potential the experience gives you to change and grow. It's also risky for just a bit of fun. Kind of like playing with a live blade.

I share your frustration with trying to find like-minded psychonauts to trip with. While I respect that everyone has the right to use substances for whatever reason they wish, I personally am after something deeper, and it's a source of frustration that most other people aren't. I'm mildly annoyed to feel that they're missing out or playing with a holy fire, but more annoyed that I don't often get to share a deep experience.

 

[Crashing]

i understand what you're saying but, with respect, your earlier comments (and some of those from others) in the thread, read like (and i recognise that i'm paraphrasing): "i'm using these drugs correctly and you are using them incorrectly".

perception is reality? very often, yes.

alasdair

I agree with all that. As well as with Jazz's latest angle and webby's rebuttal.

I think that there must be an objective truth as to which parameters could be implemented to making a trip 'safer' though, but probably not ones which everyone would see or agree on.

 

[alasdairm]

Yes, because we all have different purposes for using psychedelics, we all must use them in different ways.

i don't see anybody saying everybody must use these tools differently. but people choose to use them differently and shouldn't be criticised or looked down upon simply for making a different choice.

the irony is that some users feel that their psychedelic use makes them, for want of better words, more enlightened/humble/centered/non-judgemental/whatever but the way they look down on the choices of others demonstrates quite the opposite...



alasdair

 

[Transform]

I've trimmed out some off topic discussion. Attacking other users will absolutely not be tolerated. Please be sure to use the report button if things are veering in an unpleasant direction in the future.

I think Anon0631 raises an excellent point. Nobody ever has this argument about 2C-B, but why not? I think determining why we treat LSD so differently holds the answer to this question.

 

[alasdairm]

Nobody ever has this argument about 2C-B, but why not?

not specifically 2cb, but i've been a bluelighter for over 10 years and i've seen users of a wide spectrum of drugs say a similar thing, essentially "i don't have a problem with my own drug use but i do have a problem with your drug use."

given the way 'drug users' are treated, very generally speaking, by some non drug-users, it's disappointing and a little sad to me...

alasdair

 

[TheAppleCore]

i don't see anybody saying everybody must use these tools differently. but people choose to use them differently and shouldn't be criticised or looked down upon simply for making a different choice.

I mean, you can use psychedelics for whatever purpose you please - but that purpose will dictate what is and isn't appropriate. You know, if you want to put together an omelette, you first need some eggs. :D Or, if you want to use drugs for music enhancement, you can't take them in silence. Etc.

That's pretty much my point, in a nutshell.

 

[Ondine]

Nobody ever has this argument about 2C-B, but why not? I think determining why we treat LSD so differently holds the answer to this question.

From my own experience, and from the reports of others, it seems that 2c-b is less likely to induce the same type of alterations to mental states that drugs like LSD, psilocibin and DMT do. It's also important to note that isn't just because those drugs are tryptamines and 2c-b is a PEA. Mescaline has the same reputation for enlightenment that LSD and DMT do, while an RC tryptamine like 4-aco-dmt is more inherently recreational like 2c-b.

But back to the quote, I think the reason why 2c-b isn't argued about like this is due to the generalization of experiences in the public. 2c-b can cause physical discomfort, but it rarely causes intense psychological trauma like LSD can cause. I think that that is actually the heart of why LSD is viewed by so many as this extremely serious chemical that has to be treated with the utmost respect and reverence. Not because it produces enlightened states of mind, because those states are just as achievable on 2c-b given the right set and setting. The reason is because LSD can disintegrate a persons most fundamental views of what reality is. While some people, and probably most people on bluelight, enjoy psychedelics for purely that reason, much of the public cannot handle that. It's not that common but I have seen LSD chew people up and spit them out. Even people who, like the OP said we should all do, took LSD with the intention of achieving some pure, numinous state of mind and not just to have a good time.

I also believe that each person should use psychedelics in whatever way is best for them, but since the OP made a point of criticizing users on my side of the fence, then I think there's one big gaping hole the reasoning used by people on the other side: by dictating what one's intentions should be before taking LSD, what actions one should be taking while on LSD, that they should be meditating or thinking about certain things, and that they aim for a certain outcome and personal betterment through the experience, you're destroying the single most important thing about LSD and the psychedelic experience in general. The supreme freedom that LSD provides; degrees of freedom that can't be achieved through everyday experiences. I think, even, that people who view LSD that have a very warped view of what the chemical actually is. LSD isn't inherently spiritual or enlightening, even though it can provide spiritual and enlightening experiences. And by boxing it in that way, I think you're actually missing out on a lot of what it has to offer.

My bottom line is, achieving betterment and greater knowledge through the use of LSD is a wonderful thing, and I hope that everyone who uses it can experience that in some way. But sometimes, having fun and, as bad as it sounds, being hedonistic can be just as important to the human experience. And LSD is definitely, definitely fun.

 

[Ondine]

p.s. dude jumped of a bridge a day ago.. was he just "using the drug how he wanted to?"
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20130227/NEWS02/302270012/

haha, oh burlington....

edit: terrible stuff, but as callous as it might sound, to me, events like these are really just analogous to someone dying from liver failure from eating a bottle of aspirin, or a drunk driving killing a young couple, you read about EVERY single LSD one, even though there are magnitudes less. Tragedies that are avoidable in theory, but in reality, aren't.

 

[MonKeYDNA]

On the topic of sterile clinical settings, I'm pretty sure that the trip guides have a lot of experience with set and setting, and nowadays I think its very unlikely that you would be tripping with a creeper in a lab coat in a whitewashed room with no escape. I've never taken a trip with an actual guide physically being there, but I remember looking up a place where you could go and trip and it was more of a resort type setting. Sounds pretty ballin to me. I think what OP and the rest of us like minded beings are really getting at here, is that if you choose to be careless about such a powerful thing, you may either miss some incredible and miraculous truths, or put yourself in a situation where the chance of you freaking out is higher than if you treated yourself and the compound with respect. I remember a story of a girl who had OD'd on 2C-E that she got from a guy at a house party in my state. Her friends that were there said they didn't even know what it was but thought of it as a party drug anyways. The point is not that the news covers the bad shit, its that once the bad shit is exposed in an area, you see less and less of those compounds around almost instantly. This forum is about harm reduction, and I can confidently say that most everyone is bound to get a little freaked out by unexpected horrors that they themselves unveil at parties. And as we all probably know, there's not really such a thing as "a little freaked out" when you're peaking. Obviously if you have some experience under your belt you can thwart it completely (fear and ecstasy, two sides of the same coin- you will never understand this with words, it must be felt and discovered from within, and when it happens, when you get that epiphany that's like "OH that's what it is!" you can truly bring those kind of things beyond the trip and into sober life). But not everyone is experienced, and I fear that it is becoming increasingly prominent that users get their first experiences in unnecessarily high stimuli situatons.