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

Psychedelic Report Card

Kapitan

Kapitan

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
217
Location
grad school
Friends,

I've been pondering the problem of identifying the best psychedelic drugs. In the online psychoactive-enthusiast community, there is a somewhat pervasive attitude in which every new entheogen is thought of as offering something unique, novel, and worthwhile to the open-minded explorer -- and, in my opinion, this attitude is a problem. In a world in which a novel psychoactive enters the market every other week, it's just not possible that they're all worth trying, or that they're all unique. Surely there are some psychedelic drugs out there that do little more than poorly duplicate the cognitive shift of something else, but with more side effects; or whose side effects don't outweigh the positive effects; or that are simply just not very good drugs. The attitude that every psychedelic drug is worth trying once is just not realistic anymore, and it hinders our ability to identify and promote the best ones.

To this end, I'd like to offer up my "report card" of the psychedelic drugs that I've tried, and I'd be interested to read yours as well. Perhaps exercises like these will help us better identify the drugs that are worth trying, and the ones that are probably not worth trying.

  • LSD - A+
  • 2C-E - A +
  • DMT (oral w/ MAOI) - A -
  • Psilocin and 4-AcO-DMT - B +
  • Mescaline - B +
  • DMT (smoked) - B +
  • 4-HO-MET - B
  • Psilocybin Mushrooms - B
  • 2C-T-2 - B
  • 2C-B - B
  • Salvia - C
  • 4-HO-MiPT - C
  • 2C-I - D +
  • TMA-2 - F
  • 5-MeO-MiPT - F -

EDIT: The most recent GPAs for this thread can be found here.
 
Last edited:
I can appreciate where you're coming from on this but I don't think a one-dimensional qualification scale really does justice to the complexity and subtlety that differentiate these substances. It seems to me that users' qualitative analyses, of which there are plenty here in the Big and Dandy threads and trip reports, do a much better job of giving someone interested in a particular substance an idea of what the substance in question is all about. Then they can decide for themselves if it suits their needs. I just don't think giving LSD an A+ tells anyone much about it except that you like it. There might be times when I'd rather use 2C-I than LSD, for example, and their effect profiles give the reasons for that in a way that an F to A+ rating scale fails to capture.

For that matter, I don't think that kind of one-dimensional scale does justice in the area where it most famously found, the education system, but that's a whole other can of worms.
 
Yes, letter grades are over-simplified and one-dimensional, but that doesn't mean that they're without merit. In fact, that's kind of the point.

For example, college admissions officers could request that, instead of your high school transcript, you submit copies of every essay and assignment you've ever completed. The problem with that scenario is that the signal to noise ratio is really really low, and the sheer body of evidence available makes it almost impossible to judge the merits of each applicant. Although each individual grade is imperfect, the average over time should reflect some still-imperfect, but less imperfect, measure of the quality of the drug.

I'm not saying it's a perfect system. I just thought that it would be a fun execrcise. I'd really like to see your report card. But I guess you don't have to play if you don't want to :P
 
Fair enough, haha, I'll play. Let's say my ratings are based on a combination of weirdness potential, fun potential, and adaptability to personal work.

Off the top of my head:

LSD: A+
Synthetic Psilocin: A+
Mescaline (cactus or synthetic): A+
Mushrooms: A (maybe A+, it's been a while)
Smoked DMT: A
DOC: A
2C-B: A-
2C-E: A-
2C-C: A-
4-HO-MET: B+
2C-I: B+
2C-D: B
4-HO-DiPT: B-
 
johannes kreisler said:
a psychedelic experience is composed of: set (including personality and experience), setting, dose, substance.

see the problem of this thread?
Click to expand...
Sure. See the previous two posts?

I'm not saying that you can unequivocally assign a "quality" rating to every drug. That's a totally ridiculous idea -- but indulge me for a minute. I honestly think that most people, if they tried 5-MeO-MiPT and LSD back to back, in whatever scenario they like, would agree that LSD is a much better drug in just about every respect. That is, it's more likely to lead to a positive experience, whether that means that it was fun, or that it was meaningful, or whatever.

Thus, what I'm saying is basically that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. These days, there is a whole lot of anecdotal information out there on every entheogen, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to distill out the essential facts. There *are* some drugs out there that just aren't very good, and that probably aren't worth your time or money. The attitude that every drug has its place, or is useful in its own way, is just as ridiculous as the idea that LSD is an A + drug.

I know you're making a mental list. You should play :P
 
Kapitan said:
Friends,

I've been pondering the problem of identifying the best psychedelic drugs. In the online psychoactive-enthusiast community, there is a somewhat pervasive attitude in which every new entheogen is thought of as offering something unique, novel, and worthwhile to the open-minded explorer -- and, in my opinion, this attitude is a problem. In a world in which a novel psychoactive enters the market every other week, it's just not possible that they're all worth trying, or that they're all unique. Surely there are some psychedelic drugs out there that do little more than poorly duplicate the cognitive shift of something else, but with more side effects; or whose side effects don't outweigh the positive effects; or that are simply just not very good drugs. The attitude that every psychedelic drug is worth trying once is just not realistic anymore, and it hinders our ability to identify and promote the best ones.

To this end, I'd like to offer up my "report card" of the psychedelic drugs that I've tried, and I'd be interested to read yours as well. Perhaps exercises like these will help us better identify the drugs that are worth trying, and the ones that are probably not worth trying.
[/LIST]
Click to expand...
The problem with this thread is that a grading system in no way addresses the bold... it just indicates how much you enjoyed a specific psychedelic.
 
EliCash said:
it just indicates how much you enjoyed a specific psychedelic.
Click to expand...
It absolutely does. Why is that a bad thing? Rating music, books and movies is no less ridiculous than trying to rate drugs. Everything in life is experienced subjectively. I rarely agree with Rolling Stone or Pitchfork, but it's still interesting to see what other people thought of the album I loved.

And yes, psychedelic drugs affect everyone differently -- but there are similarities. Most people seem to like 2C-B, for example, which is why it's popular. Lets not pretend that specific psychedelics don't have defining characteristics.

I know you've taken a psychoactive that you didn't like. Let's see your report card :)
 
Kapitan said:
I know you're making a mental list. You should play :P
Click to expand...

no, I'm not.
this is entirely subjective and depends much more on the individual experiences you've had than the properties of the substances involved. the most important factor when trying to construct such a report card is definitely the level of experience - individual experiences with different substances and also life-experience. that means it is inherently biased.
it takes a lot of experience to make "objective" statements about different 5-ht2a-psychedelics. most of the substances you mentioned can provide A+-experiences (that is ++++) and all of them can produce F--experiences.
there are some substances that have a "solid" reputation (DMT, 4-substituted tryptamines), some have a mixed reputation (5-MeO-MiPT, 2C-I), some are only appreciated by afficionados (5-MeO-DMT, DPT). it depends on your personal history if a substance might be interesting for you or not.

if you want to get an idea if a substance is worthwhile for you, you either have to do a lot of reading or simply start experimenting. the more experience you have with the world of psychoactives the more you can judge if a substance might be useful for you. especially on BL there's another level with some extremely experienced users, whose preferences and previous experience you approximately know and can relate to your own history of reception. there's some guys when they say it's worthless, it is worthless and when they say it's decent, it is decent. but general statements like that are extremely rare and should still always be regarded with the dose and setting in mind. there's been cases when single reports of experienced users here - with new dosing-schemes, ROAs or purposes - have changed the overall reception of a substance (2C-C for example).
there is no reification of the psychedelic experience. it's more like music or food...



that being said: your list is invalid form the start as you gave DMT anything else than an A+. :P
this is pretty much the only psychoactive I promote unconditionally as it universally provides positive, uplifting and spiritual experiences without any negatives or side effects - if used correctly.
 
Damn. No one wants to play. Perhaps I should ask for this thread to be renamed to "Kapitan defending the idea that there might be some bad psychedelic drugs" :P I'd rather be discussing drugs with people than pursuing this pointless argument, but ...

johannes kreisler said:
that being said: your list is invalid form the start as you gave DMT anything else than an A+. :P this is pretty much the only psychoactive I promote unconditionally as it universally provides positive, uplifting and spiritual experiences without any negatives or side effects - if used correctly.
Click to expand...
:) I'm glad you asked about that. This is more along the lines of what I wanted to talk about, before I got off on this weird tangent discussing the validity of the thread. I knocked it down a point because it's often difficult or impossible for me, personally, to integrate my DMT experiences. It sure "feels" profound, but I'm always at a loss as to how I can apply the things I learned and experienced to my life in ordinary reality. In contrast, I've made real, concrete changes and improvements to my beliefs and actions as a result of LSD and 2C-E trips.

johannes kreisler said:
there are some substances that have a "solid" reputation (DMT, 4-substituted tryptamines), some have a mixed reputation (5-MeO-MiPT, 2C-I), some are only appreciated by afficionados (5-MeO-DMT, DPT). it depends on your personal history if a substance might be interesting for you or not.
Click to expand...
I mean this in the best possible way, but I think it's significant that you don't have a category for drugs with a "bad" reputation. The idea that every drug has its place, or is useful in its own way, impairs our ability to identify the good drugs (e.g. DMT), and thus to advise people on how to achieve a meaningful psychedelic experience. Our collective failure to acknowledge the fact that there is a higher tier of higher quality drugs that tend to, on average and under the right circumstances, lead more often to a positive experience, points to an ironic lack of self-reflection on the nature of psychedelic discourse.
 
Kapitan said:
It absolutely does. Why is that a bad thing? Rating music, books and movies is no less ridiculous than trying to rate drugs. Everything in life is experienced subjectively. I rarely agree with Rolling Stone or Pitchfork, but it's still interesting to see what other people thought of the album I loved.

And yes, psychedelic drugs affect everyone differently -- but there are similarities. Most people seem to like 2C-B, for example, which is why it's popular. Lets not pretend that specific psychedelics don't have defining characteristics.

I know you've taken a psychoactive that you didn't like. Let's see your report card :)
Click to expand...
I get what you're going for now, your original post made it seem like you were looking for somehitng that couldn't really be answered with a score card. I'll play, but my psychedelics list isn't all that long as of yet...

2C-B - A+
DXM - A +
MDA - A
Salvia - C+
 
so you basically want a list of "bad" psychedelics?
go on suggest a few and see your position attacked from all sides! ;)

but yes, I'd say there are substances that are useless for me in my position, I don't desire their effects or their (potential) side-effects overpower their positives - independent of set, setting, dose, ROA...I still wouldn't call them inherently bad. (my personal list would include LSD for example)


ad DMT: if you want to make it more digestible, smoke it with a MOAi already in your system. and don't smoke so much. use it more as a psychological tool than a rocket to outer space.
 
This is something that's personal and subjective. I know people who prefer mushrooms to LSD, those that prefer LSD to mushrooms, people who just like to have a psychedelic experience by smoking, vaporizing, or eating cannabis, and people who don't like any sort of psychedelic at all and they prefer other drugs.
 
Kapitan said:
[*]LSD - A+
[*]2C-E - A +
[*]DMT (oral w/ MAOI) - A -
[*]Psilocin and 4-AcO-DMT - B +
[*]Mescaline - B +
[*]DMT (smoked) - B +
[*]4-HO-MET - B
[*]Psilocybin Mushrooms - B
[*]2C-T-2 - B
[*]2C-B - B
[*]Salvia - C
[*]4-HO-MiPT - C
[*]2C-I - D +
[*]TMA-2 - F
[*]5-MeO-MiPT - F -
[/LIST]
Click to expand...

i agree that the grading system is flawed, but i'll play.


i'm interested to know why miprocin only got a C...


LSD-------------- A+
4-HO-MiPT------- A+
4-AcO-DMT------ A
DMT (smoked)---- A
mushrooms------- B+
2C-B------------- B-
2C-E------------- B-
25-I/C-NBOMe---- C-
salvia------------- D+
 
ymmv /thread

Otherwise, I don't really get the point of this beyond the prexexistent favorite psychedelics thread, and the "most....psychedelic" threads, this doesn't add to the quality of the forum. Plus, I feel it belittles the depth and power of these chemicals to give them something some arbitrary monodimensional rating. Sorry to be a debbie downer, but it needs saying.
 
only the A's


mxe - A+
salvia - A+
Lsd - A+
ket - A+
cannabis - A+
is all you need, too bad i don't smoke.

dissociates in general. A+

all in terms of achieving transcendence 'trips', mindsets or experience
 
How bout instead of giving each drug a single rating, make a kind of chart/graph where each drug is rated by a certain category. For example:

Salvia: C in visuals, A in ego-destruction, B- in insight, D- in body high, A- in afterglow
4-aco-dmt: B+ in visuals, B in ego-destruction, A- in insight, A in body high, A in afterglow

etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top