Confirmation Bias and Magic Mushrooms

slimvictor

slimvictor

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
6,477
Location
"Darkness cannot be dissipated with more darkness.
Last week Andrew Sullivan linked to my post about new research into the mystical effects of psilocybin (aka the active ingredient in magic mushrooms) and said that his own experience with mushrooms a few years ago had deepened his faith and brought him closer to God. A reader objects:

This is why rationality is ultimately irreconcilable with faith. Scientists can now pinpoint the exact spots in your brain that light up during spiritual moments and you have found a mushroom that reproduces the effect. But instead of acknowledging this as an interesting yet completely natural sensation, you instead conclude that it’s a mushroom-shaped window into the divine.

Your mind is playing tricks on you, much in the same way that your eyes play tricks on you when items move into your blind spot. However, the effect sounds interesting; I might have to try it.

Andrew has an answer ("by definition, any divine manifestation in the mortal world will have some physical manifestation"), but it doesn't seem very convincing to me. Like his reader, I figure that if the feeling of the divine can be reliably activated by ingestion of a particular drug or stimulation of a particular nerve, then it's not really likely to be anything very divine after all. But then, I'm an atheist. I would think that, wouldn't I?

cont at
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/06/confirmation-bias-and-magic-mushrooms
 
*bump*

I had to do this.
This article brings up some fascinating questions.
I want to hear people's opinions on these matters.

I can agree with what Andrew says:
"by definition, any divine manifestation in the mortal world will have some physical manifestation"

I do not accept the counter-argument given, for various reasons.
First, ingestion of any drug does not provide a *reliable* activation of the divine feeling, despite what the article claims.
Second, I have experienced such feelings myself, both while on drugs and while sober. I trust my experiences. If I believe that a certain plant has helped me connect to the divine, there is no way that someone who has never had such an experience can use their logic to change my mind.

More opinions?
 
slimvictor said:
I can agree with what Andrew says:
"by definition, any divine manifestation in the mortal world will have some physical manifestation"
Click to expand...
im agnostic/atheist, but that statement seems tough to support. if you're talking about the divine, how can you assert it'll have a physical manifestation? (ie, how can you expect it to play by the laws of physics?)
/have had "spiritual/religious" experiences a handful of times on high-dose(4++) psychedelics, but it's just solidified my position as agnostic.
 
^ The thing is, he is talking about *manifestation* of the divine in this world.
If it manifests, it has some physical reality - that is what manifestation means.

If you have had spiritual experiences, why has it made you more agnostic?
Because you don't believe that they are "real" ?
 
Psychiatry must be allowed to be pragmatic. If a patient's life is suddenly improved by religion, would a doctor tell him, "Of course you know, there is no God"? No: if something works, you run with it, unless it is harmful to the patient.

Also, the psychedelic experience is very difficult to put into words. Lacking a frame of reference for it, one must speak about it by borrowing metaphors. The metaphors that most fit seem to be religious ones.

NSFW:
The palm at the end of the mind,
Beyond the last thought, rises
In the bronze distance.

A gold-feathered bird
Sings in the palm, without human meaning,
Without human feeling, a foreign song.

You know then that it is not the reason
That makes us happy or unhappy.
The bird sings. Its feathers shine.

The palm stands on the edge of space.
The wind moves slowly in the branches.
The bird's fire-fangled feathers dangle down.
 
Last edited:
slimvictor said:
If you have had spiritual experiences, why has it made you more agnostic?
Because you don't believe that they are "real" ?
Click to expand...

it's almost impossible to word this accurately, but ...errr.. i guess that, if im able to 'tap into' such a state with just my brain and chemicals, it removes all the supernatural/divine/religious/etc from it and just leaves me and my ability to see such things, things that are, and were, contained in my head all along.
/*Edit- just wanted to add that, while it's not a true 'religious/spiritual experience', i love religious(xtian) iconography(sp?) when at that point of "tripping balls, but still able to make out what the image is". particularly images of the crucifixion (walking to it / being on the cross), hell even just empty crosses somehow become 'important' to me if i focus on them. self-induced experiences don't touch 4++ stuff (for me), but something comes out of this atheist when he mixes psychs/xtianity ;P
 
Last edited:
Reality (as we know it to exist) and our perception of it happens at the synapse. Just because we now have the technology to witness our own perception of reality doesn't make it any more or less real than it already is. We could just as easily hook up electrodes to people performing mundane tasks, or having sex and understand what chemicals allow us to perceive reality while doing pretty much any activity. It is interesting to realize how we experience mystical encounters (drug induced or otherwise), but that doesn't mean that they are just in our heads, any more than the rest of existence is just in our heads (it may well be).
 
artic said:
Reality (as we know it to exist) and our perception of it happens at the synapse. Just because we now have the technology to witness our own perception of reality doesn't make it any more or less real than it already is. We could just as easily hook up electrodes to people performing mundane tasks, or having sex and understand what chemicals allow us to perceive reality while doing pretty much any activity. It is interesting to realize how we experience mystical encounters (drug induced or otherwise), but that doesn't mean that they are just in our heads, any more than the rest of existence is just in our heads (it may well be).
Click to expand...

Yeah this.

Any thought or feeling is enabled by some physical/chemical/computational etc. activity in the brain. So what? If a mystical experience is somehow unreal because it is chemically mediated, so is every other experience you've ever had, and for the same reason.
 
My only real take on it is this; religion and drugs have many similarities: People who hang out on drug websites tend to dislike religion calling it "destructive" while people hang out on religious forums calling drug use "destructive"

Both parties claim unfounded and hypocritical self-righteousness by saying that "(Religion/Drugs) are so harmful, and they are the source of all the ignorance and stupidity in the world. They also cause many preventable deaths from (war/drugged driving) as well as cause nearly irreprable damage to your judgement! If no one (practiced religion/did drugs) then everyone would be closer to (God/rational thinking) and the world would be a better place. Fuck (religion/drugs)
 
^ The thing is, he is talking about *manifestation* of the divine in this world.
If it manifests, it has some physical reality - that is what manifestation means.

If you have had spiritual experiences, why has it made you more agnostic?
Because you don't believe that they are "real" ?
Click to expand...

Agnosticism doesnt have *THAT* strict of a definition. I believe some type of force or energy keeps everything in balance, but I think it is a natural force kept in check by other forces. Just like every other force in the universe (electromagnetism, gravity, etc). I don't think it is conscious, and I don't think it goes out of it's way to help or hurt you through life.

However, without going into 10 paragraphs of events or back story, I've seen some weird shit. And I wasn't high or drunk, I don't have any psychological disorders, nor do i even have a family history of them. If multiple dimensions are a real thing, then I cannot sit here and say ghosts or other odd phenomina don't exist. No one can.
 
Splinterguitar69 said:
Both parties claim unfounded and hypocritical self-righteousness by saying that "(Religion/Drugs) are so harmful, and they are the source of all the ignorance and stupidity in the world. They also cause many preventable deaths from (war/drugged driving) as well as cause nearly irreprable damage to your judgement! If no one (practiced religion/did drugs) then everyone would be closer to (God/rational thinking) and the world would be a better place. Fuck (religion/drugs)
Click to expand...

I like this!
 
Psychodelirium said:
Any thought or feeling is enabled by some physical/chemical/computational etc. activity in the brain. So what? If a mystical experience is somehow unreal because it is chemically mediated, so is every other experience you've ever had, and for the same reason.
Click to expand...
it's not that the mystical experience is 'unreal', so much as it's not 'mystical' if it's something your brain is producing.
(it's still amazing and important, but i don't see how something is mystical if the human brain is creating it.)
 
SangerRainsford said:
it's not that the mystical experience is 'unreal', so much as it's not 'mystical' if it's something your brain is producing.
(it's still amazing and important, but i don't see how something is mystical if the human brain is creating it.)
Click to expand...

Mystical does not mean supernatural, though I can see why this might be a problem for people who think otherwise.

Also to say that the brain "creates" it is misleading, imo. I would rather say the brain enables you to experience it, in the same way that the brain enables you to experience language, for example, or math, or music. A dog will never understand that some marks on a page are words, or that a certain sound is music, or the number of objects in a room, because the dog doesn't have the right kind of brain. Well, a human brain is to mysticism as a dog brain is to music, except in certain special occasions.
 
I think people are simply having emotional reactions against words like "mystical" and "divine". It's perfectly common to use metaphysical terminology to describe things that elude description. Doing so doesn't automatically denote a profession of faith.

I also wonder what has become of Mystikal's career

3345-mystikal.jpg
 
slimvictor said:
Last week Andrew Sullivan linked to my post about new research into the mystical effects of psilocybin (aka the active ingredient in magic mushrooms) and said that his own experience with mushrooms a few years ago had deepened his faith and brought him closer to God. A reader objects:

This is why rationality is ultimately irreconcilable with faith. Scientists can now pinpoint the exact spots in your brain that light up during spiritual moments and you have found a mushroom that reproduces the effect. But instead of acknowledging this as an interesting yet completely natural sensation, you instead conclude that it’s a mushroom-shaped window into the divine.

Your mind is playing tricks on you, much in the same way that your eyes play tricks on you when items move into your blind spot. However, the effect sounds interesting; I might have to try it.

Andrew has an answer ("by definition, any divine manifestation in the mortal world will have some physical manifestation"), but it doesn't seem very convincing to me. Like his reader, I figure that if the feeling of the divine can be reliably activated by ingestion of a particular drug or stimulation of a particular nerve, then it's not really likely to be anything very divine after all. But then, I'm an atheist. I would think that, wouldn't I?

cont at
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/06/confirmation-bias-and-magic-mushrooms
Click to expand...

Mother Earth could be (you're) "God" if your belief allows you...
the same "god" that pushes the wonderful fruit above the soil
 
psychodelirium- mystical doesn't mean supernatural? the definitions seem to say otherwise, but ill cede that ive been up for an obscenely long time, and that my ability to use these types of words in the 1st place is pretty weak ;P

fire&water- mother earth being 'god'- i imagine your quoting of 'god' means you want to use it pretty loosely, right? (ive never been able to understand using god to describe earth, it really doesn't fit the generic definition of 'god'. this is probably why i suck at these discussions, i hate using loose-words. are we in P&S? ;PPP )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top