PlacentaJuan
Ex-Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2008
- Messages
- 107
nope MDMA is not a psychedelic.
Phenethylamines Do you consider MDMA a psychedelic?
- Thread starter psycosynthesis
- Start date
Mr Blonde
Bluelighter
I voted no. On psychedelics I can conceive many different ideas, emotions and thoughts. MDMA pushes me to be euphoric and happy, whilst a true psychedelic wouldn't.
That's just me though.
That's just me though.
EntheoDjinn
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 1,129
This thread is really going nowhere. Unless a concise, exclusive definition can be agreed upon, then almost anything could be considered "psychedelic".
A moving experience such as falling in love, seeing a movie which has a profound emotional effect on one, the buzz of achieving something hard won, & etc., etc., (all feelings which are the reputed trademarks of MDMA) could all be classed as psychedelic, if MDMA is.
It is true that my own experiences when in first in love with someone exceed the joy of an LSD trip - but it is not "psychedelic" in the same sense. It might manifest my whole organism, mind and body, but it is nowhere as mind-manifesting as LSD or psilocybin.
It needs to be narrowed down IMO
What ever happened to such clear-cut categories as "entheogenic" and "entactogenic". We could dump MDMA in there, and be happy ........... life would be so much simpler if we could just have clear, distinct answers to everything
A moving experience such as falling in love, seeing a movie which has a profound emotional effect on one, the buzz of achieving something hard won, & etc., etc., (all feelings which are the reputed trademarks of MDMA) could all be classed as psychedelic, if MDMA is.
It is true that my own experiences when in first in love with someone exceed the joy of an LSD trip - but it is not "psychedelic" in the same sense. It might manifest my whole organism, mind and body, but it is nowhere as mind-manifesting as LSD or psilocybin.
It needs to be narrowed down IMO
What ever happened to such clear-cut categories as "entheogenic" and "entactogenic". We could dump MDMA in there, and be happy ........... life would be so much simpler if we could just have clear, distinct answers to everything
Canis aureus
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 930
NO, I don't consider MDMA a psychedelic!
MDMA is entactogenic-empathogen in the first place; one of the most emotogenic-stimulants. It has a psychedelic ingredient, but that's not the main one. Psychedelic ingredient is there like a spice in culinary sauce or delicacy.
MDMA's mode of action is principally different than psychedelics. Genuine psychedelics are 5HT2a ligands and have primary effects on that receptor... Psychedelics are those tryptamines, phenethylamines and ergolines which cause their effects via mentioned 5HT2a receptor. And MDMA, although phenethylamine, is not 5HT2a ligand as far as I know. It has some effects on that receptor, but as far as I know those are caused metabolic products of MDMA...
I think that MDMA's effects are very unique* It works differently than stimulants, in general and psychedelics. How produces hormone Oxytocin... and especially the way MDMA pumps serotonin flowing into synapse from inside the cell, contrary to its normal way to flow routes by reversing the action of transporter... and then it works also as reuptake inhibitor of serotonine, dopamine and norepinephrine (like usual stimulants ie. cocaine forexample). So, that should be truly unique way of action. MDMA may just because of these actions produce oxytocin like it does. MDMA is not like psychedelics, but neither like other stimulants.
Similarly, MDMA still contains or includes a stimulant component, but I don't consider it plain stimulant either. In my experience MDMA is still much more a stimulant than psychedelic; it just produce as much feeling as psychedelics (in other mode of action). But stimulant component is present as main ingredient, And, if you could have asked "do you consider MDMA a stimulant?", I would have had harder time while deciding, I would have said, the most probably, "Yes, but do you mean in the strictest sense like plain stimulant? Then I have to say, NO, I don't consider MDMA a strict stimulant, but an empathogenic or emotogenic stimulant, YES! That empathia and emotional component comes from serotonin, and there is that reuptake inhibition there TOO!
MDMA is less a psychedelic than it is a stimulant. Psychedelic drugs or psychedelics are those which profoundly hit the 5HT2a receptor
. And TRUE psychedelics could have, and in fact they indeed contain, differening amounts of other components in them. Mescaline has, for example, as phenethylamine a stimulating component in it, and I could usually walk a country mile on it (or stay still an hour while watching something), but I still feel clearly that energic charge and mescaline is very different substance than psilocin...
Well, MDMA is serotonergic amphetamine, and has untypically strong emotional kick but in different way than psychedelic and other serotonergic amphetamines which are psychedelics: DOB, DOC or DOI and TMA, TMA2... DOB and siblings (so 5HT2a ligands). MDMA is UNIQUE sort of serotonin pump: "Not only does MDMA inhibit the reuptake of serotonin, but it reverses the action of the transporter so that it begins pumping serotonin into the synapse from inside the cell" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17209801). Some other substituted amphetamines (not psychedelic ones) could inhibit reuptake of serotonin, but MDMA PUMPS SEROTONIN!
Hopefully that very brief presentation, clearuption cleared the matter a little. I just wanted to explain why I don't think MDMA is psychedelic, although it gives the feeling kick and in some degree, MDMA has also psychedelic component. It still feeels very different, AND acts very differently.
With its own sort of action MDMA is empathogenic-entactogen or emotogenic-stimulant .
* I remember that A. Shulgin was criticizing the way people used the word "unique" in differentiating or identification purposes, when people spoke about how unique some drug was in effects... because all drugs are unique in their effects according Shulgin. But I think it is appropriate to use unique NOW.... because I do it correctly
MDMA is entactogenic-empathogen in the first place; one of the most emotogenic-stimulants. It has a psychedelic ingredient, but that's not the main one. Psychedelic ingredient is there like a spice in culinary sauce or delicacy.
MDMA's mode of action is principally different than psychedelics. Genuine psychedelics are 5HT2a ligands and have primary effects on that receptor... Psychedelics are those tryptamines, phenethylamines and ergolines which cause their effects via mentioned 5HT2a receptor. And MDMA, although phenethylamine, is not 5HT2a ligand as far as I know. It has some effects on that receptor, but as far as I know those are caused metabolic products of MDMA...
I think that MDMA's effects are very unique* It works differently than stimulants, in general and psychedelics. How produces hormone Oxytocin... and especially the way MDMA pumps serotonin flowing into synapse from inside the cell, contrary to its normal way to flow routes by reversing the action of transporter... and then it works also as reuptake inhibitor of serotonine, dopamine and norepinephrine (like usual stimulants ie. cocaine forexample). So, that should be truly unique way of action. MDMA may just because of these actions produce oxytocin like it does. MDMA is not like psychedelics, but neither like other stimulants.
Similarly, MDMA still contains or includes a stimulant component, but I don't consider it plain stimulant either. In my experience MDMA is still much more a stimulant than psychedelic; it just produce as much feeling as psychedelics (in other mode of action). But stimulant component is present as main ingredient, And, if you could have asked "do you consider MDMA a stimulant?", I would have had harder time while deciding, I would have said, the most probably, "Yes, but do you mean in the strictest sense like plain stimulant? Then I have to say, NO, I don't consider MDMA a strict stimulant, but an empathogenic or emotogenic stimulant, YES! That empathia and emotional component comes from serotonin, and there is that reuptake inhibition there TOO!
MDMA is less a psychedelic than it is a stimulant. Psychedelic drugs or psychedelics are those which profoundly hit the 5HT2a receptor
. And TRUE psychedelics could have, and in fact they indeed contain, differening amounts of other components in them. Mescaline has, for example, as phenethylamine a stimulating component in it, and I could usually walk a country mile on it (or stay still an hour while watching something), but I still feel clearly that energic charge and mescaline is very different substance than psilocin... Well, MDMA is serotonergic amphetamine, and has untypically strong emotional kick but in different way than psychedelic and other serotonergic amphetamines which are psychedelics: DOB, DOC or DOI and TMA, TMA2... DOB and siblings (so 5HT2a ligands). MDMA is UNIQUE sort of serotonin pump: "Not only does MDMA inhibit the reuptake of serotonin, but it reverses the action of the transporter so that it begins pumping serotonin into the synapse from inside the cell" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17209801). Some other substituted amphetamines (not psychedelic ones) could inhibit reuptake of serotonin, but MDMA PUMPS SEROTONIN!
Hopefully that very brief presentation, clearuption cleared the matter a little. I just wanted to explain why I don't think MDMA is psychedelic, although it gives the feeling kick and in some degree, MDMA has also psychedelic component. It still feeels very different, AND acts very differently.
With its own sort of action MDMA is empathogenic-entactogen or emotogenic-stimulant .
* I remember that A. Shulgin was criticizing the way people used the word "unique" in differentiating or identification purposes, when people spoke about how unique some drug was in effects... because all drugs are unique in their effects according Shulgin. But I think it is appropriate to use unique NOW.... because I do it correctly
EntheoDjinn
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 1,129
It's still about 2/3 YES and 1/3 NO according to the poll.
We need some more convincing arguments to pull it round. Come on the naysayers - we need you desperately
We need some more convincing arguments to pull it round. Come on the naysayers - we need you desperately
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
MDMA is an empathogen. It opens people up to their own hearts and others hearts. It connects people. I'd hesitate to say it is definitively not psychedelic, because I certainly have had transcendent experiences on it, but then again I've also had transcendent experiences after drinking a strong cup of coffee and taking a walk on a crisp and beautiful autumn morning.
Its really bizarre to me that anybody could say MDMA is not psychedelic. It is capable of opening yourself up to you, allowing you to delve into your own mind, thoughts, and motivations. You can learn quite a bit about yourself from MDMA, and is thus mind manifesting. Arguments like "I don't get visuals" are ridiculous.
LSDreamer said:
I agree to an extent. Unlike lsd or psilocybin for example, if your using mdma for mind expanding/spiritual/personal development, there is a wall there that makes it meaningless to use it for such reasons. Strictly speaking, sure it is a psychedelic, but it has no where near the mind expanding capabilities like the aforementioned substances.
While I consider MDMA a psychedelic, I do not consider it a hallucinogen. However, I consider MDA to be both.
There is no consensus molecular pharmacological definition of psychedelics that I am aware of. I think it is best, and also truest to the intent of Osmond in coining the noun, to use "psychedelic" as purely psychological terminology without any specific neurochemical or molecular pharmacological connotations.
There is no consensus molecular pharmacological definition of psychedelics that I am aware of. I think it is best, and also truest to the intent of Osmond in coining the noun, to use "psychedelic" as purely psychological terminology without any specific neurochemical or molecular pharmacological connotations.
Last edited:
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
^ what is the particular neurochemical/pharmacological extension of the term 'hallucinogen'?
delta_9
Bluelighter
^Deliriants, which would of course be anticholinergics, are the only real hallucinogens IMO.
Aldousage
Bluelighter
Psychedelic drugs are, and have for a long time been, referred to as "hallucinogens". In a very broad sense of the word, I think they are.
That said, I agree that hallucinations, in a more strict, literal sense, are much more commonly experienced by people under the influence of a deliriant or suffering from psychosis.
That said, I agree that hallucinations, in a more strict, literal sense, are much more commonly experienced by people under the influence of a deliriant or suffering from psychosis.
trancedeviate
Bluelighter
No.
FreedomOfTheMind
Bluelighter
high dose MDMA can be psychedelic but at the same time there is something more "druggy and narcotic" about it than other psychedelics- like it can get you fucked up and rushy.
*Love*Lite*
Bluelight Crew
Ive always said that MDMA is a trip in your heart 
Other psychedelics are a trip in your mind. I find that it has psychedelic properties but is not entirely psychedelic.
I voted yes on the poll.
Other psychedelics are a trip in your mind. I find that it has psychedelic properties but is not entirely psychedelic.
I voted yes on the poll.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
I like that. A heart trip.
offtopic, but I had a great 5-meo-mipt trip that was very heart centered. It felt like my chest muscles were physically opening up and stretching apart, exposing my heart. Very cool feeling.
offtopic, but I had a great 5-meo-mipt trip that was very heart centered. It felt like my chest muscles were physically opening up and stretching apart, exposing my heart. Very cool feeling.
ebola?
Bluelight Crew
I'll say sure.
I've yielded profound insights from it.
It doesn't really do that weird thing with abstract concepts that you see with THC, dissociatives, and 5ht psychedelics though.
I've yielded profound insights from it.
It doesn't really do that weird thing with abstract concepts that you see with THC, dissociatives, and 5ht psychedelics though.
spec1al_k
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
- Messages
- 33
in my opinion mdma is neither psychedelic nor non psychedelic, it's something in between
the best explanaition of it's effects i have come across so far is from Alexander Shulgin, who describes MDMA lika a "window"
it's like looking into another world, but you will never ever be able to reach it with that drug
that is what makes MDMA so special in my eyes
the best explanaition of it's effects i have come across so far is from Alexander Shulgin, who describes MDMA lika a "window"
it's like looking into another world, but you will never ever be able to reach it with that drug
that is what makes MDMA so special in my eyes