• 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 |

i dont see whats so profound about psychedelics...

What a pointless topic; I mean, why hate on psychedelics just because their not your thing? Basically, you've said that "weak-minded" people think they gained by eating a drug but then here you say
ive learned a LOT about myself from cocaine and amphetamines, both of which also make me think a great deal.
So are you weak in having learned from a drug?

The truth is- noone really gives a hoot if you don't like psychedelics, except inasfar as an individual could be closing their mind to something they just MAY need. Thats a waste. Next time your thinking of consuming a psychedelic, give it to someone who will use it, not abuse it. We don't often talk about getting high of these drugs anyhow, so your approaching this from the wrong angle.
 
willow11 said:
What a pointless topic; I mean, why hate on psychedelics just because their not your thing? Basically, you've said that "weak-minded" people think they gained by eating a drug but then here you say So are you weak in having learned from a drug?

The truth is- noone really gives a hoot if you don't like psychedelics, except inasfar as an individual could be closing their mind to something they just MAY need. Thats a waste. Next time your thinking of consuming a psychedelic, give it to someone who will use it, not abuse it. We don't often talk about getting high of these drugs anyhow, so your approaching this from the wrong angle.
i never insulted psychs, in fact i said several times that i liked them. i just dont see them as profound or mystical. does that deem me unworthy of partaking?

why flame me? i dont get it... i never insulted anyone or anything. i just stated my opinion, and asked others for thiers, which are much different than mine.

i also never said that learning from a drug makes you weak minded. i learned a great deal from my drug use.

i certainly wouldnt expect a group of psychedelic users to be so defensive. it seems almost like those who are against me here are the ones with 'closed minds.' isnt there a POSSIBILITY i might be right? im just posing a question, yet being attacked for it. this is stupid. because i dont agree with you all, that seems to make my opinion invalid?

i dont see why you wouldnt talk about getting high on them, seeing as they are drugs and all... and they DO make me (at least) high.

i think its a good topic, as it seems to have sparked a debate.

no, i have not tried DMT, however i have tried salvia many times. i know what ego-loss is like, and i still didnt find that profound.

why does that warrant this hostility?
 
...i am just trying to learn more about this class of drugs, as i have very limited experience with them.

my mindset is very analytical and i find it very difficult to see anything 'magical' or 'spiritual.'

is it your opinion that if one does not see psychedelics as mystical and profound, one should not be allowed to take them? thats rather silly...

willow, youve also twisted my words quite a bit, read at face value--dont read too deeply, or infer anything.

i said "dont get me wrong, im not dissing psychedelics (in fact, im growing to love them more than any other class of drugs), i just think that weak minded people seem to fool themselves into believing that they have achieved something amazing just by eating a drug"

" i do think that people who feel as though theyve achieved some sort of enlightenment after an acid trip or two are fooling themselves"

"however if you think that it was purely the drug that gave you a mystical experience, yes. i do think you are fooling yourself, in addition to not giving yourself enough credit."

please quote where i 'hated' on anything in this thread. also, please quote where i mentioned not liking psychedelics, ive read thru it 3x and i cant seem to find it. ive already refuted everything you said previous to your post...

ill also add that "learning" from a drug is different than acheiving nirvana, enlightenment, or anything spiritual at all.
 
Last edited:
im saying that i dont believe its possible for a chemical to just GIVE you enlightenment.
make different people listen to the same song
some will find it horrible
and others will cry at its beauty

did waves just "give" a beautiful experience to the later?
maybe
or maybe "nature" gave them the metabolism that would be receptive to those waves
or maybe "nature" gave them the kind of mind that you need to learn how to appreciate such songs

but yes, for many people, a drug does the job that years of meditation did for others
 
please quote where i 'hated' on anything in this thread.
people may not appreciate when you say that
"im of the opinion that true enlightenment cant possibly be attained through the use/abuse of chemicals"
which meant (although you now corrected) : whatever you're telling me, you haven't reached true enlightenment
 
It is pretty close minded to say that just cause you haven't experienced it, its all rubbish tbh wes. Not attacking you here, just pointing it out. It might be to do with the quality of stuff you're getting as the above poster said.
 
As an atheist I would have to admit that 30+ years of psychedelic use hasn't made me any more sympathetic to religion, but I do appreciate a form of what I would term 'spirituality' that brings me closer to, and more compassionate about, other human beings.

I used to think that anyone who took LSD could not fail but be somehow 'enlightened' in the sense that they would be more regarding of other people. Well, 25 years in teaching exposed me to young men who would take acid of a friday night and proceed to kick the shit out of people for fun, or espouse the belief that all heroin users should be allowed to die in their own vomit.

Psychedelics to my mind, can accelerate you along a path that you consciously wish to travel, and add in a few seriously heavy surprises as well.

Maybe wesmdow, you are already enlightened to the extent that you feel comfortable in this world. You unfortunately made original statements which could have been (and indeed were) interpreted as provocative. But you kept calm in the face of counter-provocative responses. Keeping one's head under attack is perhaps one aspect of enlightenment.

E
 
Nothing is profound about psychedelics, per se. The profundity is found in the experience, as Shulgin said: wrapping a living human brain around them.

I would say the fact that they stirred up this much turmoil and disquieted thought in you is a signal of their profundity. There is so much there for you, wesdmow, if you will just reach out your brain and take a bite.
 
wesmdow said:
enlightenment, nirvana, and such ARE real. it seems almost like cheating to think you could just eat a drug and BAM, be enlightened. that seems insulting to those whove devoted their lives to 'the path' and really acheiving inner peace, at least to me.

your response rings of a closed mind as well.


Different paths.

No one is enlightened all the time

One might strive for 10 years for enlightenment
Another might live 'enlightement' and then take 10 years until he integrates it
;)


Of course psychedelics don't instantly work, they work based on whatever is inside you & based on you. They are catalysts.

& If you ,for example, think one might connect with the divine through meditation, then the same can be said for psychedelix as well
 
wesmdow, no-ones flaming you, just responding in kind to your comments. I just find it somehwat close minded, but I think thats just the way you've phrased what you said. I can understand, I know plenty of people who take psychedelics for nothing but pleasure.... but theres not much point in simply stating an opinion and then getting upset when people diagree, and state their own :\
 
no not at all, i do think that people who feel as though theyve achieved some sort of enlightenment after an acid trip or two are fooling themselves.

If they think they have experienced enlightenment then what difference does it make? Disregarding ideological views of work bring reward, why shouldn't enlightenment be that easy? These people are taking a big step outside of the normal human existence /perception /reality, regardless of how they are doing this is it so hard to consider such an experience may enlighten?

I think if you hold the attitude that the experience is not spiritual or enlightening then for you at least it most likely will not be. It is all-subjective for the beholder.
Personally i don't go along with many of the general ideas voiced by people who have taken psychedelics, that is a single entity/connection/nexus and such. I have not had any experiences which have shown me this and therefore have no reason to believe.

In fact i do not know what to believe or whether to believe at all. I have no definitive view on the objectiveness of my consciousness or reality, let alone spirituality. I understand things only in the simple terms i perceive them with my fallible human senses and judgments, this is extremely limited both practically and conceptually. I see no reason why an ultimate truth or enlightenment regarding the nature of something so great and complex as the cosmos would even be comprehendible by my human brain if i were to see it.

Having said that i see no reason why the opposite be true, the human brain is after all capable of things far more massive than it would be given credit for.

If i were to experience some new and unknown idea on or off psychedelics i would embrace it as enlightenment. I have experienced it and i see no reason why it would be any less correct than the things i experience with my sober eyes. After all the balance of chemicals alluding to my thoughts and senses has only changed form the norm, not necessarily from the right. If there is a right.
 
what i found profound was the fact that someone elses life force managed to keep me alive. it was the same exact force.

What I find profound about 5-MeO-DMT is the experience of life being so precious...the sense of being reborn, of living again. I've never had a blood transfusion, but I am not about to tell someone else they are weakminded if they had a profound experience through it...simply because I have no personal frame of reference.

I know you are not 'dissing' psychedelics, you have already made that clear. But you dismiss others' experiences who believe that they had a profound experience through psychedelics as 'weak minded' because you simply have no personal frame of reference.

the fact that another persons life-force can be transferred to me is mind-blowing. i did not create those blood cells, yet they are alive, and functioning in me. they are a part of me, and i cant get over that 'link.' if you think thats a crock of shit, you are truly the one being closed-minded here.

And the fact that a naturally occurring chemical (5-MeO-DMT) can cause the near-death experience and one under it may see the profundity of life, amazes me. If you think that this is a crock of shit, you are truly the one being closed minded. See, we can go back and forth all day on this one.

as far as your experience on 5-meo, could it not be possible that it was YOU and not the drug that caused your revelation?

Clearly, you are so thick-headed that you either cannot read...or simply refuse to do so. Below are my words....

MGS said:
I don't believe these chemicals 'give' one enlightenment either or 'produce' a spiritual experience. But they can be a catylist to such states, just as any experience of similar significance can also be.

I never said 5-MeO-DMT 'caused' the experience. However, I do feel these drugs are an easy access to a realm of existence that is beyond (most of) our every-day one. You think taking the blood from another is profound. Are we both idiots or can we agree that many things are a catalyst to change?
 
Last edited:
Clearly it looks as if we have a causal overdeterminacy by positing the drug as causally responsible but also subsequent neurophysiological states as well. That is, until we accept the view that our minds do not function in a singular causal chain.
 
samadhi_smiles said:
Clearly it looks as if we have a causal overdeterminacy by positing the drug as causally responsible but also subsequent neurophysiological states as well. That is, until we accept the view that our minds do not function in a singular causal chain.

Great point! Our thoughts happen all at once, not in order like a metal computer.

IMO, the drug doesn't give you enlightening experiences, it just shows you the door. You have to take the drug with the expectation of learning something. Then, when you're peaking, fractals are surrounding you, and you feel your body start to change form... something will click, and you'll understand.
 
wesmdow said:
i dont see whats so profound about psychedelics...


Try a nice dose of DMT, 5-MeO-DMT, DPT, ketamine, or salvia and I'm pretty sure you'll see what can be so profound about a psychedelic experience.
 
wesmdow said:
i have no idea how to meditate (my brain wont STFU) ...
Actually, meditation is not about the contents of your mind. It is the attitude with which you meet the contents of your mind.

I have a very busy mind as well and I meditate regularly. It works to slow down my thoughts and allows me to think more concisely as well as reducing my anxiety.

I believe anyone can learn to meditate if they wish to do so.
 
Great thread!

Wesmdow, I’d say the majority of users see psychedelics in a similar light. But that doesn’t mean you should close off the possibility that someday the drugs will catalyze a spiritual experience for you. My first few experiences were tremendously enjoyable, but extremely difficult to integrate. I initially thought of psychedelics as nothing more than an enjoyable state of drug-induced psychosis.

Any experiential events that did not sync with my worldview at the time, I dismissed as delusions. I have a report on 4-Aco-MIPT, where I comment on the feeling of being on the edge of a void, and being able to see slightly outside of this reality. I go on to say how that is impossible because there is only one reality. I thought I’d gone crazy! Now, I realize that my mind just didn’t know how to interpret that state of consciousness. What I experienced was a connection to the base substance of the universe; it was not a separate reality I was sensing. I’m not saying that I don’t get delusional thinking on psychedelics anymore, rather my worldview now permits me to explore the state further than I could previously.

After my 4-Aco-MIPT experience, I became incredibly interested in psychedelics. I started by reading scientific articles … neurobiology, theories on how psychedelics worked, etc. I eventually branched out to read books by Stanislav Grof (pioneer of psychedelic psychotherapy), Houston Smith (MIT professor of philosophy and divinity), and most importantly, Aldous Huxley. Reading the Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell caused a light to go off in my head … it felt like enlightenment; there was evidently so much more to reality than I’d ever fathomed. Since then, I’ve had an intense interest in eastern philosophy and its relationship with the psychedelic state.

So, wesmdow, I agree that the drugs themselves are not spiritual; they are merely tools which give the user a new perspective. But this new perspective often entails a feeling of connection to the universe, or a deep notion that all is one. This eastern philosophical notion is rarely contemplated in Western culture, but it’s one that’s becoming more accepted. One of the first in the West to espouse this heretical view was the philosopher, Baruch de Spinoza. A new pantheistic worldview often follows a powerful psychedelic experience, which is not necessarily a religious development, but still very spiritual. I suggest looking him up. I also found the work of Ken Wilbur very interesting, although there are more holes in his philosophy.

Consider this quote from the eminent biophysicist, Erwin Schrödinger:

“It is not possible that this unity of knowledge, feeling and choice which you call your own should have sprung into being from nothingness at a given moment not so long ago; rather this knowledge, feeling and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings. But not in this sense – that you are a part, a piece of an eternal, infinite being, an aspect or modification of it, as in Spinoza’s pantheism. For we should have the same baffling question: which part, which aspect are you? What, objectively, differentiates it from the others? No, but inconceivable as it seems to ordinary reason, you – and all other conscious beings as such – are all in all. Hence this life of yours which you are living is not merely a piece of the whole; only this whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one single glance.”

The loss or loosening of the ego is an occurrence that doesn't happen in quotidian existence. Near death experiences, deep meditation, fasting, the psychedelic experience, etc. (all changes in consciousness) … provide a route to this change in perspective. Not everyone finds the new perspective particularly meaningful, but for a few, it is immensely profound and spiritual.

Keep this discussion going!! =D
 
Last edited:
Top