Theories on DMT hyperspace

[France]

i am going to differ on you completely. There are endless possibilities to who came to this planet, how they came to planet, or why they came to this planet before recorded history. What gives humans the right to definitively say that before their sensual understanding of the universe (when humans were first roaming the earth) could provide a truthful window into the past. The past is littered with questions that humans will probe for eternity in the present moment. Dmt exists in almost every ecosystem on the planet and it is clear that whether we know it or not, that its inherent existence within the natural community of the planet is necessary for the balance of life. Now how did life begin on this planet? What installed or began "consciousness" within living life? What is it behind the masking of our minds that drives our instincts and undeniable strive for to reproduce and to probe for questions as well as answers? I would not find it ridiculous at all to believe that dmt came from somewhere else. How could you possibly say that it was not? Just because it is simple does not mean that aliens did not bring it here. I find it close minded to approach something that is so unexplainable to the human experience and science with a definitive answer. You have no idea. I have no idea. Everything that started life on this planet could have come from somewhere else

what always trips me out is that alien intelligences (which could be billions of years (why not trillions if you entertain the ideals of quantum physics)) could have came here 4,000 years ago, done some shit and left without anything or anyone to document their arrival or leaving. How would we ever fucking know?

..
8(

 

[-neptune-]

Personally, I think DMT being endogenous to the mammalian brain indicates that it must play some role in modulating perception and generating the mentalistic level of representation.

 

[ampd]

^lol

yeah, no doubt. People don't believe everything you think.

I think we construct our worlds from a set of sensory input. DMT allows us to construct it in a different manner. If we choose to give credence to one world or another, it is important to remember they are all aspects of our true self and not some thing 'out there', it's in here. I've read that james kent article and didn't find his primary logic flawed in any significant manner.

love that word, panspermia, btw

Exactly, our physical world is completely interpreted by us through binary code. Everything is vibration, everything has frequency.

I suspect DMT raises the user's vibrational frequency extremely rapidly basically blasting them off into other dimensions.

This is the very reason I live.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Basically I believe that everything in the universe can be explained via laws. We have a limited view of these laws and our understanding is ever changing due to new knowledge, but the fact remains that there are laws in existence that controls everything whether or not we see it or even understand it.

I think you are operating with a confused notion of what a law is...You seem to think that there is some objective fact of the matter whether a law exists or not as a thing that stands apart from us.

Laws are nothing but social conventions; they are agreed upon and argued over by scientists (who truck in them).

They are a thing which is distilled from one languistic framework or another, but not a necessary part of any conceptual framework.

To say that science is the only thing is like saying there is only one correct setting for a telescope lense to refract light at - there is not just one there are many, it depends on what you're asking! /trying to see with the scope!

Hope this cleared up my post if you originally misunderstood the thrust of the point I was making.

 

[Survived Abortion]

You are all butting heads over problems thrown up by semantics. That isn't what this thread was intended for I'm sure, but it has turned into that. In particular, Cloudy and Shakti; your arguement will not be fruitful:

The original discourse posed about DMT (and other psychedelics) and their relationship to reality lends itself to self-destruction and termination in a heated debate over ontology and semantics because we are using language to describe the fundamental nature of something subjective to an individual conscioussness: reality. Before the original topic can be addressed, the meaning of the signs of language ascribed to all those used within this context should be agreed upon. If not, everyone is talking a different language.

Back on topic: It should be totally clear that the shift in conscioussness produced by DMT is no less real than that which we already experience during 'everyday' functioning. I use the term 'real' as that which is real to one, but not real to another - due to the subjective nature and uncertainty of what we 'know' - but has the agreed possibility of being a shared facet of what exists outside of consensus reality. As some posters have mentioned before me, there is no way to disprove the existence of something if we cannot detect it; when something is detected by man or machine, we must give it the benefit of including it within the realm of possibility, no matter how improbable.

We now have a scientific way of describing the way in which the aforementioned universe works in this manner: quantum mechanics. It is a century old now, so what we are discussing is not entirely new. The fact that quantum mechanics is the science of probability and possibility - and that we have accepted quantum mechanics with open arms into our daily socio-economic cybernetic environment by allowing it to help us build the technologies which we take for granted (such as digital electronic devices etc.) - means we should not be so arrogant as to discard it in the face of new problems, such as conscioussness. It is subject to it's own problems just like an organic being, and as it describes what we want to see, is also itself inherently unknowable, and should be treated with as much respect. (In the same manner that we still use Newton's laws of motion etc. to help us in the macroscopic world).

It can be easily understood, then, that a shift in conscious perception which reveals new objects, layers, structures, and vectors of reality are no less valid than those we experience without the causative shift, and must be considered to be possible descriptions of the universe (and/or possible universes) in which I/we reside.

The less-important outcome:
It is then up to each of us to decide how important any of these probabilities are in terms of how they affect our desire to pursue them. If it becomes important enough for one person to pursue, they may pursue exploration of this space alone. If it becomes important for individuals who have not yet explored it, then they may endeavour to discover these things themselves. It will become semantically important, and recorded as 'real' within society when enough people agree that it has been tested thoroughly enough that the subjective evidence speaks for itself. The point at which that happens is a philosophical issue.

 

[delsymfan]

This is how I view this whole topic. Not just to DMT mind you but everything....

To me drugs basically allow us to explore different parts of our brain. They say we only use a couple percent at most. Whats in that other 98%? Light up your pipe and find out.

Our brains have designated connections for various activites, and when we tweak those receptors and such with various chemicals, we are effectively saying "take a detour from this road"

Now your Brain uses a different connection and you the body see/feel different things. Its like your brain has to venture into another part of itself to get where it wants to go. The drugs force it to go into a different section of the brain.

I love exploring my other percentages. Thats how I think of it.

 

[adrian89987]

You are all butting heads over problems thrown up by semantics. That isn't what this thread was intended for I'm sure, but it has turned into that. In particular, Cloudy and Shakti; your arguement will not be fruitful:

The original discourse posed about DMT (and other psychedelics) and their relationship to reality lends itself to self-destruction and termination in a heated debate over ontology and semantics because we are using language to describe the fundamental nature of something subjective to an individual conscioussness: reality. Before the original topic can be addressed, the meaning of the signs of language ascribed to all those used within this context should be agreed upon. If not, everyone is talking a different language.

Back on topic: It should be totally clear that the shift in conscioussness produced by DMT is no less real than that which we already experience during 'everyday' functioning. I use the term 'real' as that which is real to one, but not real to another - due to the subjective nature and uncertainty of what we 'know' - but has the agreed possibility of being a shared facet of what exists outside of consensus reality. As some posters have mentioned before me, there is no way to disprove the existence of something if we cannot detect it; when something is detected by man or machine, we must give it the benefit of including it within the realm of possibility, no matter how improbable.

We now have a scientific way of describing the way in which the aforementioned universe works in this manner: quantum mechanics. It is a century old now, so what we are discussing is not entirely new. The fact that quantum mechanics is the science of probability and possibility - and that we have accepted quantum mechanics with open arms into our daily socio-economic cybernetic environment by allowing it to help us build the technologies which we take for granted (such as digital electronic devices etc.) - means we should not be so arrogant as to discard it in the face of new problems, such as conscioussness. It is subject to it's own problems just like an organic being, and as it describes what we want to see, is also itself inherently unknowable, and should be treated with as much respect. (In the same manner that we still use Newton's laws of motion etc. to help us in the macroscopic world).

It can be easily understood, then, that a shift in conscious perception which reveals new objects, layers, structures, and vectors of reality are no less valid than those we experience without the causative shift, and must be considered to be possible descriptions of the universe (and/or possible universes) in which I/we reside.

The less-important outcome:
It is then up to each of us to decide how important any of these probabilities are in terms of how they affect our desire to pursue them. If it becomes important enough for one person to pursue, they may pursue exploration of this space alone. If it becomes important for individuals who have not yet explored it, then they may endeavour to discover these things themselves. It will become semantically important, and recorded as 'real' within society when enough people agree that it has been tested thoroughly enough that the subjective evidence speaks for itself. The point at which that happens is a philosophical issue.

This is probably one of my favorite posts in this thread.

I think it's kinda funny how often a topic is posted for discussion in this forum only to end up a discussion of semantics.

 

[Shakti]

SA, I wouldn't reduce my discussion with cloudy to semantics. I think there is a fundamental difference in our beliefs/perspectives off the nature, limitations and potential of human knowledge, what roles it plays and how it integrates with reality. I don't see how discussing this won't be fruitful. Perhaps we just have different measures of success.

Before the original topic can be addressed, the meaning of the signs of language ascribed to all those used within this context should be agreed upon. If not, everyone is talking a different language.

I agree with you except, is that not what we are doing already? Even if we don't recognize it. We need to step into this territory to start mapping it. So what if we've labeled things a little different, our collective map will still stitch together eventually. We can't stand aside, play games of what words we're going to call things before we run into them especially if its just because we are afraid of disagreement. Experience and language change and evolve too quickly especially with relatively virgin territory, so let's all just try and keep up and pick each other up when we fall behind...

Now I have some general comments about your post.

1st, I think it is appropriate to make relative distinctions of how "real" a state of experience is. It's a highly personal question of course. How adequately does my present state represent Truth? DMT certainly can reveal a great deal about the nature of our mind, yet we obviously can't go around tripping ballz at the supermarket. Just wouldn't work out too well. So the dmt state certainly is 'real,' but does it represent Truth well? I certainly think there is much to be gained from it.

I think it is important to remember that all objects of reality are a creation of a subject, ie you. Therefore, they are all bound by an absolute point and they are all relevant to each other. The important question is how. How does the dmt state relate to my normal waking state? My dream state? My causal empty state? My fully integrated non-dual state? What is dmt? In what ways does it unfold my understanding of Spirit? I can certainly understand why some people would want to ascribe the power behind it to aliens and the like, I just see no reason to believe it. I don't think dmt has revealed anything to anyone that wasn't already latent to their self system, dormant, unconscious or otherwise. That being said, it is wonderfully powerful in doing so.

It can be easily understood, then, that a shift in conscious perception which reveals new objects, layers, structures, and vectors of reality are no less valid than those we experience without the causative shift, and must be considered to be possible descriptions of the universe (and/or possible universes) in which I/we reside.

It isn't necessarily true that revealed perspectives are just as valid as 'typical' perspectives, but is important to attempt to integrate new perspective without prejudice. Do you think the narcissistic self-righteous perspectives produced by cocaine are a equally valid representations of self? Altered states lend themselves to delusion if we aren't careful.

It will become semantically important, and recorded as 'real' within society when enough people agree that it has been tested thoroughly enough that the subjective evidence speaks for itself. The point at which that happens is a philosophical issue.

I think this is largely true except I don't think it's really a philosophical issue, it is a functional one. As soon as the point you describe happens, it has happened. There doesn't need to be abstract philosophical thought on the issue, it shall just be and we will be endowed with a new way of speaking freely.

 

[modular]

I don't think there is a hyperspace in the sense that the "beings" that are seen and communicated exist outside of your head, continue to exist when you are not on DMT, present themselves to other people, or have a physical state at all. Essentially, it's all in your head, but whether or not that means there are no Gods or elves is philosophical. Just because many people have similar hallucinations does not mean that they are jointly seeing the same world as other people. I think the best test that could actually be conducted is having people from a wide variety of cultures take DMT without any knowledge of what others experience other than it makes you see stuff. If their experiences are reflective of their cultures - people who have never heard of elves, pixies and other European based mythical creatures don't see them, but may see things known in their culture - then hyperspace theory is a bust.
Maybe these creatures just occupy a similar place in the heads of Westerners.

 

[Shakti]

^^I think that is a fair test, but I do believe that there are elements of a human mind, the true archetypal forces, which aren't bound by cultural context. Elves, however don't count as such IMO.

 

[nickels]

[meant for Cloudy ]

^I don't know anything about you, Cloudy, but my guess is that you might have never formally studied a scientific discipline in a university environment. I'm only saying this because it would be very hard to do so and retain the point of view that you have. The whole point of science is a direct acknowledgment of the fact that everything is not science. All scientific theories are tentative, they're simply the most accurate model we currently have to help us understand some type of phenomenon. When science "proves" something, they're not saying "this is the way it is!", they're saying "this is currently the most empirically accurate explanation we have for what is going on." Those are two entirely different concepts.

"Science" is just a method for ordering concepts and phenomena, reality isn't science any more than a story is the paper its printed on.

Good post.

 

[indigoaura]

I have so much I want to say...been reading this thread for a few days now...

First:

Exactly, our physical world is completely interpreted by us through binary code. Everything is vibration, everything has frequency.

I suspect DMT raises the user's vibrational frequency extremely rapidly basically blasting them off into other dimensions.

This really got my attention because I have been very interested in the vibrational frequency of the mind and altering it through meditation and through binaural beats:

http://www.hemi-sync.com/store/pages.php?pageid=6

I have long suspected, that the vibrational frequency of the mind is altered in different manners by different psychoactive compounds. 2CB, in particular, makes me aware of a shift in vibrational frequency.

Certain binaural beats change vibrational frequency at a faster rate than others, causing more distinct shifts in the consciousness of the listener.

I felt a very sudden shift when I smoked a high dose of salvia that resulted in an out of body experience.

It makes a lot of sense that DMT would cause an intense shift, resulting in awareness of...something else.

Robert Monroe taught that there are layers to reality, and your vibrational state allows you to perceive those layers. The vibrational state of the average individual is not going to allow them to tune into non-physical type things.

I don't want to derail this conversation...but just wanted to throw this stuff out there, because this comment in particular really rang true for me.

I don't think there is a hyperspace in the sense that the "beings" that are seen and communicated exist outside of your head, continue to exist when you are not on DMT, present themselves to other people, or have a physical state at all. Essentially, it's all in your head, but whether or not that means there are no Gods or elves is philosophical. Just because many people have similar hallucinations does not mean that they are jointly seeing the same world as other people. I think the best test that could actually be conducted is having people from a wide variety of cultures take DMT without any knowledge of what others experience other than it makes you see stuff. If their experiences are reflective of their cultures - people who have never heard of elves, pixies and other European based mythical creatures don't see them, but may see things known in their culture - then hyperspace theory is a bust.
Maybe these creatures just occupy a similar place in the heads of Westerners.

In regards to this, I would also say that even if people of different cultures perceived the experience differently, say they saw their native legends appear instead of elves...I don't think that means that it is only in their head.

I think its entirely possible that the makeup of whatever is in the various layers of reality is not physical... not seeable with eyes. It is going to present itself in whatever way is going to be understandable to the traveler. If you have no concept of an elf, and you are not seeing with your eyes, you are not going to see an elf. You are going to see something that you understand, that your emotional understanding of is similar to that of an elf.

The DMT entities may appear as elves or gnomes of sprites or trolls or whatever is going to resonate most with the viewer and result in the most accurate perception of the essence of the entity.

All this being said...I do need to admit that I have not done DMT. I plan to, soon. I am experienced with other psychoactives, but not DMT. This is all just theory based on my other studies into the nature of reality and reading this great thread.

Also, finally, in regards to the debate going on...I think our personalities and the basic build of our "selves" dictates to a certain degree the ways in which we are capable of perceiving reality. I work in a somewhat psychological field, and we were all given the Myers Briggs personality test and then we were shown an image.

We were asked to write on a separate piece of paper everything that we saw in the picture. I am an INFJ personality type which stands for introverted intuitive feeling judging. The picture was a cartoon of people on bus. I wrote things down like "I see a man who is frightened because another man looks like he may rob him." I looked at what was there and I looked beyond the physical and into the realm of the "why" and "beyond". All the people who were not "N" personality types like me, but were the opposite "S" personality type wrote things like "A man in short sitting on the right. A woman with curly hair standing on the left."

What is my point?

We perceive differently and interpret differently. One personality type is just not going to perceive reality in the same manner as another. "Science was there before everything" and "Science could not have existed without man existing beforehand" are beautiful examples of how we're all different, and all contribute in different ways and with different perceptions to keep the world interesting.

Very similar debates, re: science and what lies beyond science (and does that make it science?) break out with my close friends quite frequently.

In any case, when I am ready to take my DMT trip I hope all of you will offer me some guidance.

(Wow, I was all over the place and hope I have not offended and that this makes sense.)

PLUR

 

[nanobrain]

recently proposed cytoskeletal quantum holographic model - potentially the neuronal microtubules function as quantum hologram receptors within the brain, enabling the mind to function as an interface for local access to nonlocal information. DMT in this case can be viewed as a tuning fork for raising the microtubular vibrational frequency to become in resonance with the universal quantum hologram and for activating selective sensorimotor gating disinhibition to enable conscious awareness and integration of the experience.

a really interesting ontopic book: Inner Paths to Outer Space - Journeys to Alien Worlds through Psychedelics and Other Spiritual Technologies, Strassman et. al., Park Street Press, 2008

 

[Pretty_Diamonds]

Hahaha. This makes me think of those hyperspace experiments....

It's kind of weird...

 

[ampd]

I have so much I want to say...been reading this thread for a few days now...

First:



This really got my attention because I have been very interested in the vibrational frequency of the mind and altering it through meditation and through binaural beats:

http://www.hemi-sync.com/store/pages.php?pageid=6

I have long suspected, that the vibrational frequency of the mind is altered in different manners by different psychoactive compounds. 2CB, in particular, makes me aware of a shift in vibrational frequency.

Certain binaural beats change vibrational frequency at a faster rate than others, causing more distinct shifts in the consciousness of the listener.

I felt a very sudden shift when I smoked a high dose of salvia that resulted in an out of body experience.

It makes a lot of sense that DMT would cause an intense shift, resulting in awareness of...something else.

Robert Monroe taught that there are layers to reality, and your vibrational state allows you to perceive those layers. The vibrational state of the average individual is not going to allow them to tune into non-physical type things.

I don't want to derail this conversation...but just wanted to throw this stuff out there, because this comment in particular really rang true for me.



In regards to this, I would also say that even if people of different cultures perceived the experience differently, say they saw their native legends appear instead of elves...I don't think that means that it is only in their head.

I think its entirely possible that the makeup of whatever is in the various layers of reality is not physical... not seeable with eyes. It is going to present itself in whatever way is going to be understandable to the traveler. If you have no concept of an elf, and you are not seeing with your eyes, you are not going to see an elf. You are going to see something that you understand, that your emotional understanding of is similar to that of an elf.

The DMT entities may appear as elves or gnomes of sprites or trolls or whatever is going to resonate most with the viewer and result in the most accurate perception of the essence of the entity.

All this being said...I do need to admit that I have not done DMT. I plan to, soon. I am experienced with other psychoactives, but not DMT. This is all just theory based on my other studies into the nature of reality and reading this great thread.

Also, finally, in regards to the debate going on...I think our personalities and the basic build of our "selves" dictates to a certain degree the ways in which we are capable of perceiving reality. I work in a somewhat psychological field, and we were all given the Myers Briggs personality test and then we were shown an image.

We were asked to write on a separate piece of paper everything that we saw in the picture. I am an INFJ personality type which stands for introverted intuitive feeling judging. The picture was a cartoon of people on bus. I wrote things down like "I see a man who is frightened because another man looks like he may rob him." I looked at what was there and I looked beyond the physical and into the realm of the "why" and "beyond". All the people who were not "N" personality types like me, but were the opposite "S" personality type wrote things like "A man in short sitting on the right. A woman with curly hair standing on the left."

What is my point?

We perceive differently and interpret differently. One personality type is just not going to perceive reality in the same manner as another. "Science was there before everything" and "Science could not have existed without man existing beforehand" are beautiful examples of how we're all different, and all contribute in different ways and with different perceptions to keep the world interesting.

Very similar debates, re: science and what lies beyond science (and does that make it science?) break out with my close friends quite frequently.

In any case, when I am ready to take my DMT trip I hope all of you will offer me some guidance.

(Wow, I was all over the place and hope I have not offended and that this makes sense.)

PLUR

No, really, great post!

PLUR

 

[lenses]

I have always had a few (crazy?) theories about neurotransmitters, mainly serotonin.

Serotonin , at its core, is a sensing chemical. Heighten the levels, your body uses more energy to sense things. It basically tells your body (and allows it) to put energy into sensing more. Serotogenic drugs increase it to the level that allows us to tap into our 6th sense, ultra sensing, psychic powers.

Now DMT is a modified form of serotonin. A modified sensing chemical. So basically you're putting on different "lenses" to sense different things.

I believe there may be alternate plains that we don't sense normally, as we don't need to as humans usually, and it expends too much energy.

I've never broken through on DMT though. Want to.

 

[DexterMeth]

Drugs are chemicals that alter your normal body functions. Nothing more. Everything dealing with these chemicals can be explained scientifically whether we have or not.

So are all the chemicals that naturally occur in your brain as normal everyday consciousness. It's just my opinion, but I don't see how anyone can subjectively say that the psychedelic experience is false and those other worlds are just in your head. It's like trying to prove or disprove the existance of God... I dunno, wtfever

 

[invert]

Very well put invert, you should aim to be a college professor(if you aren't already!).

Very kind of you... that is my aim...

Invert, I tend to disagree with your position that psychedelics will undermine the role of faith. Perhaps they will hasten the move away from mythic fundamentalism, but anything, meditation, sleep deprivation, drugs, etc. that allow for the direct conscious recognition of god can only strengthen faith. If you know god personally, through direct experience of being god, can your faith be shaken? I think you may be confusing antiquated means of social cohesion (and control) for faith and religion. Psychedelics can only be another facet of god and with that recognition, it's obvious that they will never undermine the human strive to worship, understand and experience god. I expect they will only strengthen it.

I hope I wasn't confusing antiquated means of social cohesion and control for faith... I was trying not to: religion is often that; but faith is, as I was trying to argue, an alternative method (alternative to the - also flawed - scientific method) of knowing stuff, and one that is rather less careful to avoid fallacies.

But I no longer agree with my claim that psychedelics tend to undermine faith... On a few occasions I have experienced a faith-like mental state on psychedelics at least as intense as any I had during the period (for about five years or so, up till about ten years ago) that I had faith in a more conventional sense (attached as the faith was to an organized religion and its set of dogma); but most notably last night (following 12 mg insufflated 2C-B).

I'm trying to write a trip-report on it, but it's a bugger to find the right words with which to describe wordlessness. Perhaps I could say that a seed of wordless adoration, a seed that incessantly consumed and transformed and annihilated the sea of words in which it was planted, put me incrementally in to a state of unquestioning knowledge (of nothing, mind: this faith had no object, per se; or - if it did - it was jolly abstract) and submission and wordless prayerful worship.

I guess these are two aspects of (or two ways of looking at) the psychedelic experience: twiddling the knobs of consciousness, cognition, emotion and perception; and worded access to wordlessness (you might say 'conscious access to the unconscious/ineffable'; I'd say the two phrasings are equivalent)...

The former may, as I argued, tend to promote scientific thinking and undermine faith; for it is by twiddling the knobs that you realize that your settings are nothing special, and your intuitions (what you 'just know') are not reliable (and knob-twiddling, of course, is at the heart of the scientific method)...

But the latter may tend to promote faith: By accessing wordlessness, one accesses a state (a process?) in which - increasingly - questions cannot be formed; the worded mind beholds wordlessness (but without, as in any merely unconscious state, being lost in it; for if the worded mind were fully subsumed in the wordlessness, it would not survive to tell the tale - even to itself, let alone in a trip report on bluelight). This quiet, unquestioning state, with every atom of my body, every pattern of my mind trying to align itself to the wordless, wonderful, terrifying '...' (Damn it: I feel like a religious jew avoiding the name of the lord; how can I put a name to the object of my prayer?); this is a state of faith, surely.

I'm atheist; if I were not, I would imagine that this experience would deeply strengthen (or reawaken) my faith in the specific (worded!) entities that were the object of my faith. It certainly shook me, and I have still to reflect further on my understanding of the experience... I'm not sure I've represented it (to myself, to you) correctly.

So are all the chemicals that naturally occur in your brain as normal everyday consciousness.

Quite right! Our normal neurotransmitters are just the ones that suited best our (also evolving) sensory organs and neural structures, and the demands of our environment, during the period of our species' history relevant to selection of current traits. They are pragmatic, subjective; serotonin cannot be claimed to be inherently more likely to make truths in neural networks than DMT (nor vice versa). Of course, any alterations to one part of an evolved system (i.e. if you don't also alter your sensory organs to give them the physical ability to, say, detect objects in hyperspatial dimensions) are more likely to break stuff (lose abilities) than create meaningful new abilities. But mutations are more likely to break stuff too, but nonetheless - we are not extinct. So it is not impossible that DMT (and other psychedelics, of course) could enhance some abilities or create new ones.

It's just my opinion, but I don't see how anyone can subjectively say that the psychedelic experience is false and those other worlds are just in your head. It's like trying to prove or disprove the existance of God... I dunno, wtfever

Not sure I agree with this, though... both belief in a god and some of the beliefs held by more mystically-inclined psychedelics-users are - potentially - testable. Or rather, if they think the universe would be any different if their beliefs were not true (there is no god; there are no DMT elves), there you have a - potentially - testable hypothesis. If in fact they believe the existence of their god or elf or whatever has no discernible effect on the universe; well fair enough, that would be untestable, but it would also be not much of a belief.

Yes, the serotonin-(and other stuff, of course)-mediated mental state has no objective priority over the DMT-mediated mental state; but the rigorous application of scientific method (whether the people doing the science are tripping or not) can more carefully approximate truth than the unchecked intuitions or reasonings of either of those mental states.

 

[Icculus]

when i start thinking alien elves have put themselves inside my drugs, that is when i will stop.

:D hahaha

seriously though, i think that dmt could be where science and the spirit world come together. Spiritual use of psychedelics could be a form of conscious evolution. Or when we're 50 we'll all be bat shit crazy.. jk.

 

[Shakti]

Nice post invert. I think the way you distinguished the two types of faith is pretty equivalent to the way I distinguished the 'antiquated methods of social cohesion...' and Faith. I think now that you have done so, we are pretty much in agreement.

I'm really glad you've found the more evolved form of Faith. It sounds like the 2c-b really broke you open wonderfully. I think, though you may not be ready to hear this, that this direct apprehension of the divine might move you away from your atheism. No atheist is truly rebelling against God, that's impossible, they are rebelling against social institutions and faulty mental constructs, which is just fine. With direct apprehension of God, the confusion of God with the human institutions of God tends to not happen any more.