Perennial Philosophy

[DunkleSeele]

Don't worry. I don't think anyone here at this particular forum reads long posts. Either everyone has ADD or we've really shifted over to a visual/audio culture from the print culture that Marshall McLuhan wrote about. So far, many of the replies I've had were questions that could've had been answered if the person had simply read the OP in its entirety.

Says the one who can't get right who posted what.

Friendly advice: take your condescending attitude and shove it up your ass, followed by a big cactus.

[DunkleSeele]

I have read that. I'm not sure how it counters what I'm talking about. We may not know completely the mechanisms for these type of experiences. DMT may play a role, it may not. I happen to believe it does if it is possible to induce it naturally. There may be a natural route to this experience, but it's also possible that the founders of the major religion may have taken a shamanic path to it. For instance, "soma" in Hinduism is often associated with the psychedelic mushroom, likewise "The Last Supper" of the Buddha is also heavily speculated to have been psychedelic mushrooms. Not to mention many other examples as in "The Tree of Life" of Egyptian mythology has recently been identified as the Acacia nilotica which is rich in DMT, The Elusinian mysteries of ancient Greek times has been thought to be an ergotized beer which would induce an LSD-like experience, Muhammad shivering and fasting in the cave is an example of an ascetic path to inducing this type of experience, and many other examples where these states of mind are intertwined with the origin of these religions.

Another thing I'd like to add, I wish I could give you a link to the point in a talk where Terence mentions this, but I remember hearing a talk by Terence McKenna where he claimed he had a dream where he was handed a pipe filled with DMT, smoked it inside the dream, and had a full-on, very vivid re-experience of the DMT flash he'd see at the height of an actual DMT experience. If this is true, then this is a perfect proof that the brain is very capable of producing these experiences on-the-natch. I don't believe anything about this is "woo" or pseudoscientific, but a tried-and-true phenomenon we all seem to have the potential for. I'm not sure if you've read the post, judging by your most recent comment, I'm going to have to wager not, but you'll find that I'm not arguing for "woo" or the "supernatural," but a logical and neuroscientific way of explaining such phenomena.

LOL is this your evidence? The dreams of a deranged idiot?

[Icarus]

I have read that. I'm not sure how it counters what I'm talking about. We may not know completely the mechanisms for these type of experiences. DMT may play a role, it may not. I happen to believe it does if it is possible to induce it naturally. There may be a natural route to this experience, but it's also possible that the founders of the major religion may have taken a shamanic path to it. For instance, "soma" in Hinduism is often associated with the psychedelic mushroom, likewise "The Last Supper" of the Buddha is also heavily speculated to have been psychedelic mushrooms. Not to mention many other examples as in "The Tree of Life" of Egyptian mythology has recently been identified as the Acacia nilotica which is rich in DMT, The Elusinian mysteries of ancient Greek times has been thought to be an ergotized beer which would induce an LSD-like experience, Muhammad shivering and fasting in the cave is an example of an ascetic path to inducing this type of experience, and many other examples where these states of mind are intertwined with the origin of these religions.

Another thing I'd like to add, I wish I could give you a link to the point in a talk where Terence mentions this, but I remember hearing a talk by Terence McKenna where he claimed he had a dream where he was handed a pipe filled with DMT, smoked it inside the dream, and had a full-on, very vivid re-experience of the DMT flash he'd see at the height of an actual DMT experience. If this is true, then this is a perfect proof that the brain is very capable of producing these experiences on-the-natch. I don't believe anything about this is "woo" or pseudoscientific, but a tried-and-true phenomenon we all seem to have the potential for. I'm not sure if you've read the post, judging by your most recent comment, I'm going to have to wager not, but you'll find that I'm not arguing for "woo" or the "supernatural," but a logical and neuroscientific way of explaining such phenomena.

Interesting, you said you read it then refuse to counter anything in the paper itself. Since you believe yourself more capable of interpreting evidence than the scientists who collected it you must have a PhD in biochemistry. So I have to ask, what university gave you a PhD and where are you currently teaching/researching? Why do we produce monoamine oxidase A when "according to your woo" we need DMT in high concentrations in the brain (I'm leaving out the fact that you have no idea what the threshold dose of DMT is in the brain). If you do happen to know the threshold dose you can provide it in your response.

I have a feeling you're going to ignore that as you completely ignored my post breaking down the research done and the conclusions arrived at by the researchers. You're only response to that entire thing was "I disagree" with no explanation why other than "I'm smarter than those silly scientists".

I also know you didn't read the paper because I highly doubt you have a subscription to Biochemical Pharmacology, the farthest you would have gotten is the abstract.

[stromboli]

I've had a pet theory for years that music was created by a bunch of hunter/gatherers that inadvertently threw some Marijuana into a fire and got stoned, then started beating on rocks with sticks and chanting. Just me. I took Psilocybin once, and all I did was wander in a circle and drool.

My personal belief is that religion was started by a lazy, opportunistic fuck that saw an opportunity when something unexplainable happened, declared himself a seer and came up with a supernatural explanation. He was venerated by the tribe and laid about looking important instead of being out hunting. Pretty much the same today.

[Kafei]

I've had a pet theory for years that music was created by a bunch of hunter/gatherers that inadvertently threw some Marijuana into a fire and got stoned, then started beating on rocks with sticks and chanting. Just me. I took Psilocybin once, and all I did was wander in a circle and drool.

My personal belief is that religion was started by a lazy, opportunistic fuck that saw an opportunity when something unexplainable happened, declared himself a seer and came up with a supernatural explanation. He was venerated by the tribe and laid about looking important instead of being out hunting. Pretty much the same today.

I disagree. I believe the origin of the major religions can find its source in the so-callled "mystical experience" or what's referred to today as the "ego death" experience. In order to elicit this phenomenon with a psychedelic, you must exceed the threshold dose. Terence McKenna recommends for psilocybin-containing mushrooms, for someone who weighs 140lbs, that you take at least five dried grams on an empty stomach. Of course, if you weigh a bit more, you want to go higher. I don't recommend this unless you take the necessary precautions, i.e. the right set and setting, perhaps an individual who is experienced to attend you in this endeavor, etc.

Interesting, you said you read it then refuse to counter anything in the paper itself. Since you believe yourself more capable of interpreting evidence than the scientists who collected it you must have a PhD in biochemistry. So I have to ask, what university gave you a PhD and where are you currently teaching/researching? Why do we produce monoamine oxidase A when "according to your woo" we need DMT in high concentrations in the brain (I'm leaving out the fact that you have no idea what the threshold dose of DMT is in the brain). If you do happen to know the threshold dose you can provide it in your response.

I have a feeling you're going to ignore that as you completely ignored my post breaking down the research done and the conclusions arrived at by the researchers. You're only response to that entire thing was "I disagree" with no explanation why other than "I'm smarter than those silly scientists".

I also know you didn't read the paper because I highly doubt you have a subscription to Biochemical Pharmacology, the farthest you would have gotten is the abstract.

Well, I've already answered this, we do not know the precise mechanism for this experience. All you're really attempting to dismiss is a natural induction of this experience. The 'natural satori', as Alan Watts would call it, has various explanations. The "God spot" is one explanation, endogenous DMT is another. Like I mentioned before, it's also possible that the founders of the major religions could have been using psychedelics as in the example I gave of "soma" possibly being some sort of psychedelic mushroom.

I'm not saying "I'm smarter than those silly scientists." I've read the full paper. I'm not quite sure the paper you're referring to is evidence of what you're saying. I have to question whether you read it or you simply read the abstract, because your interpretation is off. You're interpreting the paper as though it's saying that one cannot have a DMT experience that is endogenously produced, correct? Well, that's not the case. The paper is merely acknowledging other metabolic pathways for DMT. We all know DMT, when smoked, is a very fact-acting experience lasting only 5 from 15 to 20 minutes at the most. Well, this study is only proving further what we always knew, that the body can quickly metabolize DMT within minutes. If you've read the paper, you'd know that it even mentions the possibility of a endogenously produced DMT experience! Yes, the threshold is there, otherwise I don't think that would be considered. So, what you're telling me is simply absurd.

I'm not quite sure what you have against this idea, but it seems you'll go through any effort to try and knock it down. I don't think it can.

LOL is this your evidence? The dreams of a deranged idiot?

Dreams are a powerful, immersive experience in and of themselves. I don't think it's a big leap to imagine that these type of experiences can be endogenously produced. I'm not sure why you have a problem with that. There's no evidence that says that one cannot have an endogenously produced experienced.

[Icarus]

Well, I've already answered this, we do not know the precise mechanism for this experience. All you're really attempting to dismiss is a natural induction of this experience. The 'natural satori', as Alan Watts would call it, has various explanations. The "God spot" is one explanation, endogenous DMT is another. Like I mentioned before, it's also possible that the founders of the major religions could have been using psychedelics as in the example I gave of "soma" possibly being some sort of psychedelic mushroom.

I'm not saying "I'm smarter than those silly scientists." I've read the full paper. I'm not quite sure the paper you're referring to is evidence of what you're saying. I have to question whether you read it or you simply read the abstract, because your interpretation is off. You're interpreting the paper as though it's saying that one cannot have a DMT experience that is endogenously produced, correct? Well, that's not the case. The paper is merely acknowledging other metabolic pathways for DMT. We all know DMT, when smoked, is a very fact-acting experience lasting only 5 from 15 to 20 minutes at the most. Well, this study is only proving further what we always knew, that the body can quickly metabolize DMT within minutes. If you've read the paper, you'd know that it even mentions the possibility of a endogenously produced DMT experience! Yes, the threshold is there, otherwise I don't think that would be considered. So, what you're telling me is simply absurd.

I'm not quite sure what you have against this idea, but it seems you'll go through any effort to try and knock it down. I don't think it can.

This is why you are not a scientist, you don't look for connections then try to find data supporting your assumptions, you look at the data and use it to try and find something definitive. You have failed to provide a basis for your hypothesis so it can be dismissed. If you had read the full paper why are you purposefully avoiding talking about the enzyme that metabolizes DMT or the threshold dose of DMT in the brain? You can't simple say "yes, the threshold is there" if you had any education in the scientific disciplines you'd know that is not enough, you actually have to provide a numerical value with research backing it up. "Yes, the threshold is there, otherwise I don't think that would be considered. So, what you're telling me is simply absurd." Here's the problem, no one is considering it other than you. None of the papers you or I have cited even mention the link you are claiming. You've just stated your claim as "the inevitable and logic outcome" without actually providing any evidence.

[the_antithesis]

Don't worry. I don't think anyone here at this particular forum reads long posts. Either everyone has ADD or we've really shifted over to a visual/audio culture from the print culture that Marshall McLuhan wrote about.

Or maybe your shit is not not very fucking interesting.

[Kafei]

If you had any education in the scientific disciplines you'd know that is not enough, you actually have to provide a numerical value with research backing it up. "Yes, the threshold is there, otherwise I don't think that would be considered. So, what you're telling me is simply absurd." Here's the problem, no one is considering it other than you. None of the papers you or I have cited even mention the link you are claiming. You've just stated your claim as "the inevitable and logic outcome" without actually providing any evidence.

No, the paper itself considers an endogenously produced experienced. I was referring to the 2014 9-page report, the very same study that you're referring to. It mentions the metabolism of DMT when ingested or in a endogenously produced. I thought you read the paper. Furthermore and obviously, the only reason I wouldn't have concrete data on the so-called "mystical experience" is because it simply hasn't been done. That's why I mentioned earlier that even peer-review studies have to follow a certain politics, and because DMT is a highly illegal substance in most countries, there's not much funding towards asking these very interesting questions and getting the permission to pursue the very likely possibility of evidence that may be available if we could just but study these things properly.

So, I admit, a lot of what I offer here is speculation and my own opinion, but it's not unfounded speculation. Just like Strassman's speculatory reasoning that DMT may be produced in the pineal gland because the pineal gland, as we know, contains tryptophan and the necessary enzymatic constituents to synthesize DMT . Now, that we've found its presence in the rodent's pineal gland, this is a very likely possibility. There's other such things that may not convince you, but I find interesting. For instance, people who claimed themselves "atheist," but after a major psychedelic experience converted to Buddhism. To give a few famous examples, I'd say Richard Alpert, Jack Kerouac, Alan Watts, and Allen Ginsberg. I'm not sure if you've ever read Dr. Rick Strassman's book "DMT: The Spirit Molecule," but there are overlapping descriptions in the states of eastern mysticism and psychedelic experiences. I don't think this is a coincidence. I don't have the patience to wait around for tests to finally be done. We have minds, we have the ability to extrapolate, and this is all I've done. If you're going to wait around for the peer-reviewed article before you give yourself permission to let such notions ricochet in your mind, then you may never see it. This stuff may not be properly studied til well after the curtain comes down on this cosmic drama. But so far, Strassman hasn't been necessarily "incorrect." So far, the light that is being shed on these matters are pointing towards the fact that he seems to be on the right track.

Or maybe your shit is not not very fucking interesting.

Or maybe you don't like reading walls of text. Are you the one that said earlier, "I stopped reading at 'LSD God'"? I mean, if you can't even read the first paragraph, I could see how maybe this could be a daunting challenge for you.

[the_antithesis]

Spend time to tell you that you are uninteresting is more interesting that you.

[Moralnihilist]

Or maybe you don't like reading walls of text. Are you the one that said earlier, "I stopped reading at 'LSD God'"? I mean, if you can't even read the first paragraph, I could see how maybe this could be a daunting challenge for you.

All you have posted so far is based off of the writings of people who claim things based off of "I think" or "I believe" nothing of substantial evidence. I have read as much as tolerable of the insane ramblings of people who were high as a kite while getting my PhD in Roman history(historians  of the time often drank wine mixed with lead and thus were out of their minds). The ramblings of people who admit that they were fucked out of their minds on a class 1 drug, does not add much to the argument.

[Kafei]

All you have posted so far is based off of the writings of people who claim things based off of "I think" or "I believe" nothing of substantial evidence. I have read as much as tolerable of the insane ramblings of people who were high as a kite while getting my PhD in Roman history(historians  of the time often drank wine mixed with lead and thus were out of their minds). The ramblings of people who admit that they were fucked out of their minds on a class 1 drug, does not add much to the argument.

There is evidence for what I've presented here. Not the precise evidence that would prove any of this stuff, but enough evidence to convince someone of its plausibility. I take it, however, you did not read the OP.

Spend time to tell you that you are uninteresting is more interesting that you.

What I've noticed is people who find this stuff extremely fascinating are usually people that have taken up something like Terence McKenna's suggestion of the "heroic dose." I'd wager that most people that responded here have not availed themselves of such an endeavor, if not all. One side-effect of smoking DMT is that ever afterward, you can't shut up about DMT.

[Sargon The Grape]

Are you guys still talking about perineum philosophy with this guy?


Sent from Monster Island. Titty sprinkles.

[Moralnihilist]

There is evidence for what I've presented here. Not the precise evidence that would prove any of this stuff, but enough evidence to convince someone of its plausibility. I take it, however, you did not read the OP.

I did, and it lacked evidence of any of its claims. Maybe =/= evidence(at least with me). It presents a decent argument, but decent arguments only work in courtrooms not academia. Again without evidence I have to ask, what the hell is your point? Are you trying to convince people here on the validity of your claims? If so you are not going to have much success without actual evidence. Is it to prove that your point might hold water? Again without evidence, good luck.

Any asshat can come here and make a decent argument for the existence of a god. But without actual evidence all it boils down to is that you(or they) expect us to trust you. The claims that you are making are rather outlandish without any actual supporting evidence, what reason do we have to trust you?

[Kafei]

Any asshat can come here and make a decent argument for the existence of a god. But without actual evidence all it boils down to is that you(or they) expect us to trust you. The claims that you are making are rather outlandish without any actual supporting evidence, what reason do we have to trust you?

I have to assume that you, in fact, did not read the OP based on this response. I'm not arguing for the existence for a "God." If that's what you got out of reading the OP, then you've entirely missed the point.

[the_antithesis]

There is evidence for what I've presented here. Not the precise evidence that would prove any of this stuff, but enough evidence to convince someone of its plausibility. I take it, however, you did not read the OP.
What I've noticed is people who find this stuff extremely fascinating are usually people that have taken up something like Terence McKenna's suggestion of the "heroic dose." I'd wager that most people that responded here have not availed themselves of such an endeavor, if not all. One side-effect of smoking DMT is that ever afterward, you can't shut up about DMT.

It's sort of like fucking your own father. Once you do it, you think anyone else wants to hear about it.

Next time try Janitor In a Drum.