Marsh said:
You might say that I have done, um, extensive field research in the study of Shroomology during my university days. My initial response, having come out of this knowledge, stands. The whole fact of the matter is that drugs-- no matter what kind-- throw new information into a balance equation. This unbalances the equation. For a long time I tried to make myself believe that I was smarter and more enlightened when I was lit up, but in the end the truth became clear to me.
Personally, I think a sober human mind is already a spiritual mind, and that the "fine tuning" that people do with drugs is not necessary.
I too have done extensive field research, but my interest has frequently slid into the social dynamics of psychedelics.
Because 'drugs' are considered 'cool' by many young people, and since one's status is of prime importance these days, you will find a lot of people who say they have taken psychedelics, when in fact they haven't.
If and when they do actually try psychedelics, the pressure is off, and they think, 'Oh. Is this what it's all about. OK. So what's for lunch.' The issue of being cool or trying to impress people is removed. This is because during ego-death, you understand for the first time, your true nature. Things like status and being cool are thrown away like botched maths equations.
The problem is that you can't lie to someone who is experienced in psychedelics. Psychedelics have a 'profound' effect on one's personality, and there are many tell-tale signs of experience. The choice of words when discussing psychedelics is particularly revealing.
For instance. A 'veteran' does not generalise when he speaks of drugs.
The whole fact of the matter is that drugs-- no matter what kind-- throw new information into a balance equation. This unbalances the equation.
And what new information have you come across while being sedated, if you've ever been under general anaesthetic?
Because it is so hard to try and understand what a person is experiencing when they trip, people trying to mimick their behaviour miss out on the subtleties. Someone who is experienced can easily spot them.
Because psychedelic culture (Yes. It has it's own culture) is looked down upon these days, people might even lie (can you believe it!!
) in order to turn others away. They feel they are justified and that there lie is for the better, so it doesn't matter.
I could go into the whole government misinformation thing and why they do it, but I'm sure you're not that interested.
If you want to try and understand what psychedelics are all about, I recommend visiting
www.psychedelic-library.org. It has many papers which were written at the dawn of psychedelics in the west before people became conditioned by blanket 'don't do drugs' campaigns.
They also have numerous books including 'My problem child' by the chemist Aldous Huxley who first isolated LSD.
It should be noted that since psychedelics are generally underground these days, the qualities of the drugs are not monitored, and it is a frequent occurance to take drugs that don't actually work.
Mushrooms are particularly volatile since they vary greatly in potency when picked, and gradually lose their effectiveness through contact with air.
So someone who has not taken psychedelics that often, might have a rather weak view of them.
The effects of mushrooms can be seen at comparatively low doses, and so a standard dose (2g) is as low as possible (mushroom for your money.)
2g will rarely lead to ego-death. 4g or more will produce the desired level for a mystical experience to take place. Before this, it is more-or-less just a fireworks display. Another point on mushrooms is that they're very dreamy and so trying to understand what is going on is quite hard, since you're so distracted and the flood of thoughts is difficult to navigate through. LSD on the other hand is one-pointed. You can focus your attention without it being too painful. It took a lot of mushrooms for me to get anywhere. I recommend LSD.
Footnote:
I really didn't know how to approach this reply other than by saying exactly what I think. You may or may not be experienced in this field. A personally don't think you are. People might say this is short-sighted and complain that there isn't nearly enough material on which I can draw a conclusion about. I don't 'quite' know where you're at, but experienced psychonaut? Nah.
If you're going to reply with facts to support your authenticity (not that you have to prove anything to anyone here), you're wasting your time. It's not what you know, it's your personality that shows it. No hard feelings and apologies in antecedence to Brian.
