DMT the soul molecule

[Leonardo]

There may be a way to prove if someone can control a psychedelic trip! Below is a link to an article that described how scientists used MRi to capture the patterns in the visual cortex of images that a person was watching.(http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/) This very same process could capture such images while someone is on a psychedelic trip. If person can repeat a visual pattern in the visual cortex in each time they go under the influence that would pretty much prove the ability to control a trip.

Sony had patented a ultrasound neural stimulator to impress a visual image in the visual cortex. The device has never been built, but if one where built we could communicate with someone under a psychedelic like DMT! By impressing the words on their visual cortex, kinda like a crude command line screen where only text is displayed, we could communicate with the person under the influence to create an image of some object or animal, say a duck. That kind of interaction under DMT would be a fascinating experiment to say the least.:yes:

With today's technology the ability to explore the potential of psychedelics is fascinating. If I didn't have to work for a living I'd get a medical degree in psychiatry or neural science, get a grant and explore the holodeck, aka the human brain...

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Its interesting that aboriginal societies interpreted the experience with pschodelics as a pathway to a spiritual world.

Or not. Brian Hayden (author of Shamans, Sorcerers, and Saints: A Prehistory of Religion; Smithsonian Institution, 2003) is hardly your stereotypical Western conservative here, having lived among shamanistic groups, and even writes "if drugs were legalized on condition that all users had to undergo supervision and training by a bona fide shaman, society would undoubtedly be in a much better state than it is now" (p. 75). However, he also notes the "turn" in shamanistic practice in areas where "psychotropic plants and animals (such as toads) abound" (p. 84). In comparison to other methods (described below), "nder the influence of drugs, a shaman's images may be less his own and less under his control. The same might be said of the alcohol-induced ecstatic states of shamans I met in Guatemala. It is not my place to make value judgments in these areas, although I would note that even if drugs can by useful in opening up new perceptions, their systematic use was ultimately abjured even by Carlos Castaneda's Don Juan" (p. 85).

Nor should the other "paths" to spiritual worlds, or other uses of psychotropics, be ignored. The Maya and Minoans, for example, seem to have mixed the ingestion of mood-altering substances (including psychedelics) with blood-letting, blood burning, self-harm, etc., to communicate with the spirit world, to enter into ecstatic states, and to prove their right to elite status. Also, it seems likely that in many instances the ingestion of various brews, plants, etc., were not even intended to be a "pathway to a spiritual world" but were taken before engaging in painful rituals like bodily piercings (including genital), which were intended to be the central "pathway to a spiritual world", rather than the drugs themselves.

Altered or ecstatic states in religious experiences are the rule, not the exception. The earliest Christians spoke in "tongues". Jewish, Christian, and Muslim "mystics" achieved "altered" mental states for spiritual purposes using everything from starvation and self-harm (e.g., self-flagellation) to meditation and recitation. Such practices are well-documented and have been the subject of many studies over a long time. Among other "physical techniques for inducing altered and ecstatic states" which Hayden states are "extremely common", he lists "fasting, dehydration, physical exertion, pain, fear or other strong emotions, special breathing, temperature extremes, and blood loss" (p. 68). A copy of a sktech (fig. 3.15) of two men hanging in the air by hooks includes a caption explaining the depiction as "the Sun Dance ceremonies of the Plains Indians, which culminated in young participants being hung up by skewers through their skin and weighed down by bison skulls attached to them".

Keith Thomas' unprecedented study Religion & the Decline of Magic is more than a little dated (mainly because his work set the foundations for that of others), but it is still a classic and filled with primary source material, including those related to methods and reasons for "trances" from the earlier medieval days up to the 19th century. These include, for example, descriptions of "trances" used by cunning folk (or wissards, wizards, wise ones, etc.) to contact otherwordly realms. Additionally, while epileptic seizures and similar phenomena were often cross-culturally deemed to be the work of demons, the devil, evil spirits, etc., they were also cross-culturally considered the result of everything from a medium for the dead to the "touch" of God(s). Even in the period often called that of "the European witch-trials", we find "no evidence that epileptics were normally classified as witches" (p. 110 of Robin Briggs' Witches & Neighbors: The Social and Cultural Context of European Witchcraft).

Your conception that

western perspective that psychedelics are evil and harmful.

while

aboriginal societies interpreted the experience with pschodelics as a pathway to a spiritual world.

is doubly wrong. It is, as Hayden puts it, the tendency for "new-age spiritualists" (among others) to "eulogize" shamans and other mystics and ignoring (or remaining ignorant of) actual practices. Campbell, Eliade, Hayden, and others all record not only how "mystics" or "shamans" used the spiritual world to attack, kill, curse, dominate, etc., but also how often they were the subject of tribal/social animosity, even lethal attacks. But why do I say doubly wrong?

First, because throughout the history of Western culture mental states caused, or resembling those caused, by psychedelics were frequently interpreted as contact with the divine, or with the ability to perform supernatural feats (divination, contacting the dead, healing, etc.). From the canonical Revelations to the gnostic literature all the way up to the 19th century movement begun by Jean-Antoine Boullan (whose following numbered over half a million), we find repeated evidence not just of the various ways (from ingestion to flagellation) mystics reached ecstatic/mystic/etc. states, but how they based and interpreted their methods through canonical Judeo-Christian scriptures. The modern revival of ceremonial magic in the 19th and 20th centuries included the ingestion of psychedelics, but was an entirely Western phenomenon incorporating mainly Western (or Judeo-Christian & Greco-Roman) traditions, accurately or not.

Second, because both Western and non-Western societies throughout history have associated psychedelic-type states with evil, witchcraft, demonic influence, etc. The root of pharmacy is the Greek φαρμακεῖα/pharmakeia, or use of drugs, potions, etc., especially by one who is known to use these: a φαρμακός/pharmakos. Both the practice and the practitioner could refer to medicine, or beneficial potions, but equally to witchcraft, poisons, harmful potions, etc. The distinction between medicine and magic to older societies is at best to create to fine a distinction where none existed, and frequently wholly anachronistic. And then there is the "romantic" and false association of mystics and their use of drugs, which (ironically) was fueled in some instances as a means to demonize "aboriginal societies". It is certainly true that entheogens have been used as part of many religious and spiritual rituals. It is also certainly true that in many (or most) areas in which this is true, this use has been exaggerated or otherwise inaccurately portrayed. For over a century now, from the 1908 studies by Bogoras (The Chukchee) and Jochelson (The Koryak), through the transition stage of ethnology to anthropology (where Eliade firmly stands), up to the modern day, the evidence suggests that for those societies in which individuals did use psychotropics as a "pathway to a spiritual world", most of the time this was at most one method among many.

However, this:

During the hey day of the sixties the experience was a chaotic concopheny of colors and warped images, leading to emotional states that inspired sexual and brotherly love, anti-war and anti-establishment ideologies.

led to the infusion of romanticized use of psychotropics in academic literature, reinforcing stereotypes which may actually harm more than our knowledge of the religious/spiritual traditions of other cultures. For example, A Hallucinogenic Tea, Laced with Controversy-Ayahuasca in the Amazon and the United States by Marlene Dobkin de Rios & Roger Rumrrill (the former a PhD whose dissertatino was on ayahuasca healers, the latter a writer/journalist and native of the Peruvian Amazon) is written for the general audience and is both concerned with history and with policy. The authors begin with the actual use by natives, and continue from there to describe how "drug tourists" from America created a market for "neo-shamans", described by the authors as "charlaton healers" of a new breed, "men and women are basically business people who extract cash from visitors".

A more balanced (and technical) approach is that of Wallis in Shamans/Neo-Shamans: Ecstasies, Alternative Archaeologies and Contemporary Pagans, but here to the same problem is explored: "In Peru, for instance, indigenous shamans have been commercialised by neo-Shamans who conduct ‘spiritual tours’ to ancient sites such as Machu Picchu. In South Africa ‘white’ sangomas might be accused of cultural appropriation when they learn shamanistic techniques from previously suppressed black Africans. This neo-colonialism is far more pronounced in the USA, where many Native Americans are extremely angry at what they see as the ‘stealing’ of their traditions by ‘New Agers’, be it mythologies, sweat lodges or ancient monuments." (emphasis added).

It's one thing to realize the hypocrisy of a culture which simultaneously passes laws against the use and/or distribution of so-called "illicit substances" while passing out psychopharmaceuticals designed to, and touted for, their mind altering effects as if these were candy. Nor is trying to understand the spiritual connections many feel through the use of psychotropics something I find at all problematic.

It's another thing to romantacize the "aboriginal societies" and their "pathway to a spiritual world", an approach which is simply the ethnocentrism & racism of early "anthropologists" (both the armchair historians like Frazer and the ethnologists) turned on its head.

 

[Leonardo]

However, he also notes the "turn" in shamanistic practice in areas where "psychotropic plants and animals (such as toads) abound"...

It's another thing to romantacize the "aboriginal societies" and their "pathway to a spiritual world", an approach which is simply the ethnocentrism & racism of early "anthropologists" (both the armchair historians like Frazer and the ethnologists) turned on its head.

Indigenous Amazonian Amerindian cultures use ayahuasca for passage to the spiritual world. North American natives use peyote for passage to the spiritual world. So your cites seem to be ignoring historical facts! Your demonizing of the use of psychedelics by aboriginal cultures through “Bad Shamans” doesn’t bare weight to your argument that the main use and interpretation of the psychedelic trips weren't for spiritual reasons. That power can be abused is indifferent to the instruments that are used to abuse power. Its like saying quantum mechanics is bad becasue you can make atomic bombs with it...

led to the infusion of romanticized use of psychotropics in academic literature...

What does this have to do with relative cultural interpretations of psychedelics or the issues of frames of reference that influence the experience of pschedelics?

And again the Santo Damie give ayahuasca to infants with no harm phsycially or mentally. Your arguments are baseless when there is proof that under controlled use of such susbtances there is no harm and they can even be helpful...:yes:

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Indigenous Amazonian Amerindian cultures use ayahuasca for passage to the spiritual world. North American natives use peyote for passage to the spiritual world. So your cites seem to be ignoring historical facts!

How do you know what has been going on in North American or South American tribal cultures? Either someone told you or you read it. Marlene Dobkin de Rios wrote her dissertation on this subject (ayahuasca use), and both before and after spent years in the Amazon. The co-author of her book is a native from Iquitos. Let's ignore, for the moment, the vast amount of literature out there in anthropology and fields related to it (one cannot, for example, study the Navajo language without learning about the culture). Let's just stick with the description in their book on the subject. And let's pretend that the "historical facts" known to anthropologists and other specialists are those to which you allude. That would mean that you have read a representative sample of works on the subject from these specialists. So what are they?

Your demonizing of the use of psychedelics by aboriginal cultures through “Bad Shamans” doesn’t bare weight to your argument that the main use and interpretation of the psychedelic trips weren't for spiritual reasons.

I'm not demonizing anybody. Or the use. I'm just not so racist and/or arrogant that I believe I can understand the nature and nuances of societies, groups, cultures, etc., by reading websites or Strassman's book on DMT, combine these with personal experience, and then pretend I understand how these peoples used psychotropic compounds and understood/interpreted such uses.

I certainly try to understand. And not just through journals, monographs, volumes, and other academic works. I was visiting erowid back when roguesci and similar sites often linked to it (roguesci, like erowid, used to be a forum for active researchers, credentialed scientists, and extremely intelligent and informed autodidacts, but unlike erowid it was shut down). The relationship between ecstatic states, psychotropic compounds, and spirituality was also a topic on wiccaforums, although when I returned years later to the online forum world, it too had vanished. I spent years studying languages just to be able to understand how a particular culture understood their religious/spiritual practices. And I've spent years going through the literature on the effect of drugs (psychiatric, illegal, legal but recreational, etc.) on the brain. I have too many flaws to count, but being close-minded about the cultural, relgious, social, and familial influences on worldviews isn't one of them. I acknowledge that I have a problematic lack of patience with people who continue to use their inaccurate understanding of some subject to justify their opinions, such as people who mischaracterize the nature of evolutionary processes to argue for some version of creationism, or those who insist that atheism had nothing to do with the greatist mass murders in the history of the world. But if someone says they believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago, and the reason they believe this is because they adhere to a certain interpretation of religious texts, then I can understand that. I certainly don't share the belief, but it is consistent. By contrast, the US policies concerning psychiatric practices and what substances are legal (alcohol) vs. illegal (almost everything else) are indefensible in my opinion, because they are hypocritical.

That power can be abused is indifferent to the instruments that are used to abuse power. Its like saying quantum mechanics is bad becasue you can make atomic bombs with it...

That was pretty much my point, only without an analogy which confuses formalisms with practice and theory.

What does this have to do with relative cultural interpretations of psychedelics or the issues of frames of reference that influence the experience of pschedelics?

When you make inaccurate statements about "Western" viewpoints, and combine them with equally inaccurate but also elitist and condescending remarks about "aboriginal cultures", and use both to defend statements about your personal use & understanding of the relationship between psychotropic componds, ecstatic states, and spirituality, you feed into a very real market which has already created a problem (drug tourism, which is actually more of a collection of related problems) for areas like the Amazon.

And again the Santo Damie give ayahuasca to infants with no harm phsycially or mentally.

"A phenomenon that has been going on for several decades—drug tourism in the Amazon—includes the merchandising and commercialization of spiritual states of consciousness induced by drinking an admixture of several psychedelic plants. These plants have a long history of use by urban and rural mestizo healers, and by river-edge farmers and native groups. This tourism, with all the pageantry of a Hollywood epic film, is replete with tour guides and celebrity neo-shamans and charlatans. They are out to get rich quick. This situation is a public health menace and needs to be evaluated and controlled. This drug tourism is different from the sacramental use of these plants in new religions such as the União do Vegetal and Santo Daime in Brazil. Rather, this is materialistic exploitation of foreign visitors to the Amazon regions of South America, which makes a mockery of, and is destroying, the traditional use of such plants" p. 72 of A Hallucinogenic Tea, Laced with Controversy-Ayahuasca in the Amazon and the United States by Marlene Dobkin de Rios & Roger Rumrrill

Your arguments are baseless when there is proof that under controlled use of such susbtances there is no harm and they can even be helpful...:yes:

Such as?

 

[apophenia]

"A phenomenon that has been going on for several decades—drug tourism in the Amazon—includes the merchandising and commercialization of spiritual states of consciousness induced by drinking an admixture of several psychedelic plants. These plants have a long history of use by urban and rural mestizo healers, and by river-edge farmers and native groups. This tourism, with all the pageantry of a Hollywood epic film, is replete with tour guides and celebrity neo-shamans and charlatans. They are out to get rich quick. This situation is a public health menace and needs to be evaluated and controlled. This drug tourism is different from the sacramental use of these plants in new religions such as the União do Vegetal and Santo Daime in Brazil. Rather, this is materialistic exploitation of foreign visitors to the Amazon regions of South America, which makes a mockery of, and is destroying, the traditional use of such plants" p. 72 of A Hallucinogenic Tea, Laced with Controversy-Ayahuasca in the Amazon and the United States by Marlene Dobkin de Rios & Roger Rumrrill

A variant of this is also happening in Australia. Hippies discovered that certain acacias on the central east coast of Australia contain DMT. We now have self-appointed 'shaman-guides' doing 'weekend intensives'.

What is interesting is that there is the tendency to attempt to link this to Australian aboriginal culture, which has no recorded history of DMT use. This is not surprising, as DMT is not orally active without a MAO inhibitor, and so far I am not aware of anyone finding a native plant containing such substances proximal to the acacias. There are a few aboriginal Australians getting on the bandwagon, I suspect because of the cool factor and the chance to get some new social leverage, but without any real indication of any history of tribal DMT use.

What I find disturbing about all this is that the new austral-ayahuascans are now harvesting endangered species of acacias in various parts of Australia. Their rationalisations are tragic - 'these are the end days, and Gaia is making a sacrifice to ensure the cosmic wisdom... blah blah blah'.

That is so pathetic because they could easily grow phalaris grass and syrian rue. But that takes a little time and effort ...

 

[Leonardo]

How do you know what has been going on in North American or South American tribal cultures? Either someone told you or you read it.

And what you lived with some tribal Amazon natives, which makes you an expert?

I'm not demonizing anybody. Or the use. I'm just not so racist and/or arrogant that I believe I can understand the nature and nuances of societies, groups, cultures, etc., by reading websites or Strassman's book on DMT, combine these with personal experience, and then pretend I understand how these peoples used psychotropic compounds and understood/interpreted such uses.

Oh there you go again building that undefinable cloud where one can not formalize questions, tests or ideas because that would be arrogant...:sarcastic

When you make inaccurate statements about "Western" viewpoints, and combine them with equally inaccurate but also elitist and condescending remarks about "aboriginal cultures", and use both to defend statements about your personal use & understanding of the relationship between psychotropic componds, ecstatic states, and spirituality,

Condesending remarks? Are you sure you're not tripping on something?

you feed into a very real market which has already created a problem (drug tourism, which is actually more of a collection of related problems) for areas like the Amazon.

Yeah, and I bet you own a computer, betcha a laptop too, a celluar phone and a Tablet. Did you know that you've created a problem that dwarfs my so called contribution to drug tourism. The amount of pollution and the exploitation of cheap labor, including child labor from manufacturing those devices cause is abominable! Heck some of the Chinse workers threaten to commit suicide because they're worked so hard. And oh the manufacturing firms make all new hires sign a contract that they won't commit suicide! So why don't you stop your arrogant self centered abuse of technological gadgets and have some respect for the environment and those exploited workers. I mean you seem like such a concerned person for the welfare of others.

But if you read my post carefully I've not contributed to such drug tourism, can a tourist gain access to MRI machine, or conduct controlled experiments to evaluate the potential of psychodelics? NO you just go with the reflect fear in your gut and spew out the nonse of all the problems that are caused by psychodelics. You qouted an author that stated that modern society would benift from the managed, control use of psychodelics, so stop contridicting yourself and go save a tree and not buy a laptop or cell phone or even a Tablet and make the world a better place.

this is materialistic exploitation of foreign visitors to the Amazon regions of South America, which makes a mockery of, and is destroying, the traditional use of such plants" p. 72

Which is for religious purposes, but you state no its a problem drug that Shamans use to expolit people with...Getting tried..Tell ya what...Nothing is gona stop my curiousity of the potential of DMT...

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

And what you lived with some tribal Amazon natives, which makes you an expert?

No, I have not, nor do I consider myself an expert. So I rely on the work of those who are. You critique these sources (at least the ones I have cited so far) yet you make claims about "historical facts" without giving your source(s) for these.

Oh there you go again building that undefinable cloud where one can not formalize questions, tests or ideas because that would be arrogant...:sarcastic

1) There are few things I am more excited about than the ability to formalize questions, tests, or ideas (although I suspect that formalisms as they are typically understood differ substantially from the way you understand).
2) I welcome tests of ideas and questions. However, I do not welcome (and I find rather repugnant) those who propogate ignorance and yet defend their statements with nebulous references to "historical facts" or "scientific studies" despite an almost total (or completely total) lack of familiarity with these.

Yeah, and I bet you own a computer, betcha a laptop too, a celluar phone and a Tablet

I do own a laptop and a cellular phone. I don't own a tablet (and my laptop is my computer).

Did you know that you've created a problem that dwarfs my so called contribution to drug tourism.

I'm going to assume you intended this to be a rhetorical question, rather than a serious inquiry. Either way, though, the analogy below is flawed:

The amount of pollution and the exploitation of cheap labor, including child labor from manufacturing those devices cause is abominable!

Tell me, how much literature on the earth sciences have you read? Do you know, for example, the effect printing hundreds of millions of paper documents (rather than electronic douments) has on the environment? What exactly do you know of research having to do with pollution or "cheap labor"?

Heck some of the Chinse workers threaten to commit suicide because they're worked so hard.

And this, I suppose, has nothing to do with the power of the state, but is somehow related to my laptop and cellphone?

And oh the manufacturing firms make all new hires sign a contract that they won't commit suicide!

Source?

So why don't you stop your arrogant self centered abuse of technological gadgets and have some respect for the environment and those exploited workers.

1) As far as the environment goes, I've followed both the literature and the movement for years. I've tried to contribute to models, or suggest methods which might enable these, of realistic, effective means to understand enough of the dynamical systems which makeup our environment.
2) You have no idea where I get any of my products from
3) I've read your posts, and your descriptions, and compared them to those which native peoples state are exploitations, manipulations, and perversions of their spiritual goals. I've given you sources to explore.

But if you read my post carefully I've not contributed to such drug tourism, can a tourist gain access to MRI machine, or conduct controlled experiments to evaluate the potential of psychodelics?

1) You are now making claims about whether or not you are promoting something which corresponds to a phenomenon you never indicated you knew existed (and if you did, I'd love to hear from what).
2) How many times have you gained "access to [an] MRI machine" or conducted controlled experiments? If you were familiar with "drug tourism", you would know that the a fundamental component is novices, amateurs, and so forth relying on selective, pre-packaged, and easily consumed accounts of "the potentional of psychedelic". The reason "drug tourism" exists is because sources such as those you have linked to or mentioned exploit the very serious socio-cultural and religious practices of various groups/societies/peoples for money, sensationalism, notoriety, etc.
3) Controlled experiments do not tell you anything about how a particular people use, understand, and interpret the results of methods to reach ecstatic states.

NO you just go with the reflect fear in your gut and spew out the nonse of all the problems that are caused by psychodelics.

I'm far less concerned with the harm of psychedelics than I am with the harm caused by the exploitation of peoples and their spiritual traditions by those who demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the practicies the claim to be a part of. There are serious, dedicated individuals who (regardless of racial, ethnic, or geographic origin) do not take likely the spiritual practices of other groups. Such individual do not link to sites which refer in passing to studies they can't understand, or to sensationalist sources about nebulous use of psychotropics in various cultures. Instead, they are concerned with study, discipline, and spirituality. Not pop eclectic new age sensationalism.

You qouted an author that stated that modern society would benift from the managed, control use of psychodelics

Yes, I did. But that author spent years among shamans. And understands the numerous dangers involved in seeking altered states of mind. The author did not browse the web and read the inaccurate accounts of scientific studies, cultural histories, and other nonsense which is so easy to find for someone seeking the "get spiritual in 24 hours" approach.

go save a tree and not buy a laptop or cell phone or even a Tablet and make the world a better place.

I have around 7,000 electronic books and at least twice that number of electronic articles. By contrast, I have perhaps a few thousand actual books and a hanful of printed articles. The number of electronic sources I have increases far, far, greater than printed. Yet you think that ridding myself of these would "save a tree"?

Which is for religious purposes, but you state no its a problem drug that Shamans use to expolit people with...Getting tried..Tell ya what...Nothing is gona stop my curiousity of the potential of DMT...

I would applaud any curiousity to understand anything. Yet despite your "curiousity", you seem to neither understand the research you continually reference, the practices of the cultures you (at best) render trivial, nor possess any real desire understand the things of which you speak. There are others on this forum whose views are similar to your own and whom I respect, because whatever their personal experience and knowledge of ecstatic states is, they take it seriously.

 

[Leonardo]

There are others on this forum whose views are similar to your own and whom I respect, because whatever their personal experience and knowledge of ecstatic states is, they take it seriously.

Out of all your drivel this one sentence says it all.:ignore: LOL. You try to portray yourself as one with a balanced view but infact you consistently perpetuate fear, push the undefinable cloud, and trivalize any idea that threatens your notion of mind.

I hate to burst your bubble but conciousness will simply be an emergent product of deterministic processes, defined by a goal seeking autoadaptive system, that can be generalized as pursuing virtual rewards or avoiding virtual punishments. :yes:

Argue what you want, I'm tried of your old rant and point of view. The potential for exploiting the neocortex in an application driven approach aided by psychodelics is a pretty cool idea. That you don't like it, I could care less...

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Out of all your drivel this one sentence says it all.:ignore: LOL. You try to portray yourself as one with a balanced view but infact you consistently perpetuate fear, push the undefinable cloud, and trivalize any idea that threatens your notion of mind.

Actually, not only am I quite certain that I have biases like everyone else (possibly more than more), I even said so in this thread.

I hate to burst your bubble but conciousness will simply be an emergent product of deterministic processes, defined by a goal seeking autoadaptive system, that can be generalized as pursuing virtual rewards or avoiding virtual punishments. :yes:

1) Emergent products, properties, and functions are pretty much defined in opposition to determinism. Emergence is "the appearance of higher levels of system properties and behaviour that even if obviously originated in the collective dynamics of system’s components – are neither found in nor directly deductible from the lower level properties of this system. Emergent properties are properties of the ‘whole’ not possessed by any of the individual parts making up this whole. Self-organization is one of the major conceptual keys to study emergent properties in complex systems." from the preface of the edited volume Emergent Properties in Natural and Artificial Dynamical Systems (published in Springer's series Understanding Complex Systems).

Basically, emergence is the name given to some property or process of some system which makes that system indeterministic because there is no way (even in principle) to understand the dynamics of the system solely by what laws govern its "parts".

If you define consciousness as "an emergent product" then whatever deterministic processes may be involved in its production, consciousness itself is cannot be deterministic nor can that which produces it (basically, the brain).

2) I have no idea what you mean by "virtual" in your definition (?) quoted above.

3) I'm going to assume that when you said "defined by a goal seeking autoadaptive system" you meant this to be how consciousness (not the "deterministic processes" which produce it) is or should be defined. So what is the "system"? If consciousness is defined by this system, then it isn't consciousness. For example, let's say memory is defined by the encoding, dynamical storage, and recalling of concepts, events, and motor programs (i.e., three "types" of processes, all of which are used in each of three "types" of memory). It is only natural, then, that someone who wishes to understand memory would ask how these processes and types of memories are implemented.

I've defined memory in terms of other things (otherwise, I'd simply be saying "memory is memory"), just as you did with consciousness. It is "defined" by a system. So what is that system?

The potential for exploiting the neocortex in an application driven approach aided by psychodelics is a pretty cool idea.

I believe that there is far too little research on the ways in which so-called "illicit" drugs effect the brain and "mind", especially the ways in which various positive effects can be used for everything from therapy to enhancing memories. I believe that there is far too little research on the potentially harmful (even extremely harmful) effects that can result from psychiatric medications which are practically given out like candy (and that the claims made both by psychiatrists and by the companies which manufacture psychotropic medications do not match the literature, which is already problematic enough as is). I believe that it is hypocritical to to treat one class of mind-altering drugs as "medication" and another as "recreational" even when the two overlap, and defend this through bad research or no research at all. I also support the legalization of all drugs, for reasons I've detailed elsewhere.

But all of that is possible without the following:

1) Contributing to the exploitation of one or more socio-cultural traditions by contributing to the drug tourist market (even indirectly)
2) Demeaning, debasing, and trivializing rituals and practices of some society/group/tribe/etc. by falsely (whether knowing it or not) claiming to know enough about these rituals and practices (how any set of them were or are incorporated into the actual worldviews of the group using them) such that one can claim to be a part of (or otherwise continuing) these traditions. [IMPORTANT: I distinguish the above from personal interpretations of e.g., ecstatic states, including how these may be related to certain cultural interpretations one has studied to a certain extend].

3) Adopting an implicitly elitist view by insultingly simplifying distinct peoples, all lumped into one romanticized category:"aboriginal". There is little difference between viewing "aboriginal cultures" as lesser than "civilized" (i.e., Western) cultures and doing the reverse-- denigrating Western culture (especially when the one denigrating is a product of Western culture) and taking a diverse set of "aboriginal" societies and reducing them into one inaccurate, idealized, and stereotyped group (the "noble savage" myth). I could go on here, but it isn't my beliefs, cultural traditions, etc., being profaned, so instead I'll quote from "The Yurayaco Declaration of the Union de Medicos Indigenas Yageceros de la Amazonia Colombiana (UMIYAC)":

"Non-indigenous people are finally acknowledging the importance of our wisdom and the value of our medicinal and sacred plants. Many of them profane our culture and our territories by commercializing yagé and other plants; dressing like Indians and acting like charlatans. We see with concern that a new type of tourism is being promoted which deceives the foreigners with so-called “services of Taitas or shamans” in a number of villages of the foothills. Indeed, even some of our own indigenous brothers do not respect the value or our medicine and go around misleading people, selling our symbols in towns and cities"

4) Contributing to inaccurate perceptions of the effects, potential risks (or lack thereof), and "traditional" uses of hallucinogens in general and ayahuasca specifically. Much of the research suggests that the effects of ayahuasca are highly dependent on things like expectation, subjective interpretation, and thus can be both beneficial and harmful. In "Ayahuasca and Spiritual Crisis: Liminality as Space for Personal Growth" (Anthropology of Consciousness, 19: 109–133) Lewis not only discusses the "drug tourism" and debasing of Amazonian culture, but also that "unlike shamanic initiates, Western ayahuasca users have little cultural support and guidance within which to contextualize their powerful experiences. All of my Western informants feared they had become seriously mentally ill as a result of the acute and debilitating distress they struggled to understand." Dalgarno's paper, "Buying Ayahuasca and other entheogens online: A word of caution" (Addiction Research & Theory 2008 16:1) is even more distressing, as it documents the market increase from "drug tourism" and untrained use of ayahuasca to include online sales in the UK and Europe, and thus while appropriate use has (again) widely shown to be safe under the correct circumstances, not only are there an increasing number of individuals obtaining ayahuasca from people who are either unable to provide proper instructions, or who don't care, but also an online market increasing the likelihood of adverse effects.

The dangers which come from the increase in "drug tourism" (an its other manifistations) are intricately tied to the dangers of use. Most works on one topic include the other, including those cited already. And there is research which suggests that the majority view (i.e., ayahuasca can be a spiritual and mental health aid, but only with the proper framework and understanding which is too frequently lacking among Western users) is wrong:
"Although their work and similar findings contain important contributions to the literature, I take the position that a significant number of more subtle, yet equally harmful psychological risks are involved in integrating ayahuasca-based rituals into Western contexts, even if knowledgeable, trained and respected ceremony leaders are the ones sharing the brew. Ayahuasca rituals over the centuries have adapted to their indigenous cultural context to best serve those communities. With a rapidly growing diversity of people participating in these rituals, the slow refining process used to best suit the people and communities involved is not possible. With the import of the ayahuasca trade to North America, Europe and Australia, those participating in these ceremonies, even with well intentioned and trained ayahuasca ritual leaders, are at risk of harm."
from Trichter, Stephen (2010). "Ayahuasca beyond the Amazon: The Benefits and Risks of a Growing Tradition" Journal Of Transpersonal Psychology Volume: 42 Issue: 2

 

[apophenia]

[FONT=&quot]Quote from Leonardo :
[/FONT]Argue what you want, I'm tried of your old rant and point of view. The potential for exploiting the neocortex in an application driven approach aided by psychodelics is a pretty cool idea. That you don't like it, I could care less...

After reading this I wrote the comments below yesterday, but didn't post ... My decision to not post it was consideration of Rule 6, but since the post is largely a comment about ill-advised use of psychedelics, I now post it, also in response to your following quote -
[FONT=&quot]

Quote from Leonardo :
Preparing for the psychedelic requires starting off with small doses and building up to a more intense experience. But once you find yourself in your own realm using psychedelics commanding the path or theme of the experience may very well be possible.

Actually I don't see that as a desirable or workable approach to psychedelia.

To me, the primary value of psychedelia is the temporary suspension of habitual behaviour, and established desire-satisfaction rituals. It is at its best a moment of release from conditioned responses - although not always, and not entirely. Psychedelia can provide the opportunity to have a change of mind, and also insight into the nature of one's habitual compulsions.

This aspect - insight into the nature of one's habitual compulsions - can be delightful or hellish, and sometimes both simultaneously. That is also largely a question of which psychedelic, the dose, and the set and setting.If one expects that the experience will routinely produce delightful 'spiritual illumination', one is likely to get a serious shock at some point, primarily because that approach usually involves the prior assumption of what 'true insight' will be, and the attempt to confirm one's ego and beliefs by having the expected experience. If you think you already know what 'enlightenment' is, then why would you be trying to experience it ? You will be exposed as a pretender ... that may be a good or a bad thing ....

This can also occur in the more contemporary secular way - "I will discover myself, and how cool I am, and I will peace out and love you man, and maybe even become a master of the universe". I've seen that come undone ...

If the idea is to enter programmed altered states with the aim of facilitating established purposes, then float tanks and auto-suggestion is a far more workable and successful approach. I had access to floatation/isolation tanks for a year or so, and even did some 'all-nighters', so I am talking from experience here. If one formulates a purpose, particularly if a problem can be reduced to a very short phrase, like a mantra, which is held in the mind as one enters the peculiar hypnagogic states typical in a tank, then it is routine to have dreamlike states which are focused on the programmed intent. I found that very useful.

Dr John Lilly recounts the use of a combination of LSD, hypnotic suggestion and float tanks in his book 'The Human Biocomputer : Programming and Metaprogramming', which documents research in this field when such research was legal. I recommend you read it.

Trying to control psychedelia is like trying to herd flies into a bottle, but less enjoyable. In fact, trying to control psychedelia is akin to trying to force a state of ego-loss by an act of will - the zen masters have plenty to say about that, and I watched a generation of hippies play that game, mostly fruitlessly. The attempt is largely pointless, because generally speaking psychedelia dissolves willfulness. The only exception to that which comes to mind is the use of psychedelia in the context of making art. In that context, it is quite workable to have an intention, such as making a piece of music, or painting - but the experience must be left open as to the final outcome. In other words, you can set up a context in which to allow the dissolution of habit while still maintaining a general activity, and this can result in very satisfying creative activity with often very good results - and not just subjectively at the time, the music composed or painting completed is often high quality work, and regarded as such when the effects of the drug wear off.

However, IMO, the true value of psychedelia is very personal and intimate. It is about the dissolving of the pride and intractable dominance of habitual ego, and unless approached in a humble way, it merely inflames the forces of ego.

Although I am only making assumptions here, it is my guess that shamans from other cultures who use psychedelics are well aware of this, and understand that the virtue of the state is to 'get out of your own way' and allow spontaneous expression of the heart, rather than continuing the human folly of trying to rule the universe with unyielding egotism. If I am wrong about that, then fine, perhaps I am only expressing what I found myself.

[/FONT]

 

[Leonardo]

[FONT=&quot]However, IMO, the true value of psychedelia is very personal and intimate. It is about the dissolving of the pride and intractable dominance of habitual ego, and unless approached in a humble way, it merely inflames the forces of ego.[/FONT]

Your description adds to my argument that the psychedelic experience is being controlled at a subconscious level. But just as one can learn to control EEG wave forms why not the psychedelic trip? As you state the ego, which my impression of the ego is the default acceptance of reality, can interfere with the brains intellect! E.g. I was working on a project, I won't disclose any details, and it involved statistics when at the time I had taken a cursory course in college. I kept getting this image of the actor in a movie that played General Leslie Groves who was in charge of the Manhattan project, and he kept saying and there's lacking use of many statistical tools such as chi-square. I ignored it because I didn't think it had any real relevance and I always hate second guessing myself. Well the chi-square notion bugged me and bugged me and I continued to ignore it.

Well I took a more rigorous course in statistics recently and guess what that general was so right! But the interesting thing was that consciously I wasn't really fully actualized to the potential of chi-square but subconsciously I was! These kinds of conflicts are peculiar in that they conflict with ones desire to succeed.

From your approach to the benefits of psychedelics one could see how many established status quos of science could re-think ideas that they believe are corner stones to human understanding.

 

[Leonardo]

Actually, not only am I quite certain that I have biases like everyone else (possibly more than more), I even said so in this thread.

1) Emergent products, properties, and functions are pretty much defined in opposition to determinism. Emergence is "the appearance of higher levels of system properties and behaviour that even if obviously originated in the collective dynamics of system’s components – are neither found in nor directly deductible from the lower level properties of this system. Emergent properties are properties of the ‘whole’ not possessed by any of the individual parts making up this whole. Self-organization is one of the major conceptual keys to study emergent properties in complex systems." from the preface of the edited volume Emergent Properties in Natural and Artificial Dynamical Systems (published in Springer's series Understanding Complex Systems).

Basically, emergence is the name given to some property or process of some system which makes that system indeterministic because there is no way (even in principle) to understand the dynamics of the system solely by what laws govern its "parts".

If you define consciousness as "an emergent product" then whatever deterministic processes may be involved in its production, consciousness itself is cannot be deterministic nor can that which produces it (basically, the brain).

2) I have no idea what you mean by "virtual" in your definition (?) quoted above.

3) I'm going to assume that when you said "defined by a goal seeking autoadaptive system" you meant this to be how consciousness (not the "deterministic processes" which produce it) is or should be defined. So what is the "system"? If consciousness is defined by this system, then it isn't consciousness. For example, let's say memory is defined by the encoding, dynamical storage, and recalling of concepts, events, and motor programs (i.e., three "types" of processes, all of which are used in each of three "types" of memory). It is only natural, then, that someone who wishes to understand memory would ask how these processes and types of memories are implemented.

I've defined memory in terms of other things (otherwise, I'd simply be saying "memory is memory"), just as you did with consciousness. It is "defined" by a system. So what is that system?

Before responding to your comments or answer your questions, please give me a succinct generalized definition of what is a "self".

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Before responding to your comments or answer your questions, please give me a succinct generalized definition of what is a "self".

I fail to see how this is relevant, but nevertheless:
DEFINITION: The "self" is the emergent property of a system capable not just of conceptual processing but in particular the dynamically constant experience of agency ("mental" causation) conceptualized as a unity distinct from other concepts (including other systems, entities, and/or agents).

 

[Leonardo]

I tried an increase dose of 2000 mg of Tryptophan, 500 mg of Kava Kava extract and 1000 mg of passion flower, so its twice the dose from the first time. The effect does create stronger images when eyes are closed and allows for more vivid lucid dreaming. Its an interesting trick, I'm not sure if its a means to synthesize DMT through the digestive system (that's what the other ingredients are for to protect any DMT synthesis from being broken down) but the effects are worth the small cost of the ingredients and they are legal.

A caveat with the doses I mentioned is the danger of Serotonin-syndrome, however I've experienced Serotonin-syndrome symptoms after having a heavy Turkey dinner and topping off with lots of coffee and pumpkin pie! My symptoms were hypertension headache and a mild fever. How do I know it was Serotonin-syndrome not just a mild flu or cold? I was able to repeat the effects days later eating left overs from Thanksgiving...

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

A caveat with the doses I mentioned is the danger of Serotonin-syndrome, however I've experienced Serotonin-syndrome symptoms after having a heavy Turkey dinner and topping off with lots of coffee and pumpkin pie!

Then you've invented a new syndrome, distinct from serotonin syndrome:

The Serotonin Syndrome

Serotonin syndrome: a brief review

EDIT: The above papers only address the actual syndrome, so I thought I should include some that address the "turkey tryptophan" myth:
"Wurtman, a researcher affiliated with MIT's Clinical Research Center, is co-author of a new book on the interaction between nutrition and brain chemistry. And she warns those about to settle in at the groaning board: The turkey is not responsible for drowsiness after the meal.
While it is true that tryptophan--an amino acid present in all protein--does make serotonin, which makes us relaxed, tryptophan from turkey alone is not what makes us tired, said Wurtman, whose PhD is in nutritional biochemistry" MIT News

"The myth of tryptophan in turkey causing inordinate sleepiness has been debunked (tryptophan only works on the brain when ingested on an empty stomach)." Standford News Releases

"However, while conventional wisdom says turkey contains a lot of tryptophan, it actually doesn’t. For example, the protein in a 3-ounce sample of turkey contains about 160 milligrams of tryptophan, while a 3-ounce sample of canned tuna contains 240 milligrams of tryptophan. So why doesn’t tuna make us sleepy?

When you consume protein, your body breaks it down into its constituent amino acids. These amino acids dissipate into the bloodstream, but when they reach the blood-brain barrier they hit a bottleneck – the amino acids have to compete with each other to get through the barrier. Under normal conditions, this competition makes it unlikely that enough extra tryptophan will enter the brain to significantly boost serotonin levels. Is there an exception? Of course!

If you consume a lot of carbohydrates (like mashed potatoes), your body boosts its insulin production. Among other things, insulin selectively removes certain amino acids from the bloodstream – but it doesn’t remove tryptophan. That means tryptophan has less competition from other amino acids, and more tryptophan can get through the blood-brain barrier, making you sleepy.

So is THAT what makes you sleepy after Thanksgiving dinner? The combo of carbs and turkey? Probably not. So what does?

In all likelihood: gluttony. Many people gorge themselves at the Thanksgiving table. During the resultant digestive process, the body diverts as much as 50 percent of its blood to the small intestine, to maximize absorption of calories and nutrients. That means there is less blood available for physical activity. Furthermore, most traditional Thanksgiving meals are high in fat and protein content, which actually slows down the digestive process. So your body is going to be diverting blood to the small intestine for a longer period of time." Thanksgiving Science: Tryptophacts and Tryptophantasies

 

[Leonardo]

Then you've invented a new syndrome, distinct from serotonin syndrome:

No I haven't:

http://www.encognitive.com/files/Tryptophan Precautions_0.pdf

 

[Leonardo]

I fail to see how this is relevant, but nevertheless:
DEFINITION: The "self" is the emergent property of a system capable not just of conceptual processing but in particular the dynamically constant experience of agency ("mental" causation) conceptualized as a unity distinct from other concepts (including other systems, entities, and/or agents).

I can understand that perhaps you didn't quite get where I'm going...wouldn't you say that your definition is a bit anthropomorphic? Could there be a much more general definition of self? I mean would you argue that a dog is lacking the emergent property of self?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

No I haven't:

http://www.encognitive.com/files/Tryptophan Precautions_0.pdf

You'll notice (if you look) that I included some links in my post, two of which were on serotonin syndrome. You'll also notice that if you read through your link, it describes the possible dangers of mixing tryptophan supplements with certain medications. Not eating turkey. Finally, you'll notice I included quotes and links from readily available sources on the myth that it is tryptophan in turkey which makes people tired after a large meal which included turkey. In particular, you'll notice that turkey only has two thirds the amount of tryptophan contained in canned tuna. You stated:

I tried an increase dose of 2000 mg of Tryptophan

You'd have to eat about two pounds of turkey to get that amount. But it still wouldn't result in serotonin syndrome (even if you just ate only turkey) because of the way your body breaks down the meat.

So your link, which discusses the the possible dangers of combining SSRI's and other antidepressants with tryptophan supplements (and even mentions how this did not occur in a clinical study on such combinations in which the dosage of tryptophan alone was as high as 18,000 mg), would seem to indicate that even if you could extract pure tryptophan from turkey, you'd have use several turkeys just to reach that 18,000. In other words, this:

I've experienced Serotonin-syndrome symptoms after having a heavy Turkey dinner and topping off with lots of coffee and pumpkin pie!

is impossible. And if it were possible, and it was the tryptophan in the turkey which caused your serotonin syndrome, the amount of tryptophan you mentioned that you took (2,000 mg) would be do far, far worse. Thankfully, however, if you look at my post, or even just the quotes, you will find that the reason one can have all sorts of "side-effects" from a large Turkey dinner with pie and coffee and so forth has nothing to do with tryptophan at all.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I can understand that perhaps you didn't quite get where I'm going...wouldn't you say that your definition is a bit anthropomorphic? Could there be a much more general definition of self? I mean would you argue that a dog is lacking the emergent property of self?

Considering that I described emergent properties of a system (which could be anything from a dog to an ant colony to a computer), no, I don't think it was anthropocentric or anthropomorphic (and I'm not sure which term you intended). Anthropocentric would be describing the properties of neurons. Anthropomorphic would be describing human qualities that humans attribute to animals, weather events, concepts with no physical connection to reality (fate, death, love, etc.), and so on.

 

[Leonardo]

Anthropocentric would be describing the properties of neurons. Anthropomorphic would be describing human qualities that humans attribute to animals, weather events, concepts with no physical connection to reality (fate, death, love, etc.), and so on.

Anthropocentric would not be describing neurons, its more of interpreting or regarding the world in terms of human values and experiences, but Oh I digress you were just making an example ...


Your description of self:

The "self" is the emergent property of a system capable not just of conceptual processing but in particular the dynamically constant experience of agency ("mental" causation) conceptualized as a unity distinct from other concepts (including other systems, entities, and/or agents).

Is a Anthropocentric view of a human being's self awareness. So the question I ask now: Is there a need for self awarness for there to be a self? :sarcastic