100% Metal Forum (Death Metal and Black Metal)

Metal => Interzone => Topic started by: Dinaric Leather on November 06, 2012, 01:20:02 PM

Title: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 06, 2012, 01:20:02 PM
Strangely, I notice a lot of pro-drug (especially psychadelics) rhetoric on this and other new right sites, even Amerika had that LSD article which claims that you can learn magical things on your first trip. I believe this is simply a manifestation of people trying to escape reality because it's depressing for spirited people to live in a profoundly ugly society.

The usual argument for drugs is you may have an interesting experience and have an epiphany. Yes, you may happen to have an epiphany while you are tripping out, but you may also have an epiphany while... I don't know lets see, any fucking time at all while doing anything, and there are interesting things to do that actually benefit yourself and the world.

If you are one of those psychonaut hippy dipshits you should just be honest with yourself that your mission is to escape from reality because the universe as you perceive it is just too much for you to handle. So with that in mind you should drink or do opiates because psychadelics won't rebuild your crushed spirit. At least alcohol and opiates will make you forget that you hate this world for a little bit.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 06, 2012, 01:44:05 PM
People are just as capable of escaping into fantasy worlds without drugs as they are with them (to turn your bit about epiphanies against you).  It is down to the character of the person, whether they will use these things to enhance their relationship with the world around them, or use them to create a cocoon within which to hide away from perceived "evils".  I don't think you'd call the ancient Greeks, Egyptians, Babylonians, Indians, Aztecs, or Maya (to name a few...) "escapists" in their attempts to connect to a greater, deeper, more intense reality than the one available to our crude physical senses.

As things stand, I could well be one of those "psychonaut hippy dipshits" to you, and I fucking love this world, for all of the beauty and horror contained within it.  Not one thing is unappreciable; psychedelics have proven to me what conjecture already suggested.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: WAAAAAAGH! on November 06, 2012, 02:17:05 PM
There is a story I was told about a female model. She took ayuasca. The details of the trip are insignificant. She concluded that what she was currently doing was nothing, amounted to nothing and meant nothing. She was off to a great start. That is, until she reveals that her grand conclusion is that she must go to live with the South American Tribe, in the jungle, that uses this stuff. Brilliant. Abandon one vapid existence for another.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 06, 2012, 03:03:22 PM
That's too judgemental.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: aquarius on November 06, 2012, 06:26:51 PM
There is a story I was told about a female model. She took ayuasca. The details of the trip are insignificant. She concluded that what she was currently doing was nothing, amounted to nothing and meant nothing. She was off to a great start. That is, until she reveals that her grand conclusion is that she must go to live with the South American Tribe, in the jungle, that uses this stuff. Brilliant. Abandon one vapid existence for another.

Sounds like a poorly developed person to begin with.  But isn't this most, not all, drug-users, if not most people?
 
I see LSD use as vision of Brahmin without knowledge. Can I suddenly speak Greek without having learned it? Well maybe a few words  ;)
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: username on November 06, 2012, 07:22:45 PM
I did psilocybin and cannabis at a young age at parties, but stopped. But now I was thinking of doing it again in the forest or at home. Would there be a great difference? People called many things escapism, but something is not escapism because it is interessting and inspires us. They said Tolkien is escapism because it takes us into a diffenrent world. Maybe the dangers of drugs rather are they fuck with your mind and can trigger some bad reactions rather because some find them interessting?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 06, 2012, 08:29:30 PM
Drugs may hint at something attainable, but can never provide that attainment.
Purity is the only thing that can, along with self-discipline and sharp focus.
Not things that are compatible with drug-use, eh?

Oxygen+fasting+water+physical and mental silence=enlightenment.

Maybe.

Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: scourge on November 06, 2012, 08:57:39 PM
Or, you soon pee out all the minerals your body requires for your nervous system to keep functioning. Say hello to irregular heartbeat, sleep apnea and psychosis - the real feverish source of inspiration for all the desert prophets. But long before any of that, you'd get the excruciating effects of hyperoxia. Sure, it's enlightening in that you would see what it is like to transcend life and enter the realm of the tortured deceased from self-neglect.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 06, 2012, 10:01:46 PM
It's absolutely nothing like you describe.
Body means nothing in such a state.
Meanwhile, it slows and hibernates, pending reactivation.
Like a car without a battery, it suffers no damage, it just lies dormant.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 07, 2012, 12:49:14 AM
ITT: people who haven't taken enough hallucinogens trying to make up reasons for not having taken enough hallucinogens.  Nature provides tools with which we might push our physical and (especially) mental boundaries - I would say it is cowardly to attempt to bypass this stuff simply because losers don't know what they're doing.  I have seen and experienced the most wondrous, the most terrifying, the simplest and most difficult states of my entire life under the influence of plants.  Some of these things are monstrously difficult to "control", and require the discipline and rigidity of mind which Crow speaks of before progress can be made in a healthy fashion.

Crow, would you discredit those traditional cultures who make use of such substances in order to be better able to come into contact with the Forms etc. (or even God or the Logos)?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: WAAAAAAGH! on November 07, 2012, 06:37:51 AM
There is a story I was told about a female model. She took ayuasca. The details of the trip are insignificant. She concluded that what she was currently doing was nothing, amounted to nothing and meant nothing. She was off to a great start. That is, until she reveals that her grand conclusion is that she must go to live with the South American Tribe, in the jungle, that uses this stuff. Brilliant. Abandon one vapid existence for another.

Sounds like a poorly developed person to begin with.  But isn't this most, not all, drug-users, if not most people?


I agree. I felt like sharing this story. It is a very common one in my experience.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 07, 2012, 07:54:16 AM
I disagree. I think living on the forest with tribes can bestow great experience, knowledge and much more.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 07, 2012, 08:54:47 AM
Crow, would you discredit those traditional cultures who make use of such substances in order to be better able to come into contact with the Forms etc. (or even God or the Logos)?

The only people I might feel like discrediting would be those who swallow powerful hallucinogens and refer to the effects as "gettin' a buzz, man"...
I would be a hypocrite to discredit hallucinogen use, out of hand, since such activities started me on the road to where I am and what I have become.
My stance now, is that drug use for entertainment is an abuse of oneself, and of the substances one abuses.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: WAAAAAAGH! on November 07, 2012, 10:35:21 AM
I disagree. I think living on the forest with tribes can bestow great experience, knowledge and much more.

And abandon the pursuit of high civilization? Sounds like the mentality of a drop out, not a conqueror.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 07, 2012, 10:59:42 AM
Given the current state of what was once 'civilization', dropping out seems like a somewhat reasonable alternative.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 07, 2012, 12:36:41 PM
One must be mindful of the wisdom that can be gained from observing or living with a tribe. High civilization is only as good as we are - as crow points out, it's shit because humanity believes and does shitty things.

Or, you soon pee out all the minerals your body requires for your nervous system to keep functioning. Say hello to irregular heartbeat, sleep apnea and psychosis - the real feverish source of inspiration for all the desert prophets. But long before any of that, you'd get the excruciating effects of hyperoxia. Sure, it's enlightening in that you would see what it is like to transcend life and enter the realm of the tortured deceased from self-neglect.

What psychedelics specifically are you referring to? What you've described sounds more like cocaine usage.

You could similarly drain your body of its essential minerals by drinking a lot of water. Does this mean water is to be avoided? People need to paint with smaller brushes here sometimes.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 07, 2012, 12:46:04 PM
ITT: people who haven't taken enough hallucinogens trying to make up reasons for not having taken enough hallucinogens.
That doesn't apply to me at all. I've done plenty of psychadelics. I'm more like a person who's spent too much time researching, using, and trying to acquire something which will do me zero good in the long run, and doesn't want to see other smart people fall into the same trap.

The way I see it is the pro-drug crowd are bored and slightly depressed people looking for excuses to change their brain chemistry. The most popular excuse being that you might have an epiphany in the form of something like "wow dude its like so crazy that this drug makes everything seem so profound".

What psychedelics specifically are you referring to? What you've described sounds more like cocaine usage.
I think scourge was refering to the comment crow made about fasting to attain enlightenment.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: WAAAAAAGH! on November 07, 2012, 01:34:39 PM
Given the current state of what was once 'civilization', dropping out seems like a somewhat reasonable alternative.

Living among them for perspective and insight to bring back is one thing. Believing the primitive mud dwelling existence is the true path of humanity is another. What of the God-Kings who appeared during times of ignorance to sacrifice themselves for knowledge? Prometheus, Odhin, Horus? Perhaps these aren't singular men, but bands of them. The Noahs who carried on Gods commandments after the storm.

I'm being dramatic, I know, but I'm not one for throwing in the towel when there is so much work that can be done.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 07, 2012, 05:04:06 PM
That doesn't apply to me at all. I've done plenty of psychadelics. I'm more like a person who's spent too much time researching, using, and trying to acquire something which will do me zero good in the long run, and doesn't want to see other smart people fall into the same trap.

The way I see it is the pro-drug crowd are bored and slightly depressed people looking for excuses to change their brain chemistry. The most popular excuse being that you might have an epiphany in the form of something like "wow dude its like so crazy that this drug makes everything seem so profound".

How many different kinds of hallucinogen have you tried, in what sets/settings, for what purposes, to what effects?  Have you been initiated by anyone trained in the use of such things?

I'd agree with you about the "pro-drug" crowd, in that most of them don't know (or care) what they're doing; they do it because they enjoy doing it, not because they learn from it.  However, there are those who use these things appropriately, that is, by learning with/from them.  Why does the West produce so few people who recognise their own consciousness as territory to be mapped?  We seem to be under the mass-delusion that cold calculation is all our experience is good for.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 07, 2012, 05:51:27 PM
What psychedelics specifically are you referring to? What you've described sounds more like cocaine usage.
I think scourge was refering to the comment crow made about fasting to attain enlightenment.

Ah ha, I think he was. My mistake.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 07, 2012, 08:41:55 PM
I took LSD a few times and had rather profound experiences contemplating 'otherness' and the warrrior spirit. Craving to push my mental boundaries to the limit, I decided one day to combine LSD with copious amounts of amphetamines. It was the most terrifying, horrific, macabre experience of my life. My mind wasn't straight for a long time. I haven't touched drugs outside of alcohol since.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 07, 2012, 10:06:43 PM
That reminded me of an experience in my 20s, when I overdosed on Amanita Muscara mushrooms.
Utterly bizarre, out of body, out of identity, horrible gone-ness for three entire days.
Puking, shaking, freezing and boiling, almost gone-for-good.
There was nothing entertaining about that. Leave Fly Agaric seriously alone!

Psilocybin, on the other hand...

Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 08, 2012, 04:30:43 AM
Why leave fly agaric alone?  Consumed appropriately (i.e. with correct dosages, in the correct settings), it's incredibly useful for inducing visions.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 08, 2012, 04:32:30 AM
Crow, that's interesting. I'm gonna share a translation of spanish texts(I wish I could stop saying text: but sometimes the text is not an article.) praising amanita.

--


The use of vegetable substance to the consummation of the Great Gnostic and Alchemic Work: the Liberation and Return of the Spirit.

It complements sexual alchemy.

The mushroom amanita muscaria, utilized for this end since thousands of years, is the most important of those substances.

In it are the two ways: dry (ingestion of the crude mushroom) and humid (ingestion of the mushroom boiled in water).

In it are the three colors of the work: black (the base of the mushroom), white (the body of the mushroom) and red (the head).

It is the apple that Eve gave Adam to eat, to wake him up and regain his wisdom.

It is the soma that the aryans of the north took to India.

It is the origin of the power of Odin - Wotan.

It is the origin of the power of the god Hanuman, under whose effect made his feats.

Under its effects the rabbis of Alexandria invented christianity.

Is what made Saint Paul fall from the horse and provided his conversion to the new religion.

Under its effects heaven and hell are known and closeness to God is produced.

Dante Alighieri had those experiences and put them in writing in The Divine Comedy.

Amanita is the Saviour of the World, that dies for us when we ingest it.

Under its effects Rasputín talked with the Virgin and helped the Zar.

Only in sexual abstinence must amanita be consumed.

Similarities with the Catholic Church

(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/juanxxiii.jpg)

(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/benedictoxvi.jpg)

(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/juanpabloii.jpg)
(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/pioxii.jpg)



(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/amanita.jpg)

(http://www.gnosisprimordial.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/papanoel.jpg)

Santa claus, a perfect amanita

--

The hallucinogenic mushroom amanita muscaria lives in symbiosis with the pines. The amanita muscaria can't develop without the closeness of those coniferous. Since thousands of years lots of humans ingest those mushrooms to provoke in themselves visions and transcendent states of consciousness. To the people that have this habit, those mushrooms, the pines, and all that is related to them have a sacred connotation. That's why since centuries, in the winter solstice (25 December) its common to put a pine in the home, with amanita mushrooms added to its branches. Today, instead of amanitas are put several ornaments that represent them.

Santa Claus comes to this celebration and delivers presents. Those presents represent the visions and dis-coverings that are reached by the ingestion of the amanitas. Of what color are the amanitas muscaria? Red and white. Of what color are the clothes of Santa Claus? White and red, of course. The amanitas are fat and robust, just like Santa Claus.

--



Says the Bible that Paul, great persecutor of christians, on the way to the city of Damascus hd the following experiences: surrounded him a light, fell to earth and heard a voice that asked questions and gave him orders. Paul rose up from the ground and even though he had his eyes open he could see nothing. They took him by hand and made him enter the city. Spent three days without seeing, eating or drinking. On the third day gained his sight back, ate food and regained his strength.

Let's see what the investigator of the university of Harvard, Jonathan Ott, in his monumental work Pharmacotheon, as did renowned investigators (Gordon Wasson, Richard Schultes and Clark Heinrich) about the symptoms produced by the ingestion of amanita muscaria:

Mystical delusions, perceptions of shining white lights, great muscular weakness with danger of falling, auditory hallucinations (strange voices heard), difficulty in sight during two or tree days, lack of hunger or thirst.

Such similarities with Saint Paul's symptoms! Such coincidence!

--

Cargést seem to be a mind-superman immune to bad effects from all drugs. But continue this way and do not count on this super mind for so long.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 08, 2012, 07:33:38 AM
Cargést seem to be a mind-superman immune to bad effects from all drugs. But continue this way and do not count on this super mind for so long.

Hardly.  I give myself a lot of difficulty and pain in reaching such states as I do through these methods - however, these experiences are necessary, as they strip the ego of power over the self.  The "hell" response to a psychedelic is cleansing, cathartic.  The "heaven" response is bliss, peace in awareness.

That text may not be entirely accurate as to the constituents of soma - I should think it was much more likely to be a mixture of ephedrine and cannabis (bhang), though the references to soma being urinated by Indra might suggest amanita muscaria.  It could also have been ephedrine and opium, in places where cannabis was less prevalent.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 08, 2012, 07:37:10 AM
That's ok then. I was just going with the flow and giving warning messages as drugs can be dangerous.

Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 08, 2012, 09:17:39 AM
Well yes.
As I said, amanitas were nearly the end of me.
Did you know the key to other realms is the ability to say the alphabet backwards, as a single word?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 08, 2012, 05:18:04 PM
Which alphabet?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: username on November 09, 2012, 07:11:48 AM
The enochian, ofcourse.

Besides, does there actually exist some well documented record of hallucigen use in shamanistic or esoteric rites?

Can you mention something more concrete than soma or the apparently dubious mescalin accounts about the indians?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 09, 2012, 07:46:18 AM
The enochian, ofcourse.

Besides, does there actually exist some well documented record of hallucigen use in shamanistic or esoteric rites?


Of course! Everywhere, greece, china (a tomb was found with marijuana), the mayas, tribes in america, and many many more.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: username on November 09, 2012, 07:50:21 AM
Yingpang man had 800 grams of Cannabis indica, rigth? But that does not answer the specific question.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: indjaseemun on November 09, 2012, 07:57:37 AM
I think it was tons of the stuff.

Anyway, It's a well known fact that esoteric rites and entheogens always went together. I read the mayas used it, but I can't give you any exact names beyond that. But rest assured, it's true. I'm surprised you didn't know it already.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: thrust on November 09, 2012, 09:16:55 AM
Although I only found it the other day at the secondhand "The Wondrous Mushroom - Mycolatry in Mesoamerica" by R. Gordon Wasson seems to be one of the most indepth looks into this. After studying mushroom takers in Russia preWWI he became convinced the mushroom began every religion on earth. So began his research with Mazatec Indian shamans.


Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 09, 2012, 02:50:06 PM
The enochian, ofcourse.

Besides, does there actually exist some well documented record of hallucigen use in shamanistic or esoteric rites?

Can you mention something more concrete than soma or the apparently dubious mescalin accounts about the indians?

Amazonian use of ayahuasca (DMT) is well documented, as is use of psilocybin and mescaline (the reports of native American use of mescaline are well founded - peyote is still used in traditional settings today).  Fire temples in formerly Vedic lands have been found to contain cannabis and ephedra resins at the bases of sacrificial bowls (the basis for the ephedrine/THC model of soma/houma).  Viking priestesses were buried with cannabis.  The Muslims gave us hashish.  The ancient Egyptians used blue lilly/lotus flowers, the Greeks had their Kykeon for thousands of years (as well as psilocybin mushrooms).  This is not an exhaustive list; suffice it to say, the weirder of any two cultures is the one which doesn't promote the use of hallucinogens to achieve deeper states of consciousness.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: aquarius on November 09, 2012, 05:12:41 PM
So far this thread has established that hallucinogen use is not isolated to the modern world and that not everyone who uses them is an outright retard. Needless to say the Aldous Huxley types are in the minority here.

In an attempt to recap the original topic:
 
Consider what exactly is being achieved in a deeper state of consciousness?
Is this not possible without hallucinogens?
Are successive drug trips necessary to achieve it?
Are only drug-users pro-drugs?
Are the benefits of abstinence so negligible?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: lost_wanderer on November 09, 2012, 05:35:13 PM
It is possible to achieve a deeper state of consciousness but it is usually harder because our mind are conditioned to stay in the ''normal'' plane in order to survive in everyday life. The mind can be stuck in that plane and sometimes a boast is needed in order to break the bounderies. The drugs can remove the fear of the unknown or freeze our will so we can't stop the mind from wandering off.

But in itself, it is not necessary and in the longrun, it can be bad for the soul. It's like going in a car instead of walking. If you do it all the time, you will soon be out of shape. Odin is a walking wanderer. Not a driving one :)
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 11, 2012, 03:13:53 PM
Drugs lead nowhere, but they may serve to indicate there is somewhere to go.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 11, 2012, 03:54:22 PM
Drugs lead nowhere, but they may serve to indicate there is somewhere to go.

This is well spoken; I would merely add that to some they may be an aid on the journey - but to most they are a hindrance.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 11, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
Yes :)
Some yearn for some sign that there might be something greater than themselves.
While others fear that possibility, more than anything else.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 13, 2012, 10:21:45 AM
How many different kinds of hallucinogen have you tried, in what sets/settings, for what purposes, to what effects?  Have you been initiated by anyone trained in the use of such things?
I did psychadelics because they were fun, a good way to meet people, and I believed it would give me insights that I couldn't get otherwise. I did LSD and Mushies a lot up until a little over a year ago, when I was on LSD I'd usually skateboard with my friends and go on pussy patrol at the mall or college campus (LSD acted as sort of a stimulant for me, a lot of my friends said they couldn't get a boner on acid, I couldn't get flaccid). On Mushrooms it was a bit more of a shamanaic type thing, we'd usually try to go out and do it in the wilderness, specifically Red Rock Mountain and Mt. Charleston outside of Las Vegas, look it up, it's beautiful. I had some interesting experiences, it was the catalyst for some good insights. Tried Salvia once via BONG HIT, didn't like it, although it was interesting.

BUT I would have rather done something else with my time. I can't say I'm anti-drugs, but I know that if I wasn't so depressed I would have never done any drugs. I guess all I'm really trying to say here is that the pro-drug statements from some of us Hessians is merely a symptom of our spiritual decay.

Look back on your life, would you have done drugs if you were born into a thriving culture, or at least had some stronger values instilled in you as a child and adolescent? I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say despite our differing cultural and racial backgrounds, our life probably has some parallels. Namely that you probably had (a) parent(s) that thought he/she/they were doing you a favor by letting you figure out things by yourself other than "don't play in traffic" and "don't rape or murder", in effect throwing you out into a broken society to figure everything out on your own. If you had a dad maybe he would drop a nugget of wisdom here or there but probably remained aloof. Am I far off?

If you're curious, aside from psychadelics I've done pretty much every common recreational drug aside from Ecstasy and Cocaine. I used to be a borderline opiate addict, and I did speed a couple times and come to think of it I gained a lot more insights while on those drugs than I did the psychadelics, which just goes to show you because something may lead to an interesting experience/insight doesn't make it a good idea.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Time Curator 23 on November 13, 2012, 12:18:25 PM
Like most things, drug use correlates with intelligence (which is not merely IQ but also character).

After you have gone through your exploratory/experimental phase (33 years old), grade yourself:

A: Does no drugs.
B: Smokes a joint about four times a year for added alternative insight.
C: Smokes a joint about once a week and is not entirely sure why anymore.
D: Does most anything at the party, man!!1
F: Sucks penis to get more.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 13, 2012, 04:39:05 PM
Look back on your life, would you have done drugs if you were born into a thriving culture, or at least had some stronger values instilled in you as a child and adolescent?

Definitely.  I might have been lucky enough to have been born into one of those cultures that actually knows how to use these things.

Quote
Am I far off?

Yeah, pretty far off with that.  My Dad's consistently awesome, and both of my parents have sought to educate me in ways in which I might best ascertain the nature of the environments I find myself in (rather than just chucking me in the deep end, they teach me how to swim, first - like parents should).

Your description of what you did with the drugs is interesting.  Personally, I generally do nothing but experience the effects of the substance (except for weed, which I do like to use while doing other things).  Dark room, minimal music, lying down, eyes closed and breathing deeply.  The best visions always come in that kind of relaxed state.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 13, 2012, 05:29:51 PM
Personally, I generally do nothing but experience the effects of the substance (except for weed, which I do like to use while doing other things).  Dark room, minimal music, lying down, eyes closed and breathing deeply.  The best visions always come in that kind of relaxed state.
That was how I was with mushrooms. On LSD I can't sit still. If there is anything somewhat tangible that psychadelics ever helped me with was skateboarding. On LSD it seemed like practicing was twice as effective as it was normally. The key word there being "seemed", however.

Quote
Yeah, pretty far off with that.

The reason I made that guess I notice a lack of authority figures in childhood and adolescence is very strongly correlated with drug use. Come to think of it though, usually more with the purely pleasurable drugs (alcohol, opiates, stimulants) than psychadelics.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 13, 2012, 09:09:48 PM
As with most aspects of an individual, one's attitude towards drugs largely depends on the family. While Cargest and I may have been anomalies, having great parents, I'd wager over half of all drug users come from single parent or otherwise dysfunctional families.

My main motivations for drug use were peer-pressure and iconoclasm. My friends who I'd grown up with all started using drugs, so my options were: A. make new friends or B. join them. In my youthful naivety, I hopped on the bandwagon. Also, at the tender age of 15, I was searching for a identity separate from the straight-laced, clean cut, goody two-shoes persona my parents wanted me to assume. Typing this out made me realize my parents did play a role, but it's not that they didn't give me enough love and attention, but that they wanted me to be something I wasn't. That is the downside of 'traditional' parenting -- certain personality types are very resistant to the idea of being 'molded'.

I will never regret using drugs. I'm just glad I went through that phase while I was young; whenever I meet a 21 year-old who is just getting into drugs, all I can do is roll my eyes.

To the folks who still use drugs: When will enough be enough? Surely you don't plan on using drugs for the rest of your life?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Phoenix on November 14, 2012, 04:44:34 PM
Query: If a drug's positive effects of increasing one's awareness and insight are great, and its negative effects of causing slight blind spots or tiredness or extremely minor hangover effects are very few, what the fuck is wrong with being more intelligent? If you don't think drugs can do this, then that's a separate discussion. But I don't fucking 'trip' on drugs. I don't get disorientated. I don't get 'fucked up'. I don't have trouble speaking, I don't get nervous, I don't get thoughts running through my mind, I don't lose touch with reality, I don't experience illusions of grandeur, etc. I can simply think more effectively. Period. Depending on the drug, of course. But most people aren't ready for this advanced thinking, it would contradict all the scapegoat beliefs they cling to so dearly about their self-identity and the nature of reality. Most people get 'fucked up' on drugs.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: aquarius on November 14, 2012, 06:31:13 PM
I doubt if drug-use can have any value beyond what the individual gets out of it, and if it makes him any smarter without being confused for a schizophrenic then that’s truly great. Any noble or pious society wouldn’t need this. If the individual could contribute to such a society then that's great.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 14, 2012, 06:42:10 PM
Query: If a drug's positive effects of increasing one's awareness and insight are great, and its negative effects of causing slight blind spots or tiredness or extremely minor hangover effects are very few, what the fuck is wrong with being more intelligent? If you don't think drugs can do this, then that's a separate discussion. But I don't fucking 'trip' on drugs. I don't get disorientated. I don't get 'fucked up'. I don't have trouble speaking, I don't get nervous, I don't get thoughts running through my mind, I don't lose touch with reality, I don't experience illusions of grandeur, etc. I can simply think more effectively. Period. Depending on the drug, of course. But most people aren't ready for this advanced thinking, it would contradict all the scapegoat beliefs they cling to so dearly about their self-identity and the nature of reality. Most people get 'fucked up' on drugs.
Bull fucking shit, Transcix.

I used to participate in the "who's the savviest drug user" pissing contest too, but then I grew up.

Drugs do not make you more intelligent. They provide fleeting insights that seem more profound than they really are because you are in an altered state, and then leave a residual brain fog after the high is over. Perhaps you've forgotten what it's like to be sober.

The evidence is pretty damning. (https://www.google.com/search?q=marijuana+and+intelligence) (Oh but this is just prohibitionist propaganda, right? Please.)
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Phoenix on November 14, 2012, 07:15:02 PM
The war on drugs is the war against consciousness. I'm not trying to say that I have a "tolerance" to drugs or some bullshit and that they don't affect me. Buddhist monks were given LSD and they experienced barely any affect. But I don't have the luxury to be a buddhist monk, I'm in the thick of society writing my book and being the volunteer and distribution coordinator at a food bank. I choose to remain in society, and I can benefit from certain aids. Usually I write for all, but in this thread I write only for those who can understand, because drugs are the most misunderstood of all (second after consciousness). Be fucking ruthless with yourself, don't give yourself any slack, see what you can See. I'm telling you that the human form isn't the ideal, there is more than this mortal coil; I am here transcendent and I don't expect you to believe me, but I do want to say that I don't fucking get all caught up in thoughts on drugs, I don't go homeless, I carry a great job, I write and I have a great life, and I'm in full fucking control of my entheogen use. I'm a shaman and I don't know anyone like me... maybe I'm the only one... I'm not spectacular, the rest of you are just stupid, that's all. I'm just fucking sane.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 14, 2012, 08:26:44 PM
The war on drugs is the war against consciousness.
I disagree, I think it's a war against a destructive lifestyle. I like Conservationist's take on the matter: Legalize drugs in California, then check up on them in 50 years to see how things panned out. Most likely result: something like the Mad Max movies.

Quote
I'm not trying to say that I have a "tolerance" to drugs or some bullshit and that they don't affect me. Buddhist monks were given LSD and they experienced barely any affect. But I don't have the luxury to be a buddhist monk...
I'm gonna have to ask for a source. Though I suppose it is possible to discipline one's mind to such a degree that drugs would not affect one's thoughts. I would not, however, construe this to mean that LSD opens up a spiritual plain of existence otherwise only accessible to ascetics.

Quote
I choose to remain in society, and I can benefit from certain aids. Usually I write for all, but in this thread I write only for those who can understand, because drugs are the most misunderstood of all (second after consciousness). Be fucking ruthless with yourself, don't give yourself any slack, see what you can See. I'm telling you that the human form isn't the ideal, there is more than this mortal coil; I am here transcendent and I don't expect you to believe me, but I do want to say that I don't fucking get all caught up in thoughts on drugs, I don't go homeless, I carry a great job, I write and I have a great life, and I'm in full fucking control of my entheogen use. I'm a shaman and I don't know anyone like me... maybe I'm the only one... I'm not spectacular, the rest of you are just stupid, that's all. I'm just fucking sane.
Are you high? Your self-righteous rambling suggests so.

 It is rare to find a person who can responsibly use drugs, but I will not deny that they exist. Maybe you're one of them. I don't care if you use drugs or not. What I do care about is when people make asinine claims like "drugs make you smarter". First of all, that's very vague. What kind of drugs? Does jenkem make you smarter? Second, intelligence and wisdom, though there may be a correlation between the two, are not the same. Drugs may afford spiritual insight (LSD), increase abstraction of thought (Marijuana), or enhance one's focus (Amphetamines) but do they increase your IQ? Certainly not.

Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 14, 2012, 09:28:15 PM
The war on drugs is the war against consciousness.
I disagree, I think it's a war against a destructive lifestyle. I like Conservationist's take on the matter: Legalize drugs in California, then check up on them in 50 years to see how things panned out. Most likely result: something like the Mad Max movies.

No, the "War on Drugs" is a misguided, resource wasting, corporate backed pissfuck of a policy. It is utterly idiotic to think that we can wage "war" on drugs. Fucking preposterous - you can only war in a literal sense vs living things, but even metaphorically it's stupid. Why doesn't it cover the abuse and illegal distribution of most prescription drugs? Why do some prescription drugs have side effect lists that are incredibly extensive? Why is a drug like Oxycontin legal, when it's little more than synthetic heroin? Oh right - financial backing by empty-headed bigwigs; pharmaceutical companies that make a ton of $$$ from the sale of those drugs. I'm not saying coke or heroin are good things, but neither is draining money, manpower, and time into a policy that is almost entirely ineffective (isn't it like >90% or so of illegal drugs still make it into the US? yeah, nice job DEA). Plus, this "war" was started by one of the most deplorable bastards to ever weasel into the Presidency - Richard Nixon. Just another reason to abhor it.

It's another one of our "THIS IS GOOD AND THIS IS EVIL" binary ways of thinking in the US. It will bring little else but failure.

I will agree that drug abusers and heavy users live a destructive lifestyle, and I think the whole California proposition is a good idea (but it would probably be mostly southern California - the north isn't as rife with druggies so I am told).

To address an earlier point made by you, Traf - I will probably never touch stuff like coke or meth, same with most psychedelics. I don't think that I'd enjoy them. However, certain other drugs, like caffeine, THC, and alcohol I find use for. I strive to maintain a realism about my usage - when they do not benefit me anymore, or when I do not find enjoyment in them anymore, I will stop. Enough will be enough, when it is enough.

PS - interesting thought - do you folks consider sugar to be a drug? I saw a documentary on drugs which treated it like one; a fascinating take on it, and it backed up the claim with some pretty compelling arguments.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 15, 2012, 05:32:30 AM
To the folks who still use drugs: When will enough be enough? Surely you don't plan on using drugs for the rest of your life?

When the doors are fully opened, and are kept open (which is done through spiritual practice during/after the experiences).

Any noble or pious society wouldn’t need this. If the individual could contribute to such a society then that's great.

Perhaps they don't need it, but every noble and pious society, with very few exceptions, has used such things.  Greeks, Romans, Japanese, Chinese, Egyptians, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Aztecs, Mayans (all Native Amerinds, actually) - the list is indefinite, because as more cultures rise after this one's fall, they'll be turning to these sources of knowledge for guidance, just as our ancestors did.

Drugs may afford spiritual insight (LSD), increase abstraction of thought (Marijuana), or enhance one's focus (Amphetamines) but do they increase your IQ? Certainly not.

I'm aware that cannabis, for example, should not be taken by adolescents, due to its potentially negative effects on brain development.  However, there seems to be much less, if not no, damage done to a fully formed brain through consuming cannabis (though excessive amounts of CO from smoking can obviously cause problems, like the monkey suffocation they used to parade as "death by marijuana").  I wouldn't want my daughter or son taking any other similar substance until they are physically, mentally, and emotionally mature/healthy enough to make the most out of it.  However, after that point, I can find nothing to suggest that any of these substances might be harmful in any meaningful way, and very much to suggest that their consumption can generate huge benefits for humans.

Your assertion that drug-taking cannot enhance IQ is baseless.  You could provide no source for that claim, since we don't yet even know all of the psychedelic narcotics.  As things stand, there are synthetic drugs which increase (temporarily?) your IQ (e.g. nootropics); there may well be naturally occurring substances which do the same (and may even trip you out, maaaan).

Furthermore, the more I understand, the less important IQ is.  It is a measure of intelligence, but is not intelligence itself; at that, it cannot denote wisdom, and the wisest might appear to have no intelligence (which might be true!).


As a mild aside: there seems to be a hell of a lot of wimpish, modernistic thinking going on around here.  If you're concerned so much about your physical, mental, or social wellbeing that you don't want to push the boundaries, that's fine: you probably shouldn't.  That said, don't try to make yourselves out as being somehow "better" for allowing insecurities.  I could not live with myself if I left so grand an avenue unexplored; it is in my nature to accrue experience, in whatever way.  Life is for living, not for finding excuses not to live!

Here's a very small list of things which entheogens have helped me achieve (or, have suggested might be a good idea): regular (daily) meditation; no more alcohol; greater appreciation of my parents, as well as others around me; growing plants in my home; improved range of composition; spiritual insights along Sufi lines (the Way of the Heart seems to be mine); greater "connection" with my body, with others, with animals and plants, and even some objects; greater fluidity/ease of thinking; comfort in day-to-day life.  These are not temporal effects; rather, they have lasted, some of them for over two years.  It's more about the way in which one interacts with the world than about any one specific skill or set of skills; my relationship with the world has been made more whole/inclusive due to the use of these substances.

Edit: http://www.cmaj.ca/content/166/7/887.long

Evidently, smoking cannabis is a bad idea, in the long run.  Evidently, taking cannabis is a great idea!
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: username on November 15, 2012, 11:59:28 AM
There were 15 "heavy users" and »the IQ difference scores showed an average decrease of 4.1 points in current heavy users (p < 0.05) compared to gains in IQ points for light current users (5.8),«



So using cannabis in a young age does NOT mean your IQ will drop, as there is no statistical grond to assert otherwise.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 15, 2012, 12:04:44 PM
No, the "War on Drugs" is a misguided, resource wasting, corporate backed pissfuck of a policy. It is utterly idiotic to think that we can wage "war" on drugs. Fucking preposterous - you can only war in a literal sense vs living things, but even metaphorically it's stupid. Why doesn't it cover the abuse and illegal distribution of most prescription drugs? Why do some prescription drugs have side effect lists that are incredibly extensive? Why is a drug like Oxycontin legal, when it's little more than synthetic heroin? Oh right - financial backing by empty-headed bigwigs; pharmaceutical companies that make a ton of $$$ from the sale of those drugs. I'm not saying coke or heroin are good things, but neither is draining money, manpower, and time into a policy that is almost entirely ineffective (isn't it like >90% or so of illegal drugs still make it into the US? yeah, nice job DEA). Plus, this "war" was started by one of the most deplorable bastards to ever weasel into the Presidency - Richard Nixon. Just another reason to abhor it.
I never said the war on drugs was effective, just pointing out the (good) intentions behind it.

The war on drugs is largely futile, but what other choice do we have? It's a catch-22: Either we legalize drugs only to witness large swathes of society tear themselves apart as addiction rates soar, or we continue this pointless war and keep wasting untold amounts of money, countless man hours, and hundreds if not thousands of human lives fighting a beast that seemingly grows a new head every time we cut one off.

If the countries drugs come from weren't corruption-laden shit holes, then perhaps we could make some real progress. But until they clean up their act, the war on drugs is indeed a Sisyphean endeavor.   

Oxycontin isn't exactly legal. It's a schedule-II substance, meaning its use as a prescription medication is (supposed to be) very tightly controlled. Opiates/opioids have legitimate uses -- I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted my wisdom teeth out without them.

Why doesn't the DEA crack down on prescription drug abuse? I'm sure they already do, but it's lower on the priority list because terrorist cells and other entities that threaten national security are often funded with drug money from schedule-I substances. That's not to say big pharma is innocent, but in this case, I'd say they are mostly guilty of negligence; it is doubtful there is a big evil pharmaceutical conspiracy to farm cash from junkies.



Quote
It's another one of our "THIS IS GOOD AND THIS IS EVIL" binary ways of thinking in the US. It will bring little else but failure.
If you have any better ideas, I'm all ears.


Quote
To address an earlier point made by you, Traf - I will probably never touch stuff like coke or meth, same with most psychedelics. I don't think that I'd enjoy them. However, certain other drugs, like caffeine, THC, and alcohol I find use for. I strive to maintain a realism about my usage - when they do not benefit me anymore, or when I do not find enjoyment in them anymore, I will stop. Enough will be enough, when it is enough.
Fair enough. Like I said before, I do not care if you use drugs or not. A person cannot be judged through a binary right/wrong filter, as you say.

However, Dinaric Leather is on to something -- drug use is often a symptom of depression and/or other maladaptations to reality. My personal experience seems to confirm this: To most, drugs are, at best, a mindless distraction, and at worst, a crippling emotional crutch.

(Caffeine? I assumed that we were all talking about recreational drugs =P )

Quote
PS - interesting thought - do you folks consider sugar to be a drug? I saw a documentary on drugs which treated it like one; a fascinating take on it, and it backed up the claim with some pretty compelling arguments.
A common definition of drug is any substance that affects the body or mind that is not a food. However, the argument could certainly be made. Ingesting sugar does cause a small spike in dopamine levels.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Time Curator 23 on November 15, 2012, 12:34:10 PM
We can separate drug use into two categories: (1) entertaining/distracting/escaping/addictive experience and (2) learning/transformative experience. In the context of the comparatively rare second category then, drugs are simply passive meditation.

Active meditation comes in the form of meditation proper, as well as in the form of serious engagement in truly inspired and well-crafted art, music, novels, etc. All of the above are at best gateways to alternate dimensions of reality or alternate states of consciousness.

These experiences can be highly pleasurable, intriguing, mind-opening, and life-changing. However, they aren't to be valued too highly. They are merely some of the initial steps on the stair way to heaven.

Don't stop short. Just keep climbing. :)
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: fallot on November 15, 2012, 02:48:41 PM
I've learned that while drugs improve a vast amount of the modern life, they dull the few truly good things. Heroin could make my regular working day 100% better. But it makes music lose the tip of its impact, the most penetrating part is lost. You appreciate it in a very detached way. Similarly you can't enjoy family, simple love of kinship. Everything else though, boy it would be awesome.

I don't have anything against someone who smokes a little weed now and then to enhance certain experiences. It can focus your attention in certain desirable directions sometimes. Still, not to be overdone or else it saps the will out of you. Don't do drugs boys.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 16, 2012, 12:29:58 PM
(but it would probably be mostly southern California - the north isn't as rife with druggies so I am told).
You have officially lost the right to say anything about California until you visit, the north isn't as rife with druggies!? Thats by far the most ignorant thing I've heard you say. Does the name "San Francisco" sound familiar to you? Not to mention the two big conservative cities, Orange County and San Diego, are in the south. Who the fuck are your friends that keep telling you this stupid bullshit like Socal is more drug infested than Norcal and that AZ is a "neocon" shithole?
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Phoenix on November 16, 2012, 05:17:47 PM
What I do care about is when people make asinine claims like "drugs make you smarter". First of all, that's very vague. What kind of drugs? Does jenkem make you smarter? Second, intelligence and wisdom, though there may be a correlation between the two, are not the same. Drugs may afford spiritual insight (LSD), increase abstraction of thought (Marijuana), or enhance one's focus (Amphetamines) but do they increase your IQ? Certainly not.

I'm not sure what you mean by IQ. Ultimately I would define intelligence as one's ability and capacity to learn, with the caveat that it's not a symptom of mental health to be able to easily ingest the informational substance of an insane system - although the individual items of knowledge of modern society aren't threatening by themselves, taken in as a whole they form a pattern, a way of looking at the world, with incredible blind spots and perverse twists. It's not a conspiracy, it's just that the extent of the obfuscation and perversity is such that the grand illusion can indeed remain intact in the mainstream, that people can remain marginally content and stable without looking behind the curtains. The increasing of one's intelligence, then, doesn't proceed in a straight line but requires an initial deconstructive phase, and I believe certain entheogens are useful in this context. Secondly, and to some extent in parallel, a constructive phase arises from the ashes, and for this I also think the entheogenic experience can be useful. Ultimately intelligence comes down to proper vision of your own vision, the elimination of stereotypes and misconceptions--the functional, logical and harmonious integration of your self-concept and all your emotions, desires, thoughts intentions, beliefs, actions and attitudes into the true and present reality of things that is how you truly are feeling, desiring, thinking, intending, believing, acting and behaving at that time. When there is no contradiction between your paradigm and the reality to which it refers, then no biases, preconceptions, habits or complexes are there to prevent new information from being considered.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 16, 2012, 05:43:31 PM
(but it would probably be mostly southern California - the north isn't as rife with druggies so I am told).
You have officially lost the right to say anything about California until you visit, the north isn't as rife with druggies!? Thats by far the most ignorant thing I've heard you say. Does the name "San Francisco" sound familiar to you? Not to mention the two big conservative cities, Orange County and San Diego, are in the south. Who the fuck are your friends that keep telling you this stupid bullshit like Socal is more drug infested than Norcal and that AZ is a "neocon" shithole?

Someone who was from California. Evidently they didn't provide a very good perspective on the matter. I just assumed that since LA and Oakland are in SoCal, and they're both rife with drug activity, that the southern half had more drug abuse/use. But, even if it isn't California, I still think the idea has merit. It would put to rest everyone who thinks that all drugs being legalized would be a good thing (because it wont). Not only would they be gone, but the idea would be spoiled by the failed experiment. No one would take it seriously anymore. We should still enact it, the question now would be where?

AZ is pretty neo-con. Why else would they tend towards going red during election years? Of course there are people in AZ who aren't neo-con, just like there are people in NY who aren't liberals (which is another generalization I've seen around here). I thought it was implied that there are exceptions.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 16, 2012, 07:01:08 PM
You're prone to the same failings as me.
You assume reason works.
It don't.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 17, 2012, 11:14:00 AM
I just assumed that since LA and Oakland are in SoCal
Jesus fucking Christ dude, Oakland is in the San Francisco bay area. You really got shit ass backwards.

AZ is pretty neo-con.
I didn't have a problem with the neocon part, I had a problem with the shithole part. Arizona is one of the most beautiful states in the union, and there is Cactus Cooler and some great skate spots in Phoenix, Flagstaff and Tuscon.

And about it being "neocon", neocons may not be ideal, but I sure as hell prefer to live in a neocon red state than a straight up liberal blue state. And besides, the mainstream only recognizes liberal and neoconservative, there is no state made up of a majority true conservatives.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Sepulchral Voice on November 17, 2012, 03:07:40 PM
We have rampant kranksters up north, but as a far northerner, it's hard for me to consider the bay area to be Northern CA.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Tralfamadorian on November 18, 2012, 10:07:12 PM
When the doors are fully opened, and are kept open (which is done through spiritual practice during/after the experiences).
This seems line of thinking seems to equivocate enlightenment with flipping a switch in your brain. In reality, spiritual progress happens daily in imperceptible increments as one hones and refines the mind. Perhaps certain psychedelics can be used as a shortcut to speed up this process, but in most cases seem to become an end in themselves rather than a merely a tool. Besides, what's preventing you from opening those doors without drugs? Living a spiritual life is not exclusive to those who use drugs, and I find that the path of most resistance (ie not taking shortcuts) is the most fruitful path. Drugs are superfluous.

Quote
Perhaps they don't need it, but every noble and pious society, with very few exceptions, has used such things.  Greeks, Romans, Japanese, Chinese, Egyptians, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Aztecs, Mayans (all Native Amerinds, actually) - the list is indefinite, because as more cultures rise after this one's fall, they'll be turning to these sources of knowledge for guidance, just as our ancestors did.
These civilizations were great because of strong leaders and strong value systems, and outside of the Hindus neither of those attributes can said to have been significantly influenced by drugs, at least insofar as the Greeks, Romans, Japanese, and Chinese are concerned(None of the major schools of Greek philosophy encouraged drug use, nor did most sects of Buddhism). The shamans and soothsayers of old probably did more harm than good with due to their promulgation of silly superstitions alongside actual Truth. Drug use--for the sake of spirituality or any other reason--is discouraged by most religions, and for good reason: it is an anachronism that should be left for primitive jungle peoples.

Quote
I'm aware that cannabis, for example, should not be taken by adolescents, due to its potentially negative effects on brain development.  However, there seems to be much less, if not no, damage done to a fully formed brain through consuming cannabis (though excessive amounts of CO from smoking can obviously cause problems, like the monkey suffocation they used to parade as "death by marijuana").  I wouldn't want my daughter or son taking any other similar substance until they are physically, mentally, and emotionally mature/healthy enough to make the most out of it.  However, after that point, I can find nothing to suggest that any of these substances might be harmful in any meaningful way, and very much to suggest that their consumption can generate huge benefits for humans.
THC 'dis-orchestrates' the brain and causes schizophrenia-like symptoms. (http://psychcentral.com/lib/2012/cannabis-may-cause-schizophrenia-like-brain-changes/)

Furthermore, most of the cannabis users I know (including my -former- self) are lethargic, unmotivated, and live unhealthy lifestyles. Note that I am not accusing you of any of these things. There's always a duck-billed platypus to mess up the nice and neat rules people come up with.

Quote
Your assertion that drug-taking cannot enhance IQ is baseless.  You could provide no source for that claim, since we don't yet even know all of the psychedelic narcotics.  As things stand, there are synthetic drugs which increase (temporarily?) your IQ (e.g. nootropics); there may well be naturally occurring substances which do the same (and may even trip you out, maaaan).
I have experimented with nootropics such as piracetam and aniracetam, and while they did provide a high kinda sorta like marijuana, what with enhanced perception of colors and more abstract thinking but minus any euphoria or body high, in the end all they did was make me psychotic. Not smarter. I did a lot of research on those drugs, and not once did I encounter a reliable source for the claim that such drugs increased IQ.

There is a paucity of research on the effects of drugs on IQ. But seeing as it is mostly genetic, and that the part that is experiential is done developing by the end of childhood, common sense informs me that drugs cannot raise IQ. I wouldn't be surprised if they lowered IQ, though.

Quote
Furthermore, the more I understand, the less important IQ is.  It is a measure of intelligence, but is not intelligence itself; at that, it cannot denote wisdom, and the wisest might appear to have no intelligence (which might be true!).
I made this point myself:

Quote from: Tralfamadorian
Second, intelligence and wisdom, though there may be a correlation between the two, are not the same.

However, don't kid yourself: IQ is important and will determine your lot in life; wisdom is not the be-all end-all. I want to be a computer programmer. In order to be a programmer, one has to have above average intelligence. I am sure you have similarly aspire to take up a profession which requires a baseline level of intelligence.




Quote
As a mild aside: there seems to be a hell of a lot of wimpish, modernistic thinking going on around here.  If you're concerned so much about your physical, mental, or social wellbeing that you don't want to push the boundaries, that's fine: you probably shouldn't.  That said, don't try to make yourselves out as being somehow "better" for allowing insecurities.  I could not live with myself if I left so grand an avenue unexplored; it is in my nature to accrue experience, in whatever way.  Life is for living, not for finding excuses not to live!
You show weakness here -- you have been insulted so you insult back. So be it.

Drugs are not indicative of an adventurous spirit. Such a claim could not be further from the truth. Drugs are for those who have given up on life and choose to retreat into their own minds to hide from big bad Reality. Failing to see the beauty that is all around them, they 'augment' (read: distort) their perceptions with poisonous substances. Drugs are akin to life support: when a user isn't high, they're dead -- the only thing keeping them going is the thought of getting high again. They seek to rationalize their decadent lifestyles by advertising drugs as the path to enlightenment, but the only path drugs provide is a dead end. If you want to have an adventure, go hiking at your local state park, hit on that cute girl at the coffee shop, or try learning something you've never thought yourself capable of. Adventures are to be had wherever your comfort zone ends. The one place they are not to be had is in your own mind, where you are always safe and in control.







/troll =]

But see? Insulting someone else's lifestyle just because it differs from your own only makes for more venom and vitriol. I am not preaching, I am probing.



Quote
Here's a very small list of things which entheogens have helped me achieve (or, have suggested might be a good idea): regular (daily) meditation; no more alcohol; greater appreciation of my parents, as well as others around me; growing plants in my home; improved range of composition; spiritual insights along Sufi lines (the Way of the Heart seems to be mine); greater "connection" with my body, with others, with animals and plants, and even some objects; greater fluidity/ease of thinking; comfort in day-to-day life.  These are not temporal effects; rather, they have lasted, some of them for over two years.  It's more about the way in which one interacts with the world than about any one specific skill or set of skills; my relationship with the world has been made more whole/inclusive due to the use of these substances.
Were drugs really necessary to arrive at those conclusions?

I'll go through my 'revelations':
-- The complimentary nature of the sexes. I remember thinking this on my first acid trip. All it takes is interaction with the opposite sex to realize this.

-- The importance of family. Again, common sense stuff that just takes a little bit of self-reflection.

-- A good day is a productive day. I'll admit, smoking weed made me realize I was wasting too much time playing videogames. Probably would've realized this anyway once I got into physical fitness.

-- Telepathy. This is the only revelation I probably never would have had without drugs. Not too terribly important, though.

-- The importance of never giving up. A cliche, but seemed profound at the time. Experienced this thought as a fractal, as though every thought I had during the trip was a permutation of this idea. Really a no brainer.

-- The existence of other minds radically different from my own (but at the same time, identical). I remember blacking out for a second while thinking this on acid, not sure why. Again, common sense stuff you teach yourself as you learn and grow.

et cetera...

With the exception of telepathy, none of these things truly required drugs to realize. I admit drugs have an interesting way of 'crystallizing' thoughts, but they really just get you to think about and appreciate the obvious, something that can be achieved by mindfulness alone.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: crow on November 19, 2012, 12:53:35 AM
This seems line of thinking seems to equivocate enlightenment with flipping a switch in your brain.
Actually the switch-flip is a very good analogy.
Like discovering a blazing light in a completely dark cave.
Suddenly everything is clear. The clarity goes on outwards to the ends of the universe.
Except there is no out, and there is no end.
That's enlightenment.
The gradual kind is more like self-education. You move gradually in a direction you choose.
Whereas enlightenment hurls you out into space, ready or not.
Leap boldly into the void:
You will not be harmed.
It has no bottom.


Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 19, 2012, 03:39:23 AM
This seems line of thinking seems to equivocate enlightenment with flipping a switch in your brain.

It is.  Enlightenment - like anything - can only be achieved in the infinitesimal moment.  Once the change in perception has occurred, that gate is opened, and one can progress further down the path.  (Also, there are many traditions within which enlightenment is a succession of realisations, not merely a single one).

I engage in daily spiritual practice (not "once" or "twice" a day; almost all the time I'm living, actually).  The increments are not imperceptible; one of the most gratifying things I find about spiritual experience is that it becomes noticeably more tangible as one goes deeper.

Quote
These civilizations were great because of strong leaders and strong value systems, and outside of the Hindus neither of those attributes can said to have been significantly influenced by drugs, at least insofar as the Greeks, Romans, Japanese, and Chinese are concerned(None of the major schools of Greek philosophy encouraged drug use, nor did most sects of Buddhism). The shamans and soothsayers of old probably did more harm than good with due to their promulgation of silly superstitions alongside actual Truth. Drug use--for the sake of spirituality or any other reason--is discouraged by most religions, and for good reason: it is an anachronism that should be left for primitive jungle peoples.

Their leaders were initiated into the mysteries of their religions (which almost universally means taking psychedelics).  Plato, Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Zeno: these Greek philosophers (and many more - in fact, almost all Greeks for two thousand years) took the Kykeon, and firmly advocated its use.  The shamans are correct in their assessment of the spirit worlds to which we have access; theirs is not "superstition" but unclouded experience of what is, presented in metaphor (just as it is for all other people).  The use of intoxicants is discouraged by religions (for good reason); the use of entheogens is, more often than not, supported by all but the most established monotheisms.

Quote
THC 'dis-orchestrates' the brain and causes schizophrenia-like symptoms. (http://psychcentral.com/lib/2012/cannabis-may-cause-schizophrenia-like-brain-changes/)

Interesting, given that I have never, nor do I know anyone who has ever had responses to cannabis mirroring "schizophrenia-like symptoms" (I suppose they mean temporary psychosis?  I put most of that kind of stuff down to spiritual reasons, nowadays, having investigated these substances enough).

Quote
Furthermore, most of the cannabis users I know (including my -former- self) are lethargic, unmotivated, and live unhealthy lifestyles. Note that I am not accusing you of any of these things. There's always a duck-billed platypus to mess up the nice and neat rules people come up with.

This I will most certainly grant: most potheads are losers.  When weed becomes your life, and you're only exit from your home is to work, get food, and pick up, something has gone drastically wrong.

Quote
I have experimented with nootropics such as piracetam and aniracetam, and while they did provide a high kinda sorta like marijuana, what with enhanced perception of colors and more abstract thinking but minus any euphoria or body high, in the end all they did was make me psychotic. Not smarter. I did a lot of research on those drugs, and not once did I encounter a reliable source for the claim that such drugs increased IQ.

There is a paucity of research on the effects of drugs on IQ. But seeing as it is mostly genetic, and that the part that is experiential is done developing by the end of childhood, common sense informs me that drugs cannot raise IQ. I wouldn't be surprised if they lowered IQ, though.

There is at least one mechanism for the raising of IQ which is enhanced through the ingestion of a drug.  For example: taking speed to help you get through a 24 hour arithmetic challenge, you will most likely have increased in your ability to recognise and map patterns at the end of that experience (and a horrible comedown!).  Still doesn't mean taking speed is a good idea, though.

Quote
However, don't kid yourself: IQ is important and will determine your lot in life; wisdom is not the be-all end-all. I want to be a computer programmer. In order to be a programmer, one has to have above average intelligence. I am sure you have similarly aspire to take up a profession which requires a baseline level of intelligence.

I can assure you, one does not have to be of above average intelligence to be paid as a programmer (I've known too many idiots in that area), though it is certainly recommendable if you want to be able to do good work!

I honestly believe, now, that what we call the "rational faculty" is almost entirely useless for anything other than understanding cause and effect.  The reason IQ is important nowadays is because we've made it important.  However, Man can live in conditions and cultures in which such an affinity for reduction is not prized; instead, the intuition is raised above all else, or the mind's faculties are held in balance, or some other variant, etc.


Quote
Drugs are not indicative of an adventurous spirit...


/troll =]

But see? Insulting someone else's lifestyle just because it differs from your own only makes for more venom and vitriol. I am not preaching, I am probing.

I don't particularly aim my previous statement towards any one person, but it is an attitude which I see cropping up here (not just in this thread, I might add).  Is it not my duty to point it out, if I feel that my comrades might be slipping up?  Though, of course, I recognise that exactly the same argument might be levied against me, from the other perspective ; )  Don't worry that I might have been insulted by any of this!  Offense is taken, not given.

Quote
Were drugs really necessary to arrive at those conclusions?

I'll go through my 'revelations':
-- The complimentary nature of the sexes. I remember thinking this on my first acid trip. All it takes is interaction with the opposite sex to realize this.

-- The importance of family. Again, common sense stuff that just takes a little bit of self-reflection.

-- A good day is a productive day. I'll admit, smoking weed made me realize I was wasting too much time playing videogames. Probably would've realized this anyway once I got into physical fitness.

-- Telepathy. This is the only revelation I probably never would have had without drugs. Not too terribly important, though.

-- The importance of never giving up. A cliche, but seemed profound at the time. Experienced this thought as a fractal, as though every thought I had during the trip was a permutation of this idea. Really a no brainer.

-- The existence of other minds radically different from my own (but at the same time, identical). I remember blacking out for a second while thinking this on acid, not sure why. Again, common sense stuff you teach yourself as you learn and grow.

With the exception of telepathy, none of these things truly required drugs to realize. I admit drugs have an interesting way of 'crystallizing' thoughts, but they really just get you to think about and appreciate the obvious, something that can be achieved by mindfulness alone.

I have to say, I knew most of those before I took any drugs, and many of the drugs have shown me again the importance of such things.  It's all well and good to say "this is so: remember it", but it can be helpful to have a reminder every once in a while.

I perhaps should have made more of a point about the spiritual insights: for me, the workings of the subtle bodies are made apparent through the appropriate use of cannabis.  When used for meditation, one's awareness of the body is almost forced to extend to that which one cannot usually feel.  There are devices, mechanisms, and pathways within our own bodies which can be shown through nothing other than self-exploration; these are made instantly apparent through hallucinogens.

"Telepathy" (or, more accurately, the transference of emotion between two people) is something which I discovered without drugs, actually, though I find that some drugs massively improve one's ability in that area (2CB, mushrooms, and cannabis are great for it).  Still, it's perfectly possible without such things, and sometimes even easier after a while.  Smoking lots of weed is like wearing training weights, beyond a certain level: the world is made murkier, less clear; can you still function as well as you normally would? (Answer: yes, by now.)



Thanks for the interesting post!
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 19, 2012, 06:28:23 AM
And about it being "neocon", neocons may not be ideal, but I sure as hell prefer to live in a neocon red state than a straight up liberal blue state. And besides, the mainstream only recognizes liberal and neoconservative, there is no state made up of a majority true conservatives.

That last part is obvious. There are very few, if any, actual conservatives left in the realms of American politics. But I'm really unsure about the first part of your statement. To be honest, the only disadvantage I've found to living in a blue state is that the gun laws are usually more restrictive. Which sucks, but there are weapons you can use that aren't guns.

Did I say Oakland? I had meant Compton, but both have very high drug crime rates.

I wanted to also get your opinion on leaving aside an area for this whole "drug utopia" thing to take place. Keep in mind it's not CA, I don't know where this would happen.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: WAAAAAAGH! on November 19, 2012, 07:23:54 AM
Compton is a horrible metric because it is primarily consisted of subsidized blacks. I think Amsterdam is a better frame of reference for a more civilized drug utopia. I know little about the place, just rumors, I'm sure it is an armpit.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 19, 2012, 12:42:10 PM
I wanted to also get your opinion on leaving aside an area for this whole "drug utopia" thing to take place. Keep in mind it's not CA, I don't know where this would happen.
I don't like the idea at all, regardless of where you want to put it. It serves absolutely no purpose, there is no need for us to prove anyhthing to anyone. The people smart enough already know, the people too dumb will never know.

And by the way, as an American. I believe drugs should be legal. Here in America we have a strong tradition of seperating government from culture and religion. We don't need laws to tell us what is wrong or right, the only laws we are bound to is Gods law. Our values and religion will be enough to tell us to avoid recreational drug use.

Drugs aren't useless, If drugs are legal I can still get some morphine from the pharmacy when my wife is in serious pain, and a medical doctor who needs to be up all night at the hospital can get his amphetamine if he so chooses.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 28, 2012, 07:49:20 AM
I wanted to also get your opinion on leaving aside an area for this whole "drug utopia" thing to take place. Keep in mind it's not CA, I don't know where this would happen.
I don't like the idea at all, regardless of where you want to put it. It serves absolutely no purpose, there is no need for us to prove anyhthing to anyone. The people smart enough already know, the people too dumb will never know.
Drugs aren't useless, If drugs are legal I can still get some morphine from the pharmacy when my wife is in serious pain, and a medical doctor who needs to be up all night at the hospital can get his amphetamine if he so chooses.

First point - the dumb would be eliminated within the utopia. A dumb person has no self control when taking stuff - chances are they'd all OD or kill each other for more blow. Population control AND getting rid of useless people all at once. What's the problem there?

Second point - yes. Too often we neglect that some drugs have medicinal or other useful qualities here, it's best to keep this in mind.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 28, 2012, 09:07:25 AM
when I was on LSD I'd usually skateboard with my friends and go on pussy patrol at the mall or college campus

I took LSD for the first time on Monday (long weekend, haha), just as dawn was approaching.  I'd had 2C-B with my girlfriend the evening before, and rode the cannabus inbetween the two (fasting, little to no sleep).  I spent most of the day alone in my room, shifting between contemplative and meditative states of mind.  A succession of real fucking epiphanies resulted: the most practical/practicable example would be the two to three hours I spent considering my relationship with my father.  I came to understand a huge amount about him that I had never known before, and ultimately realised that my relationship with him had been suffering over the past year.  Having had this realisation, I am now set upon reigniting that relationship - Father and Son ought be as the best and closest of brothers, if not closer.  This is a beneficial result of healthy entheogen use: /thread.

More esoteric realisations were along the lines of the impossibility of denial/non-existence (I saw what Parmenides saw in the underworld), the nature of meaning, the unity of being, new perspectives on possibilities within dimensionality, and similar things (only the first three are really "useful" or "real", though).  I'll mention in passing the direct and constant communion with the Universe/Natue/God (the Whole, the One, the totality of all existence [including spaces, times, and phenomena]) - this unified entity is still prominent in my experience, two days later, though without the often crippling intensity.  My appreciation of the world has not just risen, but expanded in scope, for I have been gifted another (different but equally viable) vision of its perfection.  Meditation has also become somewhat easier, my guitar playing skills have improved, and I seem to be able to make ridiculous leaps of logic which nevertheless come to entirely correct conclusions.  Also, at some point during the trip, I started feeling as if I had "come of age" - as if it were some kind of rite of passage which I was going through, as it was seen in the old days.  Certainly, I now feel like a "man" rather than a "young man".  I'll see if any of these effects continue into next week.

I am definitely not depressed, that much I can say : )
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: AVFN on November 28, 2012, 09:13:25 AM
I don't see any reason why the different hypotheses concerning the various motivations for, and results of, drug use posited here cannot all be true.

In relation to the original post though, I have to say that one of my LSD epiphanies was that I suffer from depression.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Cargést on November 28, 2012, 10:07:27 AM
I don't see any reason why the different hypotheses concerning the various motivations for, and results of, drug use posited here cannot all be true.

All things are true.  All levels/modes of interpretation are viable.  Some things appear not to be at any given time, though they may appear to be at others; ultimately, though, if it is, it is, always.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Dinaric Leather on November 28, 2012, 06:43:30 PM
First point - the dumb would be eliminated within the utopia. A dumb person has no self control when taking stuff - chances are they'd all OD or kill each other for more blow. Population control AND getting rid of useless people all at once. What's the problem there?
The problem is that wouldn't be happening. Do you honestly think drug users gives a shit whether it's legal or not? Do you think when drugs are legalized all the addicts will go "woo hoo! I'm going to go buy a few grams of heroin!". The only difference for them is that it would be a little more convenient to obtain, and probably not any cheaper because thats the sort of thing that gets taxed to hell. People who get addicted to drugs or OD are going to get addicted and OD whether or not the government approves of it.

And what makes you think junkies will just kill other junkies for more drugs? Junkies want money, not blood. Other junkies usually don't have money, so they steal from regular folk.
Title: Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
Post by: Humanicide on November 28, 2012, 09:58:07 PM
The problem is that wouldn't be happening. Do you honestly think drug users gives a shit whether it's legal or not? Do you think when drugs are legalized all the addicts will go "woo hoo! I'm going to go buy a few grams of heroin!". The only difference for them is that it would be a little more convenient to obtain, and probably not any cheaper because thats the sort of thing that gets taxed to hell. People who get addicted to drugs or OD are going to get addicted and OD whether or not the government approves of it.

And what makes you think junkies will just kill other junkies for more drugs? Junkies want money, not blood. Other junkies usually don't have money, so they steal from regular folk.

Real junkies will do anything for their fix. Other junkies may have drugs, so it's not unheard of for them to quarrel with each other. Good point on the money thing though.

Drug users don't care if its legal or not, that's true. But if it were legalized I do believe there would be a sharp (but temporary) increase in usage outright.

Half serious theory - we could market the whole thing as a game show or something similar. TONIGHT ON FOX - watch "The Crack Pack"! The hilarity ensues when Denny forgets to bring his pipe, and the whole gang has to search the park for something to smoke out of! It's armed robbery and desperation at its finest, folks! 9 pm EST, new episode TONIGHT!