You make a valid point, but what you've just described is not a failing of science but a failing of politics. We all know how f-d up the politics are.

A good example of a failing of our system:

Scientific endeavors that go against money don't get funding, because they won't make the people funding earn more money! You can see, this is an issue with politics and economy, not the science.

Science is only a tool, an imperfect tool, but the best one we've got.

i have to disagree, i think the psychedelics are the best tool we've got, my previous post gives some reason to this. The omission from those tools in science is where science fails so greatly

The question becomes with science, does a reliably consistent series of subjective benchmarks, repeatable via many "subjective" people, count? What I mean is, if an experiment is proposed, by say, Stan Grof, to use LSD to induce a rebirth experience, and each person reports back the descending stages of infantile development that they experience in regressive order, leading ultimately to ego dissilution, can we safely say that science was conducted? And if his method proves to be consistent, are we then going to certify it, send the results to the FDA and expect to have it implemented within the mainstream consciousness?

It doesn't seem to be the case, despite the fact that that is exactly what Stan Grof did in his experiments. It's the same with meditation. Science just doesn't seem to be willing to dignify exclusively subjective experience as a valid interpretation of reality. It seems that maybe there is some fear that what is discovered could radically alter entrenched paradigms.

I read this book for one of my college classes, and it's still one of the best I've found for trying to integrate Spirituality and Science: Contemplative Science: Where Buddhism and Science Converge I highly recommend it! Find book here

Here is a description from the publisher that I'll post in case anyone wants to check it out: "

Science has long treated religion as a set of personal beliefs that have little to do with a rational understanding of the mind and the universe. However, B. Alan Wallace, a respected Buddhist scholar, proposes that the contemplative methodologies of Buddhism and of Western science are capable of being integrated into a single discipline: contemplative science.

The science of consciousness introduces first-person methods of investigating the mind through Buddhist contemplative techniques, such as samatha, an organized, detailed system of training the attention. Just as scientists make observations and conduct experiments with the aid of technology, contemplatives have long tested their own theories with the help of highly developed meditative skills of observation and experimentation. Contemplative science allows for a deeper knowledge of mental phenomena, including a wide range of states of consciousness, and its emphasis on strict mental discipline counteracts the effects of conative (intention and desire), attentional, cognitive, and affective imbalances.

Just as behaviorism, psychology, and neuroscience have all shed light on the cognitive processes that enable us to survive and flourish, contemplative science offers a groundbreaking perspective for expanding our capacity to realize genuine well-being. It also forges a link between the material world and the realm of the subconscious that transcends the traditional science-based understanding of the self."

The fact is is that science has not proved anything about this experience. It feels like experiencing the Big Bang or something and yet science has done almost nothing to figure it out. Get with The Program, Science.

To me the whole thing is a conspiracy because if I load enough it were as though something were waiting for me on the other-side. Conspiracy that it is even called a psychedelic in the first place.

woww so many great points and info here. Yeh never thought about it like that perhaps traditional science in itself might be in a way like a conspiracy hehe. Like religion it provides a set of beliefs or as many call it "facts" but more dangerous than religion is how it completely ignores anything beyond the physical/measurable. Even simpler example look at energies or emotions. You cant see or measure them BUT we sure can FEEL them. Feeling/emotions/energies/spirit in my mind is very real and most powerful and important here. Stan Grof or those that thought of contemplative science actually sound like they have an open enough mind on how we should approach science. I think the universe is made up of wayy more metaphysical nonmeasurable matter than what science wants to measure. Thats the beauty of psychedelics is that they allow us to see beyond what science only allows itself to see, the complete scope without the shades. Traditional science is simply too closed minded and ego drivin, we are studying a map with the lights off.

wtf are you even talking about and why are you here? You're views seem entirely counter to the stated attitude of the Nexus which you've proven post after post, yet you go on and on and on....

Science doesn't aim to 'prove' anything - that's an absurdly high bar to meet. Science is a tool used to explain our world. From endlessness in the "Why mainstream science contradicts itself" thread:

No need to attack, I actually really appreciate the repost from endlessness that you linked to. Just because some people have their own opinions or ways of going about them I do not think we should be mistreated by saying things like why are you even here? Or you go on and on and on. Maybe you own this fantastic site but what is the point in being snide, at all? That seems like a lesson spice provides.

[quote=voyaj]No need to attack, I actually really appreciate the repost from endlessness that you linked to. Just because some people have their own opinions or ways of going about them I do not think we should be mistreated by saying things like why are you even here? Or you go on and on and on. Maybe you own this fantastic site but what is the point in being snide, at all? That seems like a lesson spice provides.



Yes no need to attack and the negative language mate. That's not the way we should treat each other A1pha and being moderator you should be aware of this. I see you often put others down like this. Not very friendly mate!

I don't own the site nor would I want to. The Traveler holds that burden. I simply see myself as a guardian of this precious gem.

Also, aren't I allowed my opinion? It's frustrating to see new members display so much hubris; coming to this site, disobeying the rules, challenging our stated Attitude, arguing over values we hold dear. Can't people at least wait until full membership to start their crusade against our established ways? Otherwise, I question why they're here.

I am here to gleam in all the knowledge brought in by everyone. In my opinion everyone is entitled to their opinion.

It is absolutely out of bounds for me to say this, but I would much rather have Mods who are able to communicate, teach and discuss in a positive manner; creating a more positive place for everyone to grow and expand. To see what I would describe as intellectual elitism surrounding spice seems wrong.

I quite disagree with this. In fact, I'm willing to say it's bad information.

Just to get started...

http://psychedelic-information-theory.com/

It's chock-full of good sciency, facty, truthy, bits, explaining at least some of the experience.

I just read through this thread and very disappointed at the treatment of the moderators here. Starting to second guess if i want to be a member of this forum. Sounds to me he was just speaking his opinion, didnt know that wasnt allowed but for a moderator it is ok? Doesnt matter really if what he said was right or wrong you shouldn't speak like that to him alpha. If what he said doesn't abide with the forum rules than you could say it nicely not like that. I think he at least deserves an apology

ZeroG,
The mods get cranky because this stuff seems to come up all the time. If it was really his opinion, he could have said that to begin with. It's only a few words, and very much clears up the question of someone trying to pass something off as fact, or their own take.

Plus, there's many people who are legitimate scientists, and it can be offensive if someone says that you've been working for years using absolute crap. It's made worse by people who are ignorant of how science even works. (read, arrogant)


Psychedelics may indeed be a great tool, but they are less than objective. Many experiences I've had have been intertwined with my own being, my own experiences from life. They can open doors in the mind, and possibly other dimensions, but they do little to give concrete proof of how things work. They can help a person to unravel parts of them self, but do little to give knowledge in a direct and unambiguous way.

As others have stated, science doesn't set out to prove anything. It usually sets out to disprove something. When something cannot be disproved, it may then be accepted as a theory, or a law.

That gravity exists in a field around objects with mass has yet to be disproved. It is considered a law.

Skepticism is an important part of finding out the true causes of things. If I went off and believed anything that sounded plausible, I would end up believing I can have a six pack of abs in a week, babes will love me, I'll get rich quick, go to heaven if I go to church, and probably go murder people in the name of (national/racial/religious) pride.

So why should I believe any of my visions are real?


The fact that we are here communicating across probably great distances by pressing buttons which through many separate processes push electrons and light waves into your computer so you can read what I say, is all a direct product of the scientific method. It's m-f'n magic!

At least it would be, to someone who doesn't know what science has to teach.

Psychedelics can't give us the power to communicate with almost anyone in the world on a whim, from my room. It may be possible, but we'd have to use a scientific approach to really know!

"Psychedelics can't give us the power to communicate with almost anyone in the world on a whim, from my room. It may be possible, but we'd have to use a scientific approach to really know!"

Or two people can just verify the experience between themselves..just saying..just because we cannot demonstrate something via the scinetific method at this time does not mean that some people cannot really know that it exists.

Evan Dave Nichols who comes off as a very rational materialist at times claims to know that psychic phenomenon is real, becasue he has observed it personally. He knows he cannot observe it objectivly via the scientific method at this point but still claimed that he personally knows it exists.

There are things we can know as individuals and still have no way to prove it to everyone else.

"Plus, there's many people who are legitimate scientists, and it can be offensive if someone says that you've been working for years using absolute crap"

This is also very true..but at the same time it can go both ways.

voyaj-

I do apologize for coming off a bit harsh. In reality, it wasn't aimed entirely at you.

You see, over the past year there's been an influx of new members who either want to be spoon-fed, challenge our accepted attitude (or neglect to read it at all), complain that the rules of the forum are unfair, etc. I suppose the responses above show me how frustrated I am with this.

Many of us here have spent many, many, many hours putting together the resources here (and elsewhere) in an effort to help others without ever needing to ask a single question from start to finish in the DMT process. From extraction to use to integration to safety. It's all here waiting for the new member.

But all too often people come here without reading a single thread or doing the preliminary research asked of them. This causes frustration in those who created it in the first place.

I pulled over to say this so it's a bit rough but do accept my apology for being harsh. We are all here to help, included me.

Hope there's no hard feelings.

Conspiracy Theories. It never ceases to amaze me that given any governments or corporations inability to keep anything secret for any length of time; people still believe there are Conspiracies that only a select few know about or understand.

Conspiracy Theories that end up with something untoward actually going on usually turn out to be someone trying to cover their arse.

I do believe that there is a conspiracy in my house to stop me eating crisps/chips. everyone seems to get some, but when i want some, is there any to be found?

Very well put, and I agree! I am in the same boat. I think it would be near impossible for a person to delve deeply into psychedelics and not witness some seemingly supernatural phenomena that science fails to explain.



Yes, also agreed. I know you have some more critical views of science, but you are well spoken, and know what you're talking about. Because of this, as far as I know, you have not really ground too many gears, including my own. I respect you, and your views because you've shown me that you've put the work in to be educated about what you are talking about.

To me, there's really no excuse to be ignorant with as much knowledge as we have available on the internet. The comment from voyaj about intellectual elitism really doesn't apply, when it's all there for the taking. You don't have to go to college, or school, or classes, just read.

Just to clarify, A1pha, I'm sorry if this is a tired topic. It hit me in a single moment to get a little more understanding about the topic. I've been on the nexus for a while but have not been around of late, so I don't really know what's been going on around here. I'm not trying to challenge anything that's established by any means.

An example of something that often gets snubbed, that has piqued my interest in fringe topics (outside of entheogens) is the appearance of UFO's. I'm sure I will get a nice smattering of chuckles from many here, but when I see a floating triangle structure in the sky, and my friend sees the exact same thing, I have a legitimate life experience of something unexplained. That, to me, is a sort of secret, by some establishment, terrestrial or not, that exists in any conventional definition of the word. We both sat and watched the same three triangle lights shift colors, and then float slowly away. We both felt crazy enough as it is after seeing that thing, but the stigma of even raising the topic just adds to the feeling of alienation.

This is more what I was talking about with this thread, but if the intent of this site is to stick to the phenomenon of inner space, I don't intend to challenge that one bit.

Skitty-

I'm sorry your thread was hijacked. In actuality, the OP was really good. When I first saw the title I immediately had my hand on the remove button. However, you bring up some good points which is why it was allowed to remain.

My points specifically address the comments toward the attack of science by certain members. Please do not feel this topic is tired in any way. I appreciate you bringing up the points you did. The following is the crux of the issue:


We can't discuss things like '9/11 was a government conspiracy' because none of us can provide definitive facts on either side of the issue. It ends up creating division in the community because side A has their opinion and side B has theirs. Neither side, however, is privy to the real facts of the matter and therefore it does nothing to advance the subject. Instead, it only creates division and heated emotions.

Again, I apologize for creating unnecessary problems in this thread but it hits a sore spot for me and other mods here. Much of this is unseen by most members because the mod team is so good at pruning CT topics before they become a problem. These are interesting topics but it's important to not let our minds run into the absurd. A cornerstone of this forum is the use of verifiable facts and science instead of hypotheses which neither side can defend with any certainty. In the hopes of mitigating heated emotions, we actively work to stop such discussions for the benefit of all.

I hope you understand and I appreciate your OP.

Yeah, thanks for that reply. I definitely get it. It's easy to kind of link all of one's "paradigm shifting" experiences or thoughts into one genre, and seeing how this place is so great for discussing certain of those experiences, I think many people just assume everyone here is going to be on the same page, especially in that pre integration stage where the unshakable, definitive truth has obviously been comprehended and all must become privy to it Thanks for taking the time to respond to this thread so thoughtfully, and for making this place what it is. what is happening here is unprecedented and remains the most helpful spot on the internet, or in the world at large, for understanding the un-understandable.