I am down to help any possible way I can. This thread should be for debate on new terms, and once a term has been established, let's add it to the wiki.

Once our lexicon expands, we should have a sticky at the top of the experiences forum with all the terms - so that new members (and older members alike) can use it - and also understand it when they read journey reports.

@ obliguhl: Like I explained in the first post I think we should mostly pull from established descriptive terminology like the one establishised for medicine or botany. That way, at least it seems logical to me, our "Hyperspace terminology" will be more likely to be adopted by professional researchers as they have nothing like what we are proposing currently, and they seem to like those Greek and Latin roots.

I posted some links above as resources to make the process easier. Hopefully others will add links to more types of descriptive terminology that they see fitting to pull from.

Do we agree this should be the game plan or no?

I think it's best to start a work thread about the Hyperspace Lexicon in The Wiki part of the forum.

The question is: Do we really want to associate the spice realms with science terminology?
I would find it uncomfortable to use words for sacred moments which sound like another word for anti-fungus medicine.

The DMT World is beyond science..so why not use words somehow resonating with the feeling they describe? Why should the dmt experience play by the rules made up by scientists?

We don't have to use the exact words we find in the scientific types of terminology. I just thought it would be a helpful starting point for root words, prefixes, and suffixes. As they have been there done that so to speak.

Really I don't think it matters how we get the words as long as we agree on them.

With you 100% obliguhl! Hyperspace seems to have it's own tongue when you are in it anyway, so why try and translate those to earthly equivalents. That would kind of defeat the purpose IMO.

I'm on board for sure though! Great idea vegantoker!

Peace
-idt

I propose the slithy toves..

But seriously, good idea, interesting topic, and it's good to see such THINKING people here.. Edot I got tired of people always being all fanciful and whimsical.. accrediting every experience to 'the goddess'.. People here seem a bit more scientific.. a bit more 'actually' spiritually advanced.. I always look at some of those people and feel like they're just the same as a lot of other people who latch onto groups to try to fit in.. my problem with them is, they give all the credit to the chemical goddess but they take none for themselves.. they completely forget they're half of the equation.. with no experiencer, this goddess cannot even exist.. with none to see, nothing matters.. so that's what I've really loved about this community so far.. You're not too spiritual to the point where it borders on hypocrisy.. you all keep your heads out of your own asses, and that's extremely awesome.

Thank you, nexus community.. I haven't liked a forum this much in awhile. This place has been invaluable. I totally am liking this idea of more words to describe what I'm thinking and to flesh out my tripscriptions..

Hey All,

cool nice to see this stuff getting underway.

here's me 3c.

If you are going to start a terminology based system I'd personally think that a robust set of 'rules' for it would be a god starter for ten,

primarily with the aim to making this into a system that has (as much as possible) universal applicability.

Basic lingo from either cognitive science or psychology etc could be handy as this would potentially allow it to be integrated into a system that could be further developed by future academic researchers in the field (fingers crossed this will happen one day).

I feel it is important that some form of bridge be potentiated between the world of science and DMT space/experience.
If only as these will be the people that will add important credence one day to a greater acceptance of the value of the experience as well as then be excited and do a whole lot of helpful work on it for the betterment of all.
[also as an aside for those who may worry - the word 'science' has only been around since ~1840, and alot of research in alledged scientific fields isn't actually science (in the sense of reductionism), but actively works towards a non reductionist and experiential account).

One potential limiting factor regarding active base around descriptors is of course their completely personal meanings that no one else may 'get'.
So perhaps assigning / attaching any visual natures to these as well (or having them separate yet linked where possible) would allow future work to also re-categorise visuals to the research methodology/system.

there may also be (as seems to be the case with emotions and sensations occuring on the body) a direct connection link between the emotions/experience and visuals that occur.
if so this could make the characterisation of the phenomena dramatically simpler (espc from a biological perspective).

from individual instances of words/visuals etc then the beginnings of a connective map should be able to be formed.
with luck and good solid inputs/connectors this should spontaneously self organise (much in the way of non-isotropic connected graphs popular in complex systems theory), and start to make the job easier as it progresses.

As an extra [hopeful] bonus, this week i am at a conference with a lot of big wigs in the fields of cognitive and neuro science as well as philosophy of mind.
I'm [on the sly side of course ; )] checking out their knowledge of alternate state classification and ways humans generate and characterise experiences [e.g. was talking today with a philosophy of mind guy who specialises in 'how do our minds make a consistent connection between two things (e.g. types of bird) such that we understand the connection and also that we are able to explain that connection to others]. this may be useful?

I'll keep up to date with this thread over the next few days as I get time, and update where relevant.
anyone with extra ideas please post them and I'll work on seeing what I can glean from people that make a job of bringing together the previously unexplainable into a semblance of a system for general understanding of the experiential.

ace
rawmo.

Am I the only one here who thinks this is like creating a society in a space that we go to, to escape the structure. This project sounds like the beginnings of an ego inside what used to be a space to lose that. I just think we should leave this sacred land alone and take what we can from it, the way it means to give it to us

Nah, lets turn it inside-out

Yea, lets tear it up!!

I like the idea of defining terminology to describe hyperspace but I believe that it's impossible. Words are only useful when two or more people can point to something and agree what to call it. The fact of the matter is that nobody knows what anybody else is pointing at and, in order for two people to know that they're pointing at the same thing (so that they can then coin a term for it), they have to be able to describe what they're pointing at to each other. So the idea that defining a collective lexicon to describe hyperspace will allow us to more easily remember/understand/communicate hyperspace concepts seems fallacious to me, for if we can't communicate the concepts to each other without such lexicon, then such communication with such lexicon is meaningless. At least it seems that way to me. This thread is pretty old, so maybe somebody else has already made the same claim elsewhere...

On the other hand, a personal lexicon might help an individual remember his or her own trips.