There is a newer article on Reality Sandwich that I found interesting.

http://www.realitysandwi...nce_mckennas_stoned_apes

-

For the longest time I had thought of the "stoned apes" theory as being plausible.. When I was younger I read "Food of the Gods" and found it captivating. The "stoned apes" theory stuck out to me the most.. but after reading this article I am left unsure as to whether or not it could even be possible.

Has Terence been whimsically deluding the drug culture with his theories?

I don't get what you mean by this statement. The wording sounds like you think he was making up stuff on purpose just to DELUDE US! He was a dude who had an encyclopedia of knowledge and liked to philosophize as many of us do. Sure I think this theory is one he thought more probable than some of his other things, but I seriously doubt he would have cared at all if it was dis-proved.

The more correct statement would be that The Drug Culture has been deluding themselves with Terence's theories if they simply take every thing at face value and don't think critically about it. Unfortunately in the psychedelic community there are certainly people that will just beleive any crazy theory. I find it fun to consider all sorts of crazy stuff, but I don't take anything totally seriously but it makes my mind happy to ponder things.

This Brian P. Akers has some sort of Vendetta against Terrence fyi. I was looking into a book of his on Amazon and randomly saw he reviewed a bunch of Terence books and went to read the comments. He also (along with a pal of his that worked with Maria Sabina and I think was a member of the pranksters) would attack any positive review and start these crazy long threads of comments. He did sometimes have some ok stuff to say, but a lot of it was always accusing anyone who said anything positive of being a crazy Mckenna cult person much like your pal Martin Ball.

There is alot of talking in that article...but nothing new is really said. I dont really get where the point of the article was ever supported..or not supported? I think the whole "lets analyze terrence" deal is played out. I wish reality sandwich would publish some more interesting stuff.

yeah, I'm reading through it and I keep asking myself "Where is he actually going to show any proof or disproof?"

it seems like it might have some grains of truth hidden in the massive wave of linguistic masturbation

this is what irks me about both extreme psychedelic and academic culture, almost every serious piece of literature is unreadable!

While I think he brings up some decent points, Akers fails the cardinal rule of writing: Don't take twenty paragraphs to say what could be better covered in three or four; if you want a piece to be longer you have to add more content, not just more words.

I think most people whose brains are even half-engaged know to take Terence with more than a few grains of salt... I'm pretty sure Terence himself even knew that!

I was younger when I read "Food of the Gods", and naively I believed a lot of it to be possible truth. The stoned ape theory stuck out to me the most, and I was 95% sure that it must be true. I preached it to my friends.. looking back, it was foolish of me to take TM's words so seriously. He was a very good writer and definitely held an influence over my life for a while... not to say it was the same for everyone else.. but I definitely became deluded by his words. "Food of the Gods" was like a bible to me for a while..

I assume this has happened to many others as well.

But.. Had it not been for Terence, I may have never discovered DMT..

The only problem I find with all these psychedelic gurus is that we, as psychonaughts, are forgetting the fundamental concept that we are all equal.
This stops us from looking at their words in a critical light, and automatically puts them on a pedestal, so we can't question or judge their teachings.

Pick out what resonates with you, and think about it. Allow these thoughts to compare to YOUR OWN world views, and what makes sense to you.
Just because they've eaten more acid or mushrooms, or smoked more DMT, or tripped harder than anyone else, doesn't mean they're right.
The same applies for any trip reports or experiences here on the forum, the people who provide the best reports, and the people who overall contribute most consider us all to be equals. There's no distinction between "tripping guru's" because we understand that the experience is unique to all, and we can only provide content which other people can take from.

Entropy hit the nail on the head with the cardinal rule of writing part, it definitely said an extremely little and yet it was so uselessly long. I have to add-anyone who attempts to do 'science' and disprove a theory, and then cites martin balls RS articles.. well..i mean..that is just sad...
*facepalm

Who knows if the theory is true..As daruma said in the comments-this, though, does not seem like any sort of proper debunking of it, since he took such an extremely narrow view (as opposed to a more holistic one) when looking at the evidence. There was practically no science in the article at all and he simply focused on the aspect of eye acuity and sexual drive...minor details in the theory when compared with the affect these things have on creativity, energy, insight, and new and abstract thought loops ect.

Brian also quotes terence saying the thoery is 'consciously drug propoganda' or something, and then actually uses this to conclude that terence knew it was all just BS...talk about seeing only what you want to see..



honestly, there is no one to blame for that but yourself clouds. Don't delude yourself even further by believing that he was intentionally deluding the culture into believing his theories - that is no ones fault but your own. I don't know if you were insinuating that, and i don't mean to throw fists or anything, i'm just sayin'..we can't just go around believing every theory that is thrown out there..and then, when we change our minds or the facts change, point the finger at their originator-accusing them of intentionally deluding us..blaming them for our own naivete..that gets us nowhere. Terence, although often taken too seriously, really was passionate about what he said, and meant it. That doesn't mean its true, its just a theory..

Shadow: good point. A hallmark of the psychedelic culture has been that far too often people (me included) forget to keep our skeptical antennaes raised and do our OWN critical thinking

Didn't we cover this a long time ago in the Martin Ball thread?

See: Dr. Martin Ball - Entheogenicist

I don't feel going into this ride again ending with another locked thread.


Kind regards,

The Traveler

Here Cloud goes again. Time to bash Terence. McKenna was an artist and a thinker. He tried to get people to think. I doubt he believed any of his hypothesis. That's all they are. Hypothesis. Ideas. I don't understand why people at RS give him such a hard time.

I don't get it.

You don't have to read Terence. You don't have to listen to his talks. And if you read his books and took anything as gospel.... you have no sense of the absurd or you just weren't paying attention.

The stoned ape hypothesis is a cool idea.
I wonder about people who take psychedelics and are 100% sure of anything... I think.

Yeah, halfway through that I began to wonder why I was reading it...

I love Terence for the ability he has to make me question my faith's, and my belief's. Some theory's he has I enjoy and believe, the rest that I dont believe in I still enjoy.

I found one of his talks on this fascinating. He said that thousands of years ago humans were all living in a sort of paradise among themselves. Engaging in orgies and viewing everyone's children as a family, together. Once mushroom used stopped male paternity become a concern as well as taking on females as their own, and claiming ownership and how ego completely changed everything, and this is when the first civilizations were created and people really began focusing on their lives, their children, their survival. So the mushroom must have did a good number on them and their reality.

I'm not bashing Terence... =/

I'm just bringing up the fact that this article made me question Terence' stoned apes theory.

We should all hope that everyone questions the theory... don't want another faulty book escapade like the bible happening do we?

Wish we'd all drop the individual slaggings and I'm-betterly-theoretical-than-you-isms.

Our control-centre (brain) is specifically designed to to allow certain plants with certain chemicals (similar and the same to chemicals in our brain) to open our hearts and minds to the big picture. This is enough for me, whether we evolved directly in relation to these plants or not is questionable... inherently - but it's a possibility.

All together though, irrelevant is this entire topic to whatever it is the Nexus is trying to achieve...

Chill eh?

Like I said before - I used take TM's words as gospel.. and I'm sure many people out there have as well. I was naive at one point, and still am to some degree, but I'm working on it.

Only after reading these articles have I started questioning what I once believed to be possible truth.. and I think it is important to try and disprove ones own beliefs.

I am in no way trying to bash Terence here. His work still has a place in my heart.

Please don't attack me for presenting this.. I just felt that I should share this with everyone here and get some other perspectives on it. I do love everyone here. I try to be as empathic as possible..

I also ask that people actually read the full article if they wish to share their perspectives. I am fully interested in your unbiased opinions on the article.

<3

I do understand.. maybe this is irrelevant to anything the nexus is trying to achieve. Everyone here (for the most part) thinks for themselves and should already understand to take TM with a grain of salt.

Probably a useless post... sorry guys

respect

I remember one of his talks he said ' every theory has a hard swallow , probably because every theory is horse shit. truth is known in silence.'


Ive always liked that .

Then my question is: Why theorize?

I think Terence was hilarious using the good old shroomie to explain his theories.But then again, who really knows?? Mind you he spoke a lot of sense about the consumer culture, governments, and religion. So hats off to you, Terence!!

Yes. I agree. Why think at all, when someone else can do it for you.