I'm no big supporter of Tim Leary as his approach to LSD (ie. give it to everyone freely) made it seem like you could take it without any consequence. Leary simply didn't put in the structure required to take LSD with his teachings and get from it it's true worth.

That said, Art Linkletter is the classic example of someone who has twisted his whole perception of life due to a tragedy that he was likely at the root of. Confirmation bias on steroids.

I don't think this is the case at all. If you read any of Dr. Leary's books, listen to any of his records, or even dig around the less sensationalist interviews, you will find that Leary always advocated set and setting and intelligent, responsible, spiritually based use of psychedelics.

It's interesting to me how often people make this mistake based on viewing a small amount of media propaganda and not really listening to the words of the man himself or reading his work. Meanwhile Kesey really did give LSD away freely to everyone, throwing big all night psychedelic parties with giant jugs of electric kool-aid being given out indiscriminately to anyone and everyone.

Looking back, Kesey's acid test model was almost more effective at integrating these experiences than Leary's more psuedo-religious approach, though it was certainly less careful and methodical. However Leary always seems to get a lot more flack for what he was doing because he was a Harvard professor and simply gained more press.

In my opinion both these men should be held in high esteem for taking on the responsibility of being psychedelic pioneers and advocates at a time when such a stance was still incredibly taboo.

I guess it is subjective. Personally, I base my perception of Leary on what I've seen floating around, and found it off putting. It was enough for me not to delve deeper into his books and lectures, although I know plenty of people who have picked up a trick or two from him. Also, whether I'm correct or not on this assumption (I wasn't around at the time, so an unable to come to a hardened consensus one way or another), I also lay a lot of the development of the counter culture around LSD at Leary's feet, and it was that movement (and the response to it) which ultimately put the world off psychedelics, and a major precursor to the horror that is the war on drugs. Had it not gone down the way it did, we could have more research today on psychedelics, and the whole world could be better off for it - this in itself was the number one regret Hoffman took to his grave.

With all that said, I know Leary was doing the best he can to help this process, but my impression of him that he got caught up in his own cult of personality, which proved ultimately detrimental. I still think a whole lot more of Leary than I do Linkletter, who by comparison was a weak and angry man striking out at things he simply didn't understand.

Personally, my psychedelic pioneer of choice was Hunter S. Thompson. But then, I am a journalist, so I would say that

I'd appreciate it if you could back this up with some evidence. There is significant evidence that indicates this is not the case, but that drug prohibition (as demarcated by the CSA in 1970) was largely a move by Nixon and co. to control minority and dissident populations. It's important that we discuss these histories accurately when they arise.

Definitely, Snozzleberry. Like I said just before that quote you picked, I'm working on an assumption here, and haven't done to the depths of finding concrete evidence one way or the other. Well worth having a dig, as I'm relatively unbiased one way or the other and happy to read both sides of the argument. Give me a while, and I'll report back what I uncover

"LSD is one of the most important discoveries that the human being ever made. It's the key to changing your own brain. Now, there's perhaps one out of a thousand maybe one out of ten thousand people who are mature enough and self-confident enough to be able to use this. —Dr. Timothy Leary, Religion of Intelligence "

You were saying?

I don't necessarily agree with him there though (sounds like way too high of an estimate to me). Also, if you actually read his work you'd quickly see that your second sentence is far from true.

And I have to disagree with your blaming of the counter-culture for the end of research... Could they have done some things better? Absolutely. But it wasn't the counter-culture who put forth the ban on psychedelics...It was the authoritarian backlash.

I stand corrected, UC I do feel Leary did get caught up in his own self-grandeur though - something I'd also say for other figures such as Richard Dawkins and the like. That said, I think on the back of this conversation, I will be spending more time reading some Leary in the not too distant future. I'll let you know my opinions after that

I'm not putting the full blame at Leary's feet, or the counterculture. As I said, it was both the movement and the response to it (the authoritarian backlash) which led the the current state of affairs. Personally, I feel this is just one of the many ways that the divide in public opinion in the US has manifested itself over the years, but that's by the by.

The authoritarian backlash strikes me as much more an opportunistic capitalist move than an actual attempt to control drugs. Politicians get to look tough on crime, prisons get overflowed and profitable for their owners, bucket loads of cash goes into enforcement, and all down to some bright spark lobbyists who had the White House's ear.

- John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.


- Harry Robbins Haldeman, Nixon's Chief of Staff


Edit: Image added based on following comment.

That'd certainly explain why the interiors of US prisons resemble a slave ship.

No, you know what. No.

There is no real reason to hate Timothy.

Look at this interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-fpV34frPE

removed. the host saying for once hes not in jail,etc and then saying there's boo's out there.

really. removed

Timothy was a great man, and because he was a great man he had negative people spitting negativity.

"Hate" Timothy? No. I just said I wasn't a massive supporter