Nice post entropymancer! Thanks for making it.

I know I often purposely start debates about the nature of hyperspace and reality. The goal and reason why I do this is simply to provide people with a more clear scientific perspective on psychedelic drugs and what they do to the mind. Give people new ideas or a new perspective even if they don't want to hear it at first. I will try to tone down my negative comments to some peoples claims but understand I don't mean it ever in a hateful way. Thats how I normally debate even among friends (curse and battle with each other).

Most people don't seem to like these kind of explanations because the've come up with their own personal beliefs and theories about hyperspace (i used to do the same thing too so i understand more then most people know). I fully admit I haven't a clue how this stuff works. My only real argument is that it works by affecting the minds perception machinary and all its effects can thus be explained from that context. I also personally don't like supernatural explanations for anything especially drugs.

We will only understand hyperspace when we understand more about how the brain works. This will only come with experiment and observation and careful study. Tripping by yourself and coming up with ideas is just that IDEAS. Some may be good some may be bad but the only way to know is to study it.

^^true Burnt ^^

I recieved the answer last night and life is all one, it knows everything and we are all connected to it.

Philosophy about truth (or about whatever) is very beneficial to me, healing if you like. I cannot make a sharp distinction between within - without. Sharp boundaries only if you choose to apply them in your perspective. I do agree that what we hear is a function of what we seek. So i think we can learn about the way we perceive. This will teach us about ourselves and our personal, experienced reality. Again, i do not see a sharp distinction between those.

Nice thread Entropymancer. And i respect your constructive and flexible attitude.

Archetypes. Patterns. Carl Jung.

The "jester center" you refer to might actualy be a result of a 'pathway' or 'mechanism' by which the consciousness constructs, projects and experiences an image or vision of entity/presence. But i wonder if early modern man was seeing jesters on aya. Are they typical of smoked dmt? Can the different appearances of the entities be roughly categorized by substance or method or cultur or personal situation?

To put it slightly different: can the mechanism of interpretation use different concepts (jesters, stickmen, insectoid, fairies, clowns, etc. etc.) to form the psychedelic experience? Are the concepts (archetypes) choosen randomly or are they promoted by factors (personal situation/history, culture, neural network, set&setting, method of ingestion, molecular structure of substance etc. etc.)?

I am sure there is some trends in there if one could set up good experiments. But thats the problem i guess. It is all so damned connected that is seems imposible to get a clear view of anything.

All of this philosophical meandering is quite entertaining to read.

Thanks for the laughs everyone.