Oh come on, please.

McKenna's "stoned ape theory" (*mind the placement of the quotes*) is not a proper theory at all. It 's just a bout of stoner musings with some entertainment value. Don't confuse that with scientific theory based on factual observations and critical reasoning.

If I missed the factual obsevations and the critical reasoning underpinning this "theory", please fill me in on it. So far, I have only seen proponents of the "stoned ape theory" descend into uncontrolled ranting and semantic gibberish.

I really like how this thread happened to pull up some insightful contributions. Lets not push this thread back into the murky waters out of which it fortuitously arose.

Hey pit, how 'bout "stoned ape" postulate? Might that be a bit less academically offensive? Oh, and do we get extra credit if we rewrite our posts?

Just joshing, all in good humor! It's always good to be reminded to stay grounded to the materialist paradigm, this being an ENTHEOGENIC forum and all. I'll remember to make some factual observations during my next full immersion tryptamine experiment.

Peace

I think the stoned ape theory is just a sort of middlefinger to society: "you say psychedelic drugs are bad...well i say that they're the cornerstone of human evolution".

I don't see how it explains anything. What riddle does it solve? And how?

One must allow that anthropology is largely a speculative "science". Certain assumptions are postulated to allow for wild, yet informed speculation. Common ancestry, 10 million year old fossils that are fully bipedal and anatomically "human"(less apish brain pan), multiple hominid lines ANY of which could have conceivably yielded, Homo sapien sapien.

What riddle? Here's one. How on God's(euphemism) green Earth did MAN "separate" from brutish apes?
There is nothing(and never will be) anything in the fossil record that can speak to metaphysical genesis of the thoughtful, self aware, ego obsessed, naked ape. Such are queries that cannot be burnished via the "scientific method". Why culture? Why religion? Why philosophy? Why patriarchy? Why law, science, math, family, race, nation, politics, sports, education...etc. The riddle is self evident. What the hell makes a man, a man?

If one can just abandon the pretense of "knowledge" and embrace the utility of "gnosis", the vast sphere of SPECULATIVE apperception, versus empiric, blossoms. We can know so little, why not conjecture?
The idea that proto-humans ate psychoactive mushrooms is near certain. The idea that said ingestion, "fucked with their heads", is additionally, near certain. Having done the same, with near identical anatomy and physiology, the recognition that states of mind so induced MIGHT have influenced a quasi sentient ape/man, metaphysically, seems NOT so unlikely!

Crack open your heads boys and girls. There is a lot to know and even more to be gnown. Eat 10 grams of dried Stropharia, in dim quietude, literally. The logos may inform you as it most likely did our progenitors. If nothing else, it will humble the smart assed arrogance right out of your(my) feeble consensus state consciousness!

Peace

Legarto Rey, thanks for sharing your thoughts. As you will surely have expected, I don't quite agree with some of it.


What about postulating you to the holy office of "Defender of Saint Terence's Dogma" in the Church of Gnostic Woo?


And how exactly is advocating for critical reflection on baseless assumptions an exclusive part of the materialistic paradigm? In my opinion, the entheogenic experience calls for more critical self observation, not less. BTW, don't you agree that both the entheogenic substances that this forum is dedicated to and the electronic device that you use to peruse the forum are clearly materialistic entities?

First let me reveal now some of my personal freebase speculation on the topic of the "stoned ape theory", also in relation to dragonrider's comments.

In order to give validity to what is experienced in altered states of consciousness, we should take these experiences in their own right and not confuse them with objectively testable outside reality. If a person under the influence of a hefty dose of mushrooms has a poetic self-revelation about his inner monkey experiencing an evolutionary leap of consciousness, then that is just that, a poetic self-revelation. If such metaphorically loaded imagery is further taken into the form of an entertaining tale with some amusement value for crowds of like minded explorers, then that is good amusement - I have no problem with that at all. But, I do object when people run with such tales and attempt to re-mould them into a materialistic paradigm of "objective truth". Whether this is done disingenuously to embolden the entertainment value of the tale, or naively to add a forged mythical quality to one's cosmos to compensate for a lacking ability to appreciate the wonder of the vast unknown that floats our personal reality, I do not know. Perhaps both motives act in unison.


What does anthropology have to do with this? Now you are becoming academically offensive! Show me one anthropology department or accredited expert who openly professes the "stoned ape theory" as part of some scientific curriculum. There is a big difference between informed speculation and wildly baseless speculation.


If we know that we cannot establish these facts, then why invent silly "stoned ape theories" nonetheless?!?


As you mentioned above, the Linnaean species designation for the human is "homo sapiens sapiens", which roughly translates to "man who knows he knows". Clearly this references our innate ability for critical self-reflection. Wallowing in unreflected and uncritical "gnosis" may feel satisfactory and could even be useful as a source of inspiration, but if one is unable or unwilling to reflect on these states, then it undeniably is an evolutionary step backwards.


In other words, it is not certain, for if it was, you would have pointed out the evidence or otherwise the highly convincing indications.


But what to infer from that? That it caused an increase in brain volume? That it caused an enhancement of mental and intellectual abilities? Judging by what I have personally witnessed in some "entheogenic" circles I strongly doubt the logical validity of such conclusions. I can't help to have the same feelings on many occasions here on the forum when dealing with some of the people who champion these "theories".


As I have asked some fanatical proponents of the "stoned ape theory" before: what about the slugs that I find in my outdoor shroom beds, munching away happily? Are the slugs becoming fully sentient too, presently evolving into "limax sapiens sapiens"?


Open your mind but don't let your brain fall out.

I can assure you that I have eaten such amounts and even more than that. But I find myself unable to carry the visions "as is" back into the ordinary world. I see it as a challenge to translate and transpose the experiences from one state of mind into the other state of mind. It is called integration and I believe that critical faculties are a necessary tool for the process.

Often the answers one finds turn out to be useless. It is the questions that hold the greatest value.

Uhmm, yeah okay, but how does the assumption that our homonoïd ancestors ate magic mushrooms, answer that question?

Aren't we a product of our environment? Surely magic mushrooms have influenced us in some way. At a minimum they are responsible for certain ancient cave paintings. I think we can all agree on that, right? Where does there influence on us end? I don't know, but McKennas ideas are interesting.

One thing I do know: mushrooms certainly changed the course of this ape's life for the better.

One proposal that I find interesting is that the mutation that caused our body to lose the ability to synthesize Vitamin C, followed (much later on) by a change in diet, accelerated our evolution. The increase in free radicals (which can cause DNA mutations) is proposed as a mechanism for our rapid evolution after the climate changed and we had less access to free-radical skavenging Vitamin C.

I bring it up because at the same time that our diet changed we came down from the trees and began to eat mushrooms. The lack of vitamin C (increasing mutations) is an alternative explanation (to psilocybin) for our rapid brain growth. Or who knows, maybe both changes (exposure to ground psilocybin and simultaneously shortage of vitamin C) where an important part of the environment that drove the emergence of our consciousness. All this is just speculation (for fun).

Super discourse!! Thanks.

A bit more related to the OP. I'm slated to participate in a small(5-6 people), local psilohuasca session in the near future. The last one I participated in was catalyzed with Cappi extract, followed by @4g powdered P.cubensis in OJ.

No question, these can be "edifying" engagements, less the travel arrangements and equatorial humidity.

Peace

I associate tropical humidity more with mushrooms as most of my mushroom experiences have been on my travels to the tropics, whereas Ayahuasca I usually drink in my temperate country of residence.