Fire walking is a very dangerous thing. I understand that some cultures do it to achieve their highest social status. This is a way for them to show their superiority above all others. How can one just randomly show up to the Kataragama affair and think that they will have achieved the proper state of being to be able to walk over fire unscathed? The people who do all the preparations properly are way more likely to survive. It takes 3 months to get your mind in the right place while Westerners try to butt right in at the end and take the front row to all the action and even try to participate. How can a total belief in a God give you the unquestioning power to be able to walk across fire, hold a scalding pot on your head, or be poked with needles and have nothing physically happen to you? These people would probably live forever because they can never get hurt. Does this make them shaman? They probably don’t have healing power but they certainly have supernatural powers. Pearce says that fire walking is an autistic power. How can an autistic power give you so much physical difference from the norm?
America is supposed to be the land of the free. I know that drugs are harmful and that the government wants to protect us but Sterling states that this land was founded by people who wanted the right to practice their own religion their own way. Why was that freedom taken away from us? The Native Americans have gotten congress to approve their right to use peyote in their spiritual rituals. If anything should be banned from Native Americans it should probably be gambling and drinking. Religion should have the right to use what they need when they need it. Religion and its practices, what ever they might be, have been around a whole lot longer then the laws of any country. People used to say what religious group they were from then they changed it to what country but their true loyalty lies with religion. They shouldn’t have to abide by what the government deems acceptable because they want to cut down on abusers. Just because they are illegal doesn’t mean that there are abusers out there.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Pychedelic Society/Law Enforcements Against Entheogens and Pearce
The articles by Sterling and McKenna were very interesting starting with Sterling's article, at the beginning he paints such a beautiful picture on that sunny beach and the energy the waves create. How through our experience we know the energy of these waves but when additional energy applied we see the "wave in a new light". This is true with this article, how Sterling transposes the energy of the wave "exposing God at work in creation, as the Great Designer of the interplay of the forces of life, as the Cosmic Choreographer." (165) "Entheogens", coming from the word entheos meaning en+ theos = GOD. The Law is constantly working to fight and protect the young from all this greed. As if these riches (entheogens) were or are going to corrupt us or open our eyes to other world/realities. "...the greed becomes power-one of the great evil powers of our times." (166) I understand that some drugs if taken or ingested without knowledge can be harmful or even fatal but what about all these written and rewritten laws covering and making very little distinctions among "all drugs".
The Peyote drug which is used for rituals within the Huichol people of North Central Mexico since 1620 and the Spanish conquistadors banned it as diabolic and made it illegal. This drug was never used "recreationally" or as a "drug of abuse" it was used in religious practices. Fortunately this drug was and is allowed to be used under the extended and regulated protection to Indian religions. Unfortunately for the rest of , we have been controlled from any usage of entheogens. Lastly, Sterling talks about how now these drugs don't have a "haven" and many are being arrested for drug charges , without knowing the primary usage of this drug. Law enforcements protect the youth because it is hard to distinguish what is the harmful street drugs verses the usage of entheogens in spiritual practices.
McKenna touches on a very important concept "If God did not exist, man would invent him." (60) As humans we are in constant search for something that is out there...the unknown whether it is a god or a statue or other world. It does not suffice to know that we are but the continuously transformation of information. "We all create our own universe because we are all operating with our own private languages which are only very crudely translatable into any other person's language." (61) We had spoken of "Language" as one of the themes for the Huxley book and we gathered that if we took language ( as we know it) out of the picture there wouldn't be OUR own PRIVATE language but a vast of openings without barriers...no different interpretation or translation but just ONE understanding. Just like the "photons" he spoke about and how we all can see something and interpret it in all distinct and different ways from each other.
I really liked when McKenna quotes Ludwig von Bertalanfe; he goes to say that there's an "anti-humanist tendency in all systems" (62) and that people aren't machines but when given a situation we act like machines falling into patterns and hold this concept and belief very close as if it were to dissolve away or something. I think this is very true. We tend to hold on to things that are man made because they are the "norms"(what we know) but sometimes we forget about the little vague things that mean the most. In the end we will exit with nothing but our bones and flesh to be recycled back into where we came from.
The Peyote drug which is used for rituals within the Huichol people of North Central Mexico since 1620 and the Spanish conquistadors banned it as diabolic and made it illegal. This drug was never used "recreationally" or as a "drug of abuse" it was used in religious practices. Fortunately this drug was and is allowed to be used under the extended and regulated protection to Indian religions. Unfortunately for the rest of , we have been controlled from any usage of entheogens. Lastly, Sterling talks about how now these drugs don't have a "haven" and many are being arrested for drug charges , without knowing the primary usage of this drug. Law enforcements protect the youth because it is hard to distinguish what is the harmful street drugs verses the usage of entheogens in spiritual practices.
McKenna touches on a very important concept "If God did not exist, man would invent him." (60) As humans we are in constant search for something that is out there...the unknown whether it is a god or a statue or other world. It does not suffice to know that we are but the continuously transformation of information. "We all create our own universe because we are all operating with our own private languages which are only very crudely translatable into any other person's language." (61) We had spoken of "Language" as one of the themes for the Huxley book and we gathered that if we took language ( as we know it) out of the picture there wouldn't be OUR own PRIVATE language but a vast of openings without barriers...no different interpretation or translation but just ONE understanding. Just like the "photons" he spoke about and how we all can see something and interpret it in all distinct and different ways from each other.
I really liked when McKenna quotes Ludwig von Bertalanfe; he goes to say that there's an "anti-humanist tendency in all systems" (62) and that people aren't machines but when given a situation we act like machines falling into patterns and hold this concept and belief very close as if it were to dissolve away or something. I think this is very true. We tend to hold on to things that are man made because they are the "norms"(what we know) but sometimes we forget about the little vague things that mean the most. In the end we will exit with nothing but our bones and flesh to be recycled back into where we came from.
Domo Arigato, Mr. Roboto...
"Modern science is characterized by its ever-increasing specialization, necessitated by the enormous amount of data, the complexity of techniques and of theoretical structures within every field. Thus science is split into innumerable disciplines continually generating new subdisciplines. In consequence, the physicist, the biologist, the psychologist and the social scientist are, so to speak, encapusulated in their private universes, and it is difficult to get word from one cocoon to the other..." - Ludwig Von Bertalanffy.
This is kind of where I began my thoughts on this blog, seeing as I was so moved by the other quote from Ludwig Von Bertalanffy. I find it suitable that we are delving into science, as it would be, but more so “true” science, i.e. the science of the mind (if there is such a thing). I love how Pearce points out the idea of the mind being the “mirror of the universe.” We have been talking in some of my communication classes about how television and movies are not reliable realities but interpretations of the real world. It all began with the idea that media is no longer a mirror but a medium that is actually doing the constructing (or distorting the reflection). If you think about it, no camera, or film can ever capture a real moment, even if it’s just you and the camera. It is capturing its moment, from its perspective, from its frame of reference, from its use of lighting, from its transcription onto film, etc, etc, etc. However, what I am getting at is how our minds truly can be the mirrors of the universe and although we cannot capture moments, as McKenna pointed out; we can use our minds for “the exteriorization of the soul, and the interiorization of the body.”
The mind in a way can never be understood by us, or captured for the sake of examination, it is truly “a fourth dimensional organ of the body.” The mind is a medium, not an object, and we must use it externalize the desires of our soul and internalize the actions of our bodies. As McKenna alludes, we need to drop these belief systems which originated at times where people needed something to believe in and concentrate on living in the moment. Everyone today is obsessed with capturing their life on film, or in pictures, as if looking at them sometime will recreate that time of life. It won’t. That type of thinking only reinforces the societal norms and pretenses. There needs to be an appreciation of the present and a departure from the past (and past beliefs) where in we are focused on a progression toward a society unhindered by its own constructs.
As far as the science is concerned, it seems to have become a business centered around “fact” and is only willing to discuss that which it can justify. The facts it presents follow a linear model and many of the realities in our world are not linear. Therein lies the problem and the inability of science to understand the world as a whole. We can no longer see the world as just pieces of a puzzle. These scientists are content analyzing their portion of the world without regarding the scale at which the world functions and the level at which human beings are capable of experiencing it.
(Oh and as far as Law Enforcement is concerned, some creeper caught me smoking on campus and took my name and id# down, so now i have to look over my shoulder everytime i light up, thanks PSU Security!)
This is kind of where I began my thoughts on this blog, seeing as I was so moved by the other quote from Ludwig Von Bertalanffy. I find it suitable that we are delving into science, as it would be, but more so “true” science, i.e. the science of the mind (if there is such a thing). I love how Pearce points out the idea of the mind being the “mirror of the universe.” We have been talking in some of my communication classes about how television and movies are not reliable realities but interpretations of the real world. It all began with the idea that media is no longer a mirror but a medium that is actually doing the constructing (or distorting the reflection). If you think about it, no camera, or film can ever capture a real moment, even if it’s just you and the camera. It is capturing its moment, from its perspective, from its frame of reference, from its use of lighting, from its transcription onto film, etc, etc, etc. However, what I am getting at is how our minds truly can be the mirrors of the universe and although we cannot capture moments, as McKenna pointed out; we can use our minds for “the exteriorization of the soul, and the interiorization of the body.”
The mind in a way can never be understood by us, or captured for the sake of examination, it is truly “a fourth dimensional organ of the body.” The mind is a medium, not an object, and we must use it externalize the desires of our soul and internalize the actions of our bodies. As McKenna alludes, we need to drop these belief systems which originated at times where people needed something to believe in and concentrate on living in the moment. Everyone today is obsessed with capturing their life on film, or in pictures, as if looking at them sometime will recreate that time of life. It won’t. That type of thinking only reinforces the societal norms and pretenses. There needs to be an appreciation of the present and a departure from the past (and past beliefs) where in we are focused on a progression toward a society unhindered by its own constructs.
As far as the science is concerned, it seems to have become a business centered around “fact” and is only willing to discuss that which it can justify. The facts it presents follow a linear model and many of the realities in our world are not linear. Therein lies the problem and the inability of science to understand the world as a whole. We can no longer see the world as just pieces of a puzzle. These scientists are content analyzing their portion of the world without regarding the scale at which the world functions and the level at which human beings are capable of experiencing it.
(Oh and as far as Law Enforcement is concerned, some creeper caught me smoking on campus and took my name and id# down, so now i have to look over my shoulder everytime i light up, thanks PSU Security!)
McKenna writes about living with technology and how we as humans have become products of an assembly line where we become machines ourselves. The existential elements of his writing are standing outside our doorsteps waiting for us to come out and play.
We've become a society stuck on settling for ourselves. We often talk to people who, after reacting negatively to a situation, just shrug their shoulders, saying, "That's my nature." What? Since when did we become so lazy with ourselves that we find happiness in secluding our development? There is a cliche out there that states something about not knowing yourself until the day you die.
People settle for the problems within themselves and never try to learn from experiences or become stronger within themselves. They are often the one's, who when confronted with ideas outside of their everyday norm, become confused and uncomfortable.
The word faith pops up throughout our readings, and I feel that if such people have such a strong faith within themselves then why be so quick to jump down the throat of one that questions the way you feel. Shouldn't faith be indestructable to outside influence without one becoming so emotional and angry to these ideas. Is faith even a question of strength? Or are we looking at a battle between faith vs. beliefs. If faith is used as one's mask to hide fear, and a person becomes aggressive and defensive with anything arguing that faith, that person may be bursting into flames when walking across burning embers. (Foreshadowing... kind of)
(Segway First)
Faith is mentioned in Sterling's article. Certainly there is a big contradiction to our laws. However, Sterling doesn't really acknowledge that there are some idiots who abuse peyote and other spirtiual drugs for the purposes of just getting "messed up." They have no intentions of using the drug for spiritual reasons, and I find that the most unsettling point on these laws against entheogens. To use a drug for the purpose of just partying, in Sterling's case, would be sacrigelious, almost. He's talking about peyote use in rituals in a mature environment. Give me some peyote and I can find you five kids on campus that would take it without any knowledge of its origins. I could do it during our classtime today. It wouldn't take me any longer than using the restroom. In a similar situation, Penn State allows students to smoke in designated areas with places to discard your cigarette. However, people just stomp them out on the ground and walk away. Smoker's talk about "their rights," but when an area is willing to compromise, throwing a cigarette on the ground is probably the most stupid thing someone could do. The same goes for drug use, I believe.
(No segway)
I read "The Cosmic Egg" late last night. I like when reading all of Pearce's anecdotes about scientists, he suddenly smacks you awake with a quote of his own that sums up what you have just been reading for ten minutes.
"Each of us has an autistic openness for unlimited synthesis, but agreement on another's synthesis then limits our openness. It defines a specific area that can then no longer be open for us." Could this be where myths developed?
Question: Does the Humanities department put together courses that allow the students to make connections to all of their classes? Lance and I were discussing this conspiracy earlier today.
While reading Chapter 6, I kept thinking of a post that Wilbert had written a few weeks ago regarding the martial arts. He mentioned that when you see someone break a block of wood with their bare hands, you know that the discipline carries a whole lot of merit. I couldn't agree more with you, Wilbert. I think you should speak more often in class.
I spent my early childhood being severely sick with all kinds of breathing problems. My mom, who was running out of vacation time to take care of me, finally took me to the doctor, so he could put me on a presciption all winter long. Every so often my mom will say something about some other sickness that I don't recall having. My point is though, that my mother never treated me any different than my sister who was consistently healthy as a child. For instance, if I thought I was some strong man she encouraged me to think that way. She never babied me with some sickening sympathy that made me feel like a victim. I think she gave me some spiritual sense of myself that as time went on and I entered my later elementary school grades, I never missed a day of school. And even today, I do nothing beneficial to my health, but my doctor says I'm healthy.
Now I have to think of a closing that doesn't reference my childhood, or anything personal for that matter. Jenna gave me the idea to just post up a series of YouTube clips for my next blog. I'll write a subject and have a video connection for what I read without a written explanation.
That's still a pretty bad conclusion. Why am I so concerned with an ending today?
We've become a society stuck on settling for ourselves. We often talk to people who, after reacting negatively to a situation, just shrug their shoulders, saying, "That's my nature." What? Since when did we become so lazy with ourselves that we find happiness in secluding our development? There is a cliche out there that states something about not knowing yourself until the day you die.
People settle for the problems within themselves and never try to learn from experiences or become stronger within themselves. They are often the one's, who when confronted with ideas outside of their everyday norm, become confused and uncomfortable.
The word faith pops up throughout our readings, and I feel that if such people have such a strong faith within themselves then why be so quick to jump down the throat of one that questions the way you feel. Shouldn't faith be indestructable to outside influence without one becoming so emotional and angry to these ideas. Is faith even a question of strength? Or are we looking at a battle between faith vs. beliefs. If faith is used as one's mask to hide fear, and a person becomes aggressive and defensive with anything arguing that faith, that person may be bursting into flames when walking across burning embers. (Foreshadowing... kind of)
(Segway First)
Faith is mentioned in Sterling's article. Certainly there is a big contradiction to our laws. However, Sterling doesn't really acknowledge that there are some idiots who abuse peyote and other spirtiual drugs for the purposes of just getting "messed up." They have no intentions of using the drug for spiritual reasons, and I find that the most unsettling point on these laws against entheogens. To use a drug for the purpose of just partying, in Sterling's case, would be sacrigelious, almost. He's talking about peyote use in rituals in a mature environment. Give me some peyote and I can find you five kids on campus that would take it without any knowledge of its origins. I could do it during our classtime today. It wouldn't take me any longer than using the restroom. In a similar situation, Penn State allows students to smoke in designated areas with places to discard your cigarette. However, people just stomp them out on the ground and walk away. Smoker's talk about "their rights," but when an area is willing to compromise, throwing a cigarette on the ground is probably the most stupid thing someone could do. The same goes for drug use, I believe.
(No segway)
I read "The Cosmic Egg" late last night. I like when reading all of Pearce's anecdotes about scientists, he suddenly smacks you awake with a quote of his own that sums up what you have just been reading for ten minutes.
"Each of us has an autistic openness for unlimited synthesis, but agreement on another's synthesis then limits our openness. It defines a specific area that can then no longer be open for us." Could this be where myths developed?
Question: Does the Humanities department put together courses that allow the students to make connections to all of their classes? Lance and I were discussing this conspiracy earlier today.
While reading Chapter 6, I kept thinking of a post that Wilbert had written a few weeks ago regarding the martial arts. He mentioned that when you see someone break a block of wood with their bare hands, you know that the discipline carries a whole lot of merit. I couldn't agree more with you, Wilbert. I think you should speak more often in class.
I spent my early childhood being severely sick with all kinds of breathing problems. My mom, who was running out of vacation time to take care of me, finally took me to the doctor, so he could put me on a presciption all winter long. Every so often my mom will say something about some other sickness that I don't recall having. My point is though, that my mother never treated me any different than my sister who was consistently healthy as a child. For instance, if I thought I was some strong man she encouraged me to think that way. She never babied me with some sickening sympathy that made me feel like a victim. I think she gave me some spiritual sense of myself that as time went on and I entered my later elementary school grades, I never missed a day of school. And even today, I do nothing beneficial to my health, but my doctor says I'm healthy.
Now I have to think of a closing that doesn't reference my childhood, or anything personal for that matter. Jenna gave me the idea to just post up a series of YouTube clips for my next blog. I'll write a subject and have a video connection for what I read without a written explanation.
That's still a pretty bad conclusion. Why am I so concerned with an ending today?
Pearce ch.5-6
The 5th and 6th chapter of the book The Crack in the Cosmic Egg begins explaining how science is a creative art and how it’s a “joining of hands with all human endeavors, learning by its mistakes,” according to Sir Cyril Hinshelwood. Science is creative, but I would also say that all of science is not a creative work of art. Some things that science brings into existence are lethal and deadly. Imagine what it would be like if we didn’t have the weapons out in the world today or illegal drugs that science has created. There are many pros and cons. In one aspect, if we didn’t have scientific discoveries like medicine, more people would still be dieing of common sicknesses like pneumonia, colds, malaria, or even the flu. Things that are mostly controlled today by medicine that people didn’t have back then.
I don’t understand where Pearce went with this though. In one paragraph he says “ What a thing is is to an unknowable extent determined by or influenced by what we think it is.” What does that mean? Did he crack his egg again when he wrote this? It’s a very broad “pulled out of no-where” statement. He begins his writer explanation hopping shortly after. I am taken to a different author every paragraph. People I’ve never heard of making exclamations about art, about atoms, protons, neutrons, planets, God and religion, Hindu’s, voodoo, sacrifices, and fire burning. A mary-go-round of writers who state without any support for how they came up with their conclusions. Writers such asTeilhard, Singer, Michael Polanyi, Jung, Descarte’s, Apropos, Popper, Warren Weaver, Whitehead, McKellar, Brunar, Claude Bernard, Paulim Gerald Feinberg, David Bohm, James B. Conant, Max Planck, Leonard Feinberg, Gilbert Grosvenor, Arnold Kreschmal, and Eric Neumann.
Throughout the two chapters, Pearce makes a touchdown on controversy. He begins by saying possible reasons or purpose for Hindu’s and other people getting themselves in a spiritual state and walk over fire. Not only that, but how people are being able to withstand being stabbed, have hooks jabbed into their back, and not suffering from any bleeding, or have marks/blisters at all.
I do believe there are certain people out in the world that can get themselves in a state of mind, so focused on a goal, that they can overcome physical pain and feelings. Take Lance Armstrong for existence. A celebrity and pro-athlete who has overcome testicular cancer and a brain tumor, given a 40% chance to live, and he does. Not only that, but he trains for the Tour De France, while undergoing chemotherapy and surgeries. This just proves how faith and spirituality can put you at supernatural strengths. I believe that it is a person’s faith, in God, and in themselves, that equips them to be invincible. As Pearce described the people walking over the fire, he said how some burned to death, some suffered devastating burns, while others walked multiple times across the fire without so much as a single burn on their clothing, standing and dancing in fire, that was burning well over a 1000 degrees. This observation Pearce made was interesting. He definitely should have spent more of his time researching these fire ceremonies that take place, instead of talking about the other unsupported subjects.
I don’t understand where Pearce went with this though. In one paragraph he says “ What a thing is is to an unknowable extent determined by or influenced by what we think it is.” What does that mean? Did he crack his egg again when he wrote this? It’s a very broad “pulled out of no-where” statement. He begins his writer explanation hopping shortly after. I am taken to a different author every paragraph. People I’ve never heard of making exclamations about art, about atoms, protons, neutrons, planets, God and religion, Hindu’s, voodoo, sacrifices, and fire burning. A mary-go-round of writers who state without any support for how they came up with their conclusions. Writers such asTeilhard, Singer, Michael Polanyi, Jung, Descarte’s, Apropos, Popper, Warren Weaver, Whitehead, McKellar, Brunar, Claude Bernard, Paulim Gerald Feinberg, David Bohm, James B. Conant, Max Planck, Leonard Feinberg, Gilbert Grosvenor, Arnold Kreschmal, and Eric Neumann.
Throughout the two chapters, Pearce makes a touchdown on controversy. He begins by saying possible reasons or purpose for Hindu’s and other people getting themselves in a spiritual state and walk over fire. Not only that, but how people are being able to withstand being stabbed, have hooks jabbed into their back, and not suffering from any bleeding, or have marks/blisters at all.
I do believe there are certain people out in the world that can get themselves in a state of mind, so focused on a goal, that they can overcome physical pain and feelings. Take Lance Armstrong for existence. A celebrity and pro-athlete who has overcome testicular cancer and a brain tumor, given a 40% chance to live, and he does. Not only that, but he trains for the Tour De France, while undergoing chemotherapy and surgeries. This just proves how faith and spirituality can put you at supernatural strengths. I believe that it is a person’s faith, in God, and in themselves, that equips them to be invincible. As Pearce described the people walking over the fire, he said how some burned to death, some suffered devastating burns, while others walked multiple times across the fire without so much as a single burn on their clothing, standing and dancing in fire, that was burning well over a 1000 degrees. This observation Pearce made was interesting. He definitely should have spent more of his time researching these fire ceremonies that take place, instead of talking about the other unsupported subjects.
Drugs and Beliefs
In Psychedelic Society, I was intrigued with McKenna's beliefs on beliefs themselves. He says, "A psychedelic society would abandon belief systems for direct experience. This is I think much of the problem of the modern dilemma: direct experience has been discounted, and in its place all kinds of belief systems have been erected." This really goes along well with what my group pegged as the theme of Huxley's book, really living in the moment. McKenna claims that our beliefs are the very reason we don't live in the moment. He calls belief a "self-limiting function."
And when I think about it, I suppose belief is a self-limiting function. By believing one thing, you probably don't believe the opposite. For example, as in Pearce Ch. 6, if you believe fire burns, it's absolutely incredible to think that people can walk across fire and be unharmed. I was intrigued by this fire-burning chapter, because walking across fire seems an impossible feat and yet many do it and aren't harmed in the least. Pearce talks about people witnessing these fire-walking ceremonies and still not believing it. I guess a strong set of beliefs can cause us to completely disregard the incredible, even if we have tangible evidence or have seen it ourselves.
Also sticking with the living in the moment theme, McKenna says, "We must transcend the historical movement and become exemplars of humanity at the End of Time." I believe McKenna doesn't mean the End of Time like the end of the world but rather very literally the end of time. What I got from this statement was that we either live in the past, constantly attempting to learn from it, or we live in the future, always striving toward something not there yet, but we never live in the present. We never just "are", which is what I think Huxley challenged in his book.
McKenna talked about ridding ourselves of our beliefs so we are not inhibited by them. I thought about this as I read Law Enforcement Against Entheogens and when Sterling discussed religious tolerance I got a very visual image. I thought that maybe we need to get rid of our beliefs to make room for more and I imagined tapping the side of my head and having my beliefs fall out so that I could put more ideas in and form new beliefs. And although not quite so literally, I think that's what I do. My views of the world are always changing and especially as I struggle with my religious affiliations, I'm constantly revising my beliefs. In high school, I used to believe Jesus was the only way to Heaven and I was strongly convicted in that belief, but over the years, I've revised my belief to simply say that I don't know the way to Heaven.
I compare the revision of beliefs to the Constitution of the United States. We base our laws, court decisions, everything on the Constitution today, but according to Gore Vidal in Inventing A Nation, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams only pushed for the ratification of the Constitution with the hopes that they would later have the chance to improve it. My professor compared it to a student handing in a paper knowing it's not great, but hoping it will get an average grade. Jefferson and Adams knew a federal government was needed and the Articles just weren't doing it, so they supported the Constitution. And Benjamin Franklin supported the Constitution much for the same reason, but he was also very vocal about its faults. He in fact predicted the government corruption that exists in Washington today. Now we base everything on a half-assed development of our Founding Fathers, at least according to my interpretation of Vidal's book. But we make amendments as necessary and make new laws and overturn those new laws as necessary, because society and culture is constantly changing and to keep up, law must in turn change.
As McKenna says, "Our fundamental ontological conceptions of reality have to be remade." According to McKenna, to become a psychedelic society, we not only have to discard our belief systems, but was also have to redefine reality. Or maybe we should just get rid of a definition of reality. Discard the belief system that causes us to require a definition for everything.
I feel quite confident a psychedelic society as McKenna describes will never happen. Why? I think Pearce sums it up when he says in Ch. 6, "We are so heavily committed to our constructs that any suggestion of their relativeness fills us with anxiety." And at least in our society, anxiety is bad, change causes anxiety, so change must be bad. After all, isn't that why psychiatrist prescribe lorazepam and diazepam? I'm not saying anxiety is good, I'm just saying that certain levels of anxiety probably weren't meant to be doused with Valium.
Keeping in line with beliefs, Pearce says in Ch. 5, "Data can be found to bolster the conviction. The desire for conviction can produce its own data," which makes me think of Santa and the fly agaric mushrooms. As a class, we pretty much agreed that a lot of his supporting evidence was quite a stretch. Bursenos so believed that Santa was connected to the mushrooms that he forced his data to fit. I've certainly done this in the aforementioned half-assed papers and I think is an interesting not to end on that a belief can be so persuasive in our lives.
Our beliefs undoubtedly shape who we are and what we do, but do they close us off to the rest of the world?
Electronic reserve and pearce 5 and 6
Pearce 6: I can not go with this idea at all. This does not make any sense. How can you put a pot of boiling water on your head and not move an ince. The pot is scorching hot. I dont think i can believe in the whole Mohotty thing. They have 100 percent faith in their gods.......but no food or water, that is ridiculous. How is someone to live to worship these gods when they can not participate in the things neccessary to survive. I cant really agree or relate on this. Look forward to learning more though.
Pearce 5: In chapter 5, it says that a mans way of thinking is how their universe is ran. They only see what they want to see. Some men think they are always right based off of only what they know. I feel that people will never actually be able to determine how ones universe is supposed to be. There is an infinite amount of ways to do virtually anything so it will continue to be unknown.
Psychedelic: I really do not see the big deal about psychedelic drugs. It is ones responsibility to take them or not. If one person is high, it will seldomly affect someone else. I do not think these drugs should be illegal. Alcohol is legal and kills many people a year due to drunk driving. I would rater see alcohol be illegal before these drugs. Before people are so quick to judge, they should try these drugs, if not.....leave it alone!
Pearce 5: In chapter 5, it says that a mans way of thinking is how their universe is ran. They only see what they want to see. Some men think they are always right based off of only what they know. I feel that people will never actually be able to determine how ones universe is supposed to be. There is an infinite amount of ways to do virtually anything so it will continue to be unknown.
Psychedelic: I really do not see the big deal about psychedelic drugs. It is ones responsibility to take them or not. If one person is high, it will seldomly affect someone else. I do not think these drugs should be illegal. Alcohol is legal and kills many people a year due to drunk driving. I would rater see alcohol be illegal before these drugs. Before people are so quick to judge, they should try these drugs, if not.....leave it alone!
Drugs and religion and art
I found Psychedelic Society an interesting perspective on the world as a whole, and it tied in quite nicely with the conversation on language we began in class last Thursday. Terence McKenna was very adamant about breaking down language barriers, not in the sense of learning the same language, but to disregard language completely because the use of a spoken or written language convoluted the message. In a sense, his approach is very similar to what Huxley said about the painting of the chair; the painting is just a symbol of the chair, the artist's interpretation, and it will be interpreted by each and every viewer, and that painting will never be anything but a shadowy reflection of that chair.
Another thing I found interesting about McKenna's article was his belief that the Internet as a communication device is a feminine approach, not in an insulting sense, but that it is softer and more humanistic than the cold calculation of a more masculine engineering approach. With very little background knowledge myself, I seem to remember hearing that societies were begun as matriarchal (ie, Mother Earth) before organized religions became the power players and the societies became patriarchal. Is it possible that we are, in a sense, reverting again to a matriarchal society? If we feel that the masculine engineering approach was not effective, and if we feel that the more humanistic approach of communicating directly for each individual situation might be worth an attempt, then it sounds as if we are bringing the past full circle.
Sterling's opinions on religious persecution are understandable, but at the same time, I think it is easy to understand why law enforcement officials would use a blanket law. After all, it is far easier to persecute everyone who is using a certain substance that it is to determine who is using which substance for private use versus religious means. I do agree, as Sterling mentioned near the end of the article, that a more specific law to do just that would be the best option if lawmakers are going to insist on naming the drugs illegal.
On the other hand, illegal is illegal. Religious ceremony or not, is it fair to say that a drug is legal for one person but not for another? Sterling used the example of virgin sacrifice; he mentions that those leaders would be charged with murder, but so then would any citizen who murdered a virgin. He used a blanket example in his attempt to advocate favoritism. From what we learned in class -- that the natural substances are not physically harmful, that they are not addictive, that they are useful for altered experiences -- I do believe that the use of these drugs should be legal, but I would take it one step further than Sterling and say that they should be legal for all if for some.
Another thing I found interesting about McKenna's article was his belief that the Internet as a communication device is a feminine approach, not in an insulting sense, but that it is softer and more humanistic than the cold calculation of a more masculine engineering approach. With very little background knowledge myself, I seem to remember hearing that societies were begun as matriarchal (ie, Mother Earth) before organized religions became the power players and the societies became patriarchal. Is it possible that we are, in a sense, reverting again to a matriarchal society? If we feel that the masculine engineering approach was not effective, and if we feel that the more humanistic approach of communicating directly for each individual situation might be worth an attempt, then it sounds as if we are bringing the past full circle.
Sterling's opinions on religious persecution are understandable, but at the same time, I think it is easy to understand why law enforcement officials would use a blanket law. After all, it is far easier to persecute everyone who is using a certain substance that it is to determine who is using which substance for private use versus religious means. I do agree, as Sterling mentioned near the end of the article, that a more specific law to do just that would be the best option if lawmakers are going to insist on naming the drugs illegal.
On the other hand, illegal is illegal. Religious ceremony or not, is it fair to say that a drug is legal for one person but not for another? Sterling used the example of virgin sacrifice; he mentions that those leaders would be charged with murder, but so then would any citizen who murdered a virgin. He used a blanket example in his attempt to advocate favoritism. From what we learned in class -- that the natural substances are not physically harmful, that they are not addictive, that they are useful for altered experiences -- I do believe that the use of these drugs should be legal, but I would take it one step further than Sterling and say that they should be legal for all if for some.
Pearce (Chapter 5 and 6) & Electronic Reserves
Chapter 5
I think it is fascinating to think of our minds as a reflection of nature. Also, it's wild to think that there are so many things going on within each of our heads. Yet, we are like grains of sand on a beach in comparison to the entire world. We are even more minuscule when compared to the entire universe. Nevertheless, all things are tied together in a kind of cosmic symphony. It's nice to be a part of something greater, isn't it?
Chapter 6
The thing that stood out to me in Chapter 6 (besides all of the fire walking) was Voodoo. I believe in the power of Voodoo, not because I think that poking a little doll will actually make someone feel bad, but I believe in the power of suggestion. I believe Voodoo is very similar to the power of nocebos— the opposite of placebos. If a doctor tells his or her healthy patient that he or she is sick, the patient begins to manifest symptoms. In the most extreme cases, the patient is told that he or she has only 6 months to live and the patient dies. Voodoo is no different, but it requires strong belief from the victim to work. I find this quite fascinating. It illustrates the power of the human mind and the power of suggestion.
Law Enforcement
For the last six years, I have specialized in self defense instruction for law enforcement, military and special interest groups. I have trained members of the Carlisle Police Department, State Police, and Dickinson College Campus Police on a long term basis. I started focusing on members of law enforcement when I was an assistant instructor at one of the largest self defense schools in Pennsylvania. Eventually people started requesting me to teach them privately. That's how I became a private instructor. Anyway, on to Law Enforcement Against Entheogens.
Quite honestly, I despise drugs in all its forms. But the War on Drugs makes me sick. If this weren't an online forum/blog I would have a lot to say about the War on Drugs... and how much of a sham it is. From Bill Clinton and Barry Seal in Mean Arkansas to the Opium fields in Afghanistan... there is so much more to the story. Though, I think it is important to note that there are very honorable agents, with very honorable motives, who work for the DEA, FBI, BATF, and other agencies. They work tirelessly to get drugs off our streets... Unfortunately, their attempts are futile. While they work, a sea of drugs (and guns) is trucked, boated and flown in by money hungry individuals who could care less about the United States.
Okay, so now that I am done with my rant, lets focus on the focus on the reading... entheogens. The bottom line: no one should be persecuted for any reason, especially if they're not hurting anyone else. Yes, the Christian Missionaries were committing religious persecution... much as they have done throughout history. If Law Enforcement agents are putting people in jail for entheogen use, they should be ashamed of themselves, even if it's in the job description.
From my experience, most of the law enforcement people I have met or trained think busting people for hallucinogens and marijuana is a waste of time, especially if the "offenders" are not driving or putting anyone else's life in danger. There are far many more important crimes to worry about.
Psychedelic Society
The first page of this reading ties in with Pearce's rant about science. It seems that every civilization believes that they have figured out the cosmos.
When Pearce wrote, "Men get their egos tied up with their theories and their facts and fight one another for intellectual self-preservation." Maybe the same can be applied to societies. Perhaps civilizations have a collective egos. It's an ego that is wrapped up in the societies religion and experience. But in the end, it all comes down to a need for self-preservation. I suppose the question I am wrestling with in my own head is, are we wrong?
It is funny to think how scientific theories are produced, or better yet, how policies are established. It's even funnier (and sad) to see how quickly these theories can be undone. The real question is, who gets persecuted in the process?
This text, Psychedelic Society made a lot of sense. I agree, we are hindered by our own ideology. With the technology we have available to us, we have a rare opportunity to transcend that old way of thinking. We can come together, and launch ourselves into a new age of reason. Unfortunately, very few would go along with it willingly. I guess that is where mind control comes in. Change public perception and attitudes to such a degree that a universal change can take place.
The Internet, though it is an artificial form of unconscious, might be vital in the transformation process. For the first time in known history, the world is connected. We must take advantage of this. A new world order might be closer than we think.
I think it is fascinating to think of our minds as a reflection of nature. Also, it's wild to think that there are so many things going on within each of our heads. Yet, we are like grains of sand on a beach in comparison to the entire world. We are even more minuscule when compared to the entire universe. Nevertheless, all things are tied together in a kind of cosmic symphony. It's nice to be a part of something greater, isn't it?
Chapter 6
The thing that stood out to me in Chapter 6 (besides all of the fire walking) was Voodoo. I believe in the power of Voodoo, not because I think that poking a little doll will actually make someone feel bad, but I believe in the power of suggestion. I believe Voodoo is very similar to the power of nocebos— the opposite of placebos. If a doctor tells his or her healthy patient that he or she is sick, the patient begins to manifest symptoms. In the most extreme cases, the patient is told that he or she has only 6 months to live and the patient dies. Voodoo is no different, but it requires strong belief from the victim to work. I find this quite fascinating. It illustrates the power of the human mind and the power of suggestion.
Law Enforcement
For the last six years, I have specialized in self defense instruction for law enforcement, military and special interest groups. I have trained members of the Carlisle Police Department, State Police, and Dickinson College Campus Police on a long term basis. I started focusing on members of law enforcement when I was an assistant instructor at one of the largest self defense schools in Pennsylvania. Eventually people started requesting me to teach them privately. That's how I became a private instructor. Anyway, on to Law Enforcement Against Entheogens.
Quite honestly, I despise drugs in all its forms. But the War on Drugs makes me sick. If this weren't an online forum/blog I would have a lot to say about the War on Drugs... and how much of a sham it is. From Bill Clinton and Barry Seal in Mean Arkansas to the Opium fields in Afghanistan... there is so much more to the story. Though, I think it is important to note that there are very honorable agents, with very honorable motives, who work for the DEA, FBI, BATF, and other agencies. They work tirelessly to get drugs off our streets... Unfortunately, their attempts are futile. While they work, a sea of drugs (and guns) is trucked, boated and flown in by money hungry individuals who could care less about the United States.
Okay, so now that I am done with my rant, lets focus on the focus on the reading... entheogens. The bottom line: no one should be persecuted for any reason, especially if they're not hurting anyone else. Yes, the Christian Missionaries were committing religious persecution... much as they have done throughout history. If Law Enforcement agents are putting people in jail for entheogen use, they should be ashamed of themselves, even if it's in the job description.
From my experience, most of the law enforcement people I have met or trained think busting people for hallucinogens and marijuana is a waste of time, especially if the "offenders" are not driving or putting anyone else's life in danger. There are far many more important crimes to worry about.
Psychedelic Society
The first page of this reading ties in with Pearce's rant about science. It seems that every civilization believes that they have figured out the cosmos.
When Pearce wrote, "Men get their egos tied up with their theories and their facts and fight one another for intellectual self-preservation." Maybe the same can be applied to societies. Perhaps civilizations have a collective egos. It's an ego that is wrapped up in the societies religion and experience. But in the end, it all comes down to a need for self-preservation. I suppose the question I am wrestling with in my own head is, are we wrong?
It is funny to think how scientific theories are produced, or better yet, how policies are established. It's even funnier (and sad) to see how quickly these theories can be undone. The real question is, who gets persecuted in the process?
This text, Psychedelic Society made a lot of sense. I agree, we are hindered by our own ideology. With the technology we have available to us, we have a rare opportunity to transcend that old way of thinking. We can come together, and launch ourselves into a new age of reason. Unfortunately, very few would go along with it willingly. I guess that is where mind control comes in. Change public perception and attitudes to such a degree that a universal change can take place.
The Internet, though it is an artificial form of unconscious, might be vital in the transformation process. For the first time in known history, the world is connected. We must take advantage of this. A new world order might be closer than we think.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Blog number seven
Pearce Chapters 5&6
I like how this book is very philosophical. I also like how chapter 5 started with talking about science. Science is very important and definitely reveals the truth to many things in life. This book is filled with infinitely amazing quotes. Things that make you think and rethink. I like it a lot. I can feel my brain.Even if Pearce is using other people’s quotes to get his point across… the material he’s quoting is good stuff.
For instance, “Sir Cyril Hinshelwood spoke of science as a creative art, ‘joining hands with all human endeavors, learning by its mistakes.’” As well as referencing Singer in terms of him writing about the processes of the mind and how it seemed to reflect nature. “He felt that our minds were as much the products of evolution as were our bodies, an idea both Jung and Teilhard developed.”
I think about Darwin and Natural Selection. How the heritable favorable traits remain present for survival where the unfavorable inheritable traits become less common. I certainly believe we adapt to our environments. If biological adaptations occur then psychological ones must occur as well.
Another smart statement by Popper, “Every scientific statement must remain tentative forever.” I’m a firm believe that anything can happen and everything is subject to change. Nothing is definite. Nothing is solid or forever, neither can science. I think we can only be 99.9% sure of anything in this life.
“The scientific audience is won over to a new system by intellectual sympathy. A hostile audience may deliberately refuse to entertain novel conceptions for fear of being led to conclusions they abhor, rightly or wrongly.” That is well put. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
And for the fire walkers… yeah, I can see how these people walked across a bed of deep charcoal that produced the perfect conditions for fire walking. I’d be delirious too if for three months I was forced to remain abstinent, vegiterian, drinking only water, with constant sprinklings of holy water with continual religious instruction and prayer as well as meditating and communicating with god. Oh yes, and the rhythmic drums to produce a hypnotic like state, can’t forget that. I also think it’s kind of funny that of 80 people walking, 12 failed. I wonder what it would look like to watch someone fail at that. Yikes.
Really, fire walking is a mind over matter kind of deal.
Psychedelic Society
I like the point made “if you believe something, you are automatically precluded from believing its opposite; which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeited in the act of committing yourself to this belief.” I see so many people struggle with this.
On page 59, I really enjoy how he talks about getting rid of the concepts from previous decades and that we must transcend the historical moment and basically demonstrate humanity at the end of time. I also agree that the change that occurred biologically long ago is now operating in our culture. This text was also filled with good quotes. I think the Psychedelic society is more interesting and in depth than what’s first assumed.
Law Enforcement Against Entheogens: Is It Religious Persecution?
It really isn’t a question of religious persecution when Christian Missionaries were involved in the suppression of Peyote. If it’s used for religious purposes and not abused for the reasons as to why it’s banned in the first place, perhaps those who don’t understand the religious practices should butt out.
It’s just ignorant of the westerners to treat peyote the way it’s treated. I got annoyed reading this article a little.
Whatever the government deems “illegal” is banned yet pharmaceutical companies produce how many drugs with how many absurd side effects where some result in death? Chris Rock sums up the way the government acts towards drugs in his stand up from Never Scared in 2004 perfectly. He makes some valid points... Watch the clip!
Beware, this video contains some profanity.
I like how this book is very philosophical. I also like how chapter 5 started with talking about science. Science is very important and definitely reveals the truth to many things in life. This book is filled with infinitely amazing quotes. Things that make you think and rethink. I like it a lot. I can feel my brain.Even if Pearce is using other people’s quotes to get his point across… the material he’s quoting is good stuff.
For instance, “Sir Cyril Hinshelwood spoke of science as a creative art, ‘joining hands with all human endeavors, learning by its mistakes.’” As well as referencing Singer in terms of him writing about the processes of the mind and how it seemed to reflect nature. “He felt that our minds were as much the products of evolution as were our bodies, an idea both Jung and Teilhard developed.”
I think about Darwin and Natural Selection. How the heritable favorable traits remain present for survival where the unfavorable inheritable traits become less common. I certainly believe we adapt to our environments. If biological adaptations occur then psychological ones must occur as well.
Another smart statement by Popper, “Every scientific statement must remain tentative forever.” I’m a firm believe that anything can happen and everything is subject to change. Nothing is definite. Nothing is solid or forever, neither can science. I think we can only be 99.9% sure of anything in this life.
“The scientific audience is won over to a new system by intellectual sympathy. A hostile audience may deliberately refuse to entertain novel conceptions for fear of being led to conclusions they abhor, rightly or wrongly.” That is well put. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
And for the fire walkers… yeah, I can see how these people walked across a bed of deep charcoal that produced the perfect conditions for fire walking. I’d be delirious too if for three months I was forced to remain abstinent, vegiterian, drinking only water, with constant sprinklings of holy water with continual religious instruction and prayer as well as meditating and communicating with god. Oh yes, and the rhythmic drums to produce a hypnotic like state, can’t forget that. I also think it’s kind of funny that of 80 people walking, 12 failed. I wonder what it would look like to watch someone fail at that. Yikes.
Really, fire walking is a mind over matter kind of deal.
Psychedelic Society
I like the point made “if you believe something, you are automatically precluded from believing its opposite; which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeited in the act of committing yourself to this belief.” I see so many people struggle with this.
On page 59, I really enjoy how he talks about getting rid of the concepts from previous decades and that we must transcend the historical moment and basically demonstrate humanity at the end of time. I also agree that the change that occurred biologically long ago is now operating in our culture. This text was also filled with good quotes. I think the Psychedelic society is more interesting and in depth than what’s first assumed.
Law Enforcement Against Entheogens: Is It Religious Persecution?
It really isn’t a question of religious persecution when Christian Missionaries were involved in the suppression of Peyote. If it’s used for religious purposes and not abused for the reasons as to why it’s banned in the first place, perhaps those who don’t understand the religious practices should butt out.
It’s just ignorant of the westerners to treat peyote the way it’s treated. I got annoyed reading this article a little.
Whatever the government deems “illegal” is banned yet pharmaceutical companies produce how many drugs with how many absurd side effects where some result in death? Chris Rock sums up the way the government acts towards drugs in his stand up from Never Scared in 2004 perfectly. He makes some valid points... Watch the clip!
Beware, this video contains some profanity.
Mystery of Being
In the article Psychedelic Society one of the initial points made by McKenna is the idea that “our beliefs have grown obsolete and should be put aside.” I first thought well that’s silly and I decided to look up the definition of belief. Merriam-Webster dictionary says that belief is 1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing. After reflecting on this, I concluded that McKenna may be on to something… It is not that we shouldn’t believe in something, but we need to consider varying points of view so we are not hindered by our ideology.
Further on in the article he talks about the “ontological conceptions of reality and the notion that they have to be remade.” My question is “Who decides?” Society can agree on very few things, how could we decide on a new order of reality? As I continued to read, McKenna’s statement became clearer the idea that we should take responsibility of ourselves and actions seemed to be the underlying message. . Each one of us needs to let go of the thoughts and ideas that may be holding us captive to a particular ideologies.
As we, within ourselves, begin to reconstruct our thoughts, we need to consider science (the state of knowing). McKenna writes “Science can be demolished in thirty seconds.” This may be true however; I believe that science and experience are both necessary elements to transform ourselves. McKenna further describes that no transformation of society can be done without psychedelics – Really?
Bad Boys – Bad Boys
I really enjoyed the Law Enforcement article! Because of the infiltration of man-made drugs into our society I think it has forced the hand of lawmakers and drug officials. I am not saying that is right or wrong, I am on the fence. Sterling reverences that our religious tolerance is often limited - I agree. That is true of all religions. We can’t have society member sacrificing people in mall parking lots but, faiths should have the freedom to practice even if that involves entheogens. However, the no one would agree where to draw the line. People would, as some do now, use religion to contrive some twisted form of worship in order to have experience an altered state.
Yikes that’s hot!
Both articles and the Pearce reading discuss the voyage of discovery. Pearce said that “every scientific statement must remain tentative forever.” I agree, but we need a starting point in order to continue on our voyage of discovery.
I loved the story about the discovery of the planet Neptune and Bodes’s Law of 1772 – how cool is that?
I think it is a positive step that we are looking for cracks in “truths” only then will we grow and learn the meaningful patterns in reality.
The concept of fire walking a fascinating! Why are some individuals unharmed and others brought to the cusp of death and others cruise through the fire unscathed? Much like Pearce, I must believe in fire walking because I cannot reason it out. . .
Further on in the article he talks about the “ontological conceptions of reality and the notion that they have to be remade.” My question is “Who decides?” Society can agree on very few things, how could we decide on a new order of reality? As I continued to read, McKenna’s statement became clearer the idea that we should take responsibility of ourselves and actions seemed to be the underlying message. . Each one of us needs to let go of the thoughts and ideas that may be holding us captive to a particular ideologies.
As we, within ourselves, begin to reconstruct our thoughts, we need to consider science (the state of knowing). McKenna writes “Science can be demolished in thirty seconds.” This may be true however; I believe that science and experience are both necessary elements to transform ourselves. McKenna further describes that no transformation of society can be done without psychedelics – Really?
Bad Boys – Bad Boys
I really enjoyed the Law Enforcement article! Because of the infiltration of man-made drugs into our society I think it has forced the hand of lawmakers and drug officials. I am not saying that is right or wrong, I am on the fence. Sterling reverences that our religious tolerance is often limited - I agree. That is true of all religions. We can’t have society member sacrificing people in mall parking lots but, faiths should have the freedom to practice even if that involves entheogens. However, the no one would agree where to draw the line. People would, as some do now, use religion to contrive some twisted form of worship in order to have experience an altered state.
Yikes that’s hot!
Both articles and the Pearce reading discuss the voyage of discovery. Pearce said that “every scientific statement must remain tentative forever.” I agree, but we need a starting point in order to continue on our voyage of discovery.
I loved the story about the discovery of the planet Neptune and Bodes’s Law of 1772 – how cool is that?
I think it is a positive step that we are looking for cracks in “truths” only then will we grow and learn the meaningful patterns in reality.
The concept of fire walking a fascinating! Why are some individuals unharmed and others brought to the cusp of death and others cruise through the fire unscathed? Much like Pearce, I must believe in fire walking because I cannot reason it out. . .
Week 8
Psychedelic Society
Notions like those expressed by Terence McKenna exemplify wishful thinking, and involve concepts that only have their place in the hypothetical. While the end of McKenna's ideal is noteworthy, his means for accomplishing it are not. He states quite conclusively that "No reconstruction of society can be done without psychedelics because we have drifted so long without them (McKenna 63)." I don't think the premise of his argument warrants such an extreme conclusion. Also, his remarks that "Whether you buy into my own peculiar, apocalyptarian transformative vision involving 2012, or whether you can just tell by looking around you that shit may soon hit the fan...(McKenna 62)", really gave me pause. If McKenna seriously subscribes to the belief that either the world will end in 2012 or a large scale spiritual revivalism must take place, then I wish to detract the slightly complimentary words I used earlier.
Entheogens and Law Enforcement
Sterling's claim that American laws prohibiting the possession or use of psychedelic drugs is religious persecution is preposterous. Furthermore, his assertion that the nature of the oppressive legislation (and its enforcement thereof) against entheogens in contemporary America parallels that of the Spanish Inquisition or is comparable to the persecution of Pilgrims in the 17 Century is outright laughable.
In Employment Division v. Smith two gentlemen, one Native American and one white man, were randomly drug tested at their work ( a drug rehabilitation clinic) and subsequently fired for the trace amount of drugs in their system. The two men, who acknowledged that the ingestion of psychedelic drugs was illegal in the state of Oregon, proceeded to file for unemployment compensation. However, more relevantly, Sterling seems to omit that Oregon's Appellate and Supreme Court ruled in Smith's favor, acknowledging the Free Exercise Clause infringement, until the Supreme Court finally overturned their ruling. Also, the state of Oregon did not file criminal charges against these gentlemen during or after the ruling. Moreover, a recent case, Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal 546 U.S. 418 (2006), upheld the religious right of a branch of a Brazilian church to ingest Hoasca, a psychedelic tea, falling back on their prior "compelling interest" criteria established in Sherbert v. Verner in 1963. It is interesting to note that the hallucinogenic properties in Hoasca, the sacramental tea used in the UDV religious practices, happens to be listed under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. In this case, however, the State failed to establish a "compelling interest" in disallowing the substance from being used for religious purposes, therefore, the UDV were granted the right to take Hoasca.
Notions like those expressed by Terence McKenna exemplify wishful thinking, and involve concepts that only have their place in the hypothetical. While the end of McKenna's ideal is noteworthy, his means for accomplishing it are not. He states quite conclusively that "No reconstruction of society can be done without psychedelics because we have drifted so long without them (McKenna 63)." I don't think the premise of his argument warrants such an extreme conclusion. Also, his remarks that "Whether you buy into my own peculiar, apocalyptarian transformative vision involving 2012, or whether you can just tell by looking around you that shit may soon hit the fan...(McKenna 62)", really gave me pause. If McKenna seriously subscribes to the belief that either the world will end in 2012 or a large scale spiritual revivalism must take place, then I wish to detract the slightly complimentary words I used earlier.
Entheogens and Law Enforcement
Sterling's claim that American laws prohibiting the possession or use of psychedelic drugs is religious persecution is preposterous. Furthermore, his assertion that the nature of the oppressive legislation (and its enforcement thereof) against entheogens in contemporary America parallels that of the Spanish Inquisition or is comparable to the persecution of Pilgrims in the 17 Century is outright laughable.
In Employment Division v. Smith two gentlemen, one Native American and one white man, were randomly drug tested at their work ( a drug rehabilitation clinic) and subsequently fired for the trace amount of drugs in their system. The two men, who acknowledged that the ingestion of psychedelic drugs was illegal in the state of Oregon, proceeded to file for unemployment compensation. However, more relevantly, Sterling seems to omit that Oregon's Appellate and Supreme Court ruled in Smith's favor, acknowledging the Free Exercise Clause infringement, until the Supreme Court finally overturned their ruling. Also, the state of Oregon did not file criminal charges against these gentlemen during or after the ruling. Moreover, a recent case, Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal 546 U.S. 418 (2006), upheld the religious right of a branch of a Brazilian church to ingest Hoasca, a psychedelic tea, falling back on their prior "compelling interest" criteria established in Sherbert v. Verner in 1963. It is interesting to note that the hallucinogenic properties in Hoasca, the sacramental tea used in the UDV religious practices, happens to be listed under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. In this case, however, the State failed to establish a "compelling interest" in disallowing the substance from being used for religious purposes, therefore, the UDV were granted the right to take Hoasca.
Electronic Reserve; Pearce Chapters 5 and 6
Psychedelic Society
I thought it was interesting that the author mentioned that it was pointless to have beliefs. I guess I am blinded because I like having a belief system, rather than a direct experience. I don't think there is anything wrong with our society or our scientific approaches. McKenna wrote, "Our ability to destroy ourselves is the mirror image of our ability to save ourselves." I think that is a little risky, especially because I think everything is perfectly fine the way it is. Yes humans do act somewhat like machines, but why is that bad? Each person is unique and views the world differently, but isn't that individual uniqueness similar to a personal direct psychedelic experience? Everyone has his or her own experience and reality, and the ideas are always changing from person to person. What is the point of pschedelics?
Law Enforcement
I do not think that drugs, such as entheogens, that are used for religious purposes should be illegal. In fact, I don't think any drugs should be made illegal, unless they are extremely harmful to a person. I think when drugs are made illegal, then people are more curious, and thrive on doing them. This article seems to show that not all drugs are harmful. I don't think society should make everything illegal, for the simple fact that they are trying to protect everyone.
Pearce Chapter 5
It is interesting that this chapter says that a man's mind is a mirror of the universe. I guess it shows that each person sees themselves and the universe differently. A lot of people are wrong, but they don't want to admit that they are wrong. Science is the explanation of the universe, but often the theories are wrong. For example, people once believed that the earth was flat. Now we believe it is round. Will it be square some day? I feel humans are a long way away from having definite truths and laws about the whole universe. Also, David Bohm believes, "...that all things are interconnected and influenced by contingencies with all other things, traceable to so remote an interrelation that they may be considered chance for all practical purposes." I'm not sure I completely understand this quote, but I do believe that everything is interconnected. I feel like understanding the universe is like trying to put together a puzzle, with an infinite number of pieces.
Pearce Chapter 6
Well this is crazy. I don't understand how a woman could carry a red-hot pot on her head and not show any signs of scorching. I can't believe the whole story of Mohotty. I mean it just seems impossible, to me. He had total faith in his gods? I never had a religious experience, but I still don't understand how it could be that powerful. This Mohotty does not sound human. No drink or drugs??? I believe in mind over body, but only to a certain extent. I don't even know what else to say. This whole idea is mind boggling to me.
I thought it was interesting that the author mentioned that it was pointless to have beliefs. I guess I am blinded because I like having a belief system, rather than a direct experience. I don't think there is anything wrong with our society or our scientific approaches. McKenna wrote, "Our ability to destroy ourselves is the mirror image of our ability to save ourselves." I think that is a little risky, especially because I think everything is perfectly fine the way it is. Yes humans do act somewhat like machines, but why is that bad? Each person is unique and views the world differently, but isn't that individual uniqueness similar to a personal direct psychedelic experience? Everyone has his or her own experience and reality, and the ideas are always changing from person to person. What is the point of pschedelics?
Law Enforcement
I do not think that drugs, such as entheogens, that are used for religious purposes should be illegal. In fact, I don't think any drugs should be made illegal, unless they are extremely harmful to a person. I think when drugs are made illegal, then people are more curious, and thrive on doing them. This article seems to show that not all drugs are harmful. I don't think society should make everything illegal, for the simple fact that they are trying to protect everyone.
Pearce Chapter 5
It is interesting that this chapter says that a man's mind is a mirror of the universe. I guess it shows that each person sees themselves and the universe differently. A lot of people are wrong, but they don't want to admit that they are wrong. Science is the explanation of the universe, but often the theories are wrong. For example, people once believed that the earth was flat. Now we believe it is round. Will it be square some day? I feel humans are a long way away from having definite truths and laws about the whole universe. Also, David Bohm believes, "...that all things are interconnected and influenced by contingencies with all other things, traceable to so remote an interrelation that they may be considered chance for all practical purposes." I'm not sure I completely understand this quote, but I do believe that everything is interconnected. I feel like understanding the universe is like trying to put together a puzzle, with an infinite number of pieces.
Pearce Chapter 6
Well this is crazy. I don't understand how a woman could carry a red-hot pot on her head and not show any signs of scorching. I can't believe the whole story of Mohotty. I mean it just seems impossible, to me. He had total faith in his gods? I never had a religious experience, but I still don't understand how it could be that powerful. This Mohotty does not sound human. No drink or drugs??? I believe in mind over body, but only to a certain extent. I don't even know what else to say. This whole idea is mind boggling to me.
Try as I might, I can't really link all of this together. In reading "Psychedelic Society", McKenna states that we can't have a society go this long without psychedelics, that they are necessary to having meaning and direction. He tells us that we need to embrace direct experience, which is what a psychedelic would do. Well, I can kind of see his point in that, but do we really need psychedelics to experience the world? I don't know. How do I know that the world experienced while on a psychedelic is the "real thing"? It might just be a different thing, not more or less real, or more or less right. I have to question an article from a guy who (I'm guessing, based on his allusion) believes there will be an apocalyptic event in 2012. I can't remember the details of that cult, but I do remember thinking that they were a whacked out bunch.
In "Law Enforcement Against Entheogens", I can, for the most part, see Sterling's point. If a nature is producing something, and a group of people is using it basically as-is for religious purposes only, it seems as though making it legal ought not to be an issue. Making it illegal only entices people to want to use it. If it were legal, and used only in the intended setting, we (not 'we' as a whole, but 'we' as in our class) probably wouldn't even know about it. At the beginning of the article, though, he lumped LSD in with the peyote and the mushrooms. LSD is not a naturally occuring substance in nature, so I don't think it should be considered in this light. Again, though, I am not one who thinks that we need drugs, natural or synthesized, to have religion, but that's mostly because the religion to which I subscribe doesn't require that of me.
Pearce's chapters were chock-full of stuff. Lots of it went over my head, hit the wall, and slid down into a pile. I'm going through said pile, looking for meaning. He starts off by referencing Eddington, saying, "He felt that man's mind must be made a 'mirror of the universe'." (p.81) He talks a lot about how everything that there is to be known already exists, but we have to go about finding it. Pearce says, "...recognize that man's mind is a mirror of a universe that mirror's man's mind." (p. 82) That seems like it ought to be a really great point, but I struggle with truly grasping it. Is it that we observe the universe around us, but we shape that view of the universe simply by our observation and our thoughts about it? I do like how he talks about science actually being born out of religion, and the thinking that God is rational so we can rationalize everything in His creation. How funny, considering the fact that science and religion have been at odds for centuries, and it will get worse before it gets better.
Pearce talks about how things are only true because people believe them to be true. He talks about how egotistical and arrogant scientists can be regarding their theories, but they have to be that way, or no one would ever believe them. They need belief in their theories in order for their theories to really exist. He also talks about Max Planck, who wrote that when an experiment produced results that were contradictory to what the experimenter theorized, it wasn't a bad thing. Rather, it allowed the experimenter to fine-tune his theory. (p.96) He went on to discuss how we thought that quasars didn't exist, but then we found those. Then we thought that the energy from it was unsurpassed. Then, pulsars were discovered.
Pearce then talked about fire-walking, and how the people who practiced this did it. He spoke of their entry into what seemed like an altered state, and how they came through unharmed. He later referenced an Indian Fakir (p.106) who told a professor that all he had to do was hold his (the Fakir's) hand and he could cross the coals. They cited other examples where all it took was the belief that something COULD be done, for it TO be done. I wonder if I can believe that my blog WILL get written, and somehow that will make it so???? =)
In "Law Enforcement Against Entheogens", I can, for the most part, see Sterling's point. If a nature is producing something, and a group of people is using it basically as-is for religious purposes only, it seems as though making it legal ought not to be an issue. Making it illegal only entices people to want to use it. If it were legal, and used only in the intended setting, we (not 'we' as a whole, but 'we' as in our class) probably wouldn't even know about it. At the beginning of the article, though, he lumped LSD in with the peyote and the mushrooms. LSD is not a naturally occuring substance in nature, so I don't think it should be considered in this light. Again, though, I am not one who thinks that we need drugs, natural or synthesized, to have religion, but that's mostly because the religion to which I subscribe doesn't require that of me.
Pearce's chapters were chock-full of stuff. Lots of it went over my head, hit the wall, and slid down into a pile. I'm going through said pile, looking for meaning. He starts off by referencing Eddington, saying, "He felt that man's mind must be made a 'mirror of the universe'." (p.81) He talks a lot about how everything that there is to be known already exists, but we have to go about finding it. Pearce says, "...recognize that man's mind is a mirror of a universe that mirror's man's mind." (p. 82) That seems like it ought to be a really great point, but I struggle with truly grasping it. Is it that we observe the universe around us, but we shape that view of the universe simply by our observation and our thoughts about it? I do like how he talks about science actually being born out of religion, and the thinking that God is rational so we can rationalize everything in His creation. How funny, considering the fact that science and religion have been at odds for centuries, and it will get worse before it gets better.
Pearce talks about how things are only true because people believe them to be true. He talks about how egotistical and arrogant scientists can be regarding their theories, but they have to be that way, or no one would ever believe them. They need belief in their theories in order for their theories to really exist. He also talks about Max Planck, who wrote that when an experiment produced results that were contradictory to what the experimenter theorized, it wasn't a bad thing. Rather, it allowed the experimenter to fine-tune his theory. (p.96) He went on to discuss how we thought that quasars didn't exist, but then we found those. Then we thought that the energy from it was unsurpassed. Then, pulsars were discovered.
Pearce then talked about fire-walking, and how the people who practiced this did it. He spoke of their entry into what seemed like an altered state, and how they came through unharmed. He later referenced an Indian Fakir (p.106) who told a professor that all he had to do was hold his (the Fakir's) hand and he could cross the coals. They cited other examples where all it took was the belief that something COULD be done, for it TO be done. I wonder if I can believe that my blog WILL get written, and somehow that will make it so???? =)
4D minds, spiritual energies, and fire-walking...
Psychedelic Society - McKenna offers a 'to-the-point' description of what exactly he deems such a society to be: those which abandon their beliefs in order to allow the direct experience to guide and influence them. This makes sense - by discrediting everything, there cannot be any bias. Your belief can be renewed in what what this new perception grants. His suggestion of the mind being a fourth dimensional organ was interesting. Certainly we know we all have minds, but they are not something tangible. Because of this we might never fully know what its capabilities are or aren't. There are times during conscious or altered states where we are 'tuned in' and can appreciate the capacity of thoughts that emerge. I believe McKenna is trying to illustrate the importance of this tuning in and using our minds to their fullest extent without the 'extra baggage' that usually gets absorbed. He states, "half the time you think you are thinking you are actually listening; that ideas are remarkably slippery creatures that are very difficult to trace to their origin". (If I only had a dollar every time I lost my train of thought!) I thought his comments on language really touched what our class discussion revolved around last week; "We all create our own universe because we are all operating with our own private languages which are only very crudely translatable into any other person's language. How many times, just within this class in group discussions, have we found ourselves stuck trying to explain our thoughts - we know what we want to mean and are thinking, but have a difficult time construing it. If we are able to spit it out, sometimes it can be mistaken or interpreted quite differently than intended. Lastly for this read, McKenna states, "We can claim this higher level of freedom by the simple act of paying attention to being". If you would now ask me what the theme of Huxley's Doors is I'd repeat this quote.
Sterling's essay was interesting regarding the battle between religious practices and drug enforcement policies. I think that this controversy will continue to manifest itself - even though we are a country offering freedom, that freedom is certainly controlled. Worship who or what you want, just do it according to what the government dictates is safe and practical. In a humorous twist on this persecution of Native Americans' worship, Sterling suggests we acknowledge and learn from their teachings and practices as significant and historical much like we do to their Thanksgiving Day contributions. To segue this reading into Pearce's, Pearce makes the statement, "Laws there will be, and only the breaking of them will be through that crack-forming procedure". Peyote IS this culture's 'crack-forming procedure'.
Pearce's comment on how we perceive things reminded me yet again of Huxley. Pearce explains, "what a thing is is to an unknowable extent determined by or influenced by what we think it is". Much like Huxley's comment on our perceptions driven by "who influenced whom to say what when?". Are these biased perceptions what is being reflected on our mirrored minds? This ties in with Polanyi's metanoia; we are all, perhaps, given abilities to construct ideas and thoughts in unlimited ways, but because of interaction and networking with others' ideas and their thought processes, are own personal thought processes are hindered. It's almost as if when presented with a new idea by someone else, we are unknowingly adorned with blinders that confine our ability to perceive that same thought in a new way. (This makes more sense in my head than what it does typed out onto this keyboard, so my apologies if this makes no sense!) As for the fire-walking and hook-hanging, it was interesting to learn that once it was found that people who participated in such events could not only survive these but sometimes come away unharmed there was a new acceptance and notion of 'reality-potential' and such practices continued and grew. I can't help to think (in my westernized mind that is full of bias, blinders, and skepticism) that such dangerous practices that could potentially result in severe injury or death would receive such receptive audience participation simply because there were a few incidences that left the participants unscathed....what about the several others who WERE injured, disfigured or died?
Sterling's essay was interesting regarding the battle between religious practices and drug enforcement policies. I think that this controversy will continue to manifest itself - even though we are a country offering freedom, that freedom is certainly controlled. Worship who or what you want, just do it according to what the government dictates is safe and practical. In a humorous twist on this persecution of Native Americans' worship, Sterling suggests we acknowledge and learn from their teachings and practices as significant and historical much like we do to their Thanksgiving Day contributions. To segue this reading into Pearce's, Pearce makes the statement, "Laws there will be, and only the breaking of them will be through that crack-forming procedure". Peyote IS this culture's 'crack-forming procedure'.
Pearce's comment on how we perceive things reminded me yet again of Huxley. Pearce explains, "what a thing is is to an unknowable extent determined by or influenced by what we think it is". Much like Huxley's comment on our perceptions driven by "who influenced whom to say what when?". Are these biased perceptions what is being reflected on our mirrored minds? This ties in with Polanyi's metanoia; we are all, perhaps, given abilities to construct ideas and thoughts in unlimited ways, but because of interaction and networking with others' ideas and their thought processes, are own personal thought processes are hindered. It's almost as if when presented with a new idea by someone else, we are unknowingly adorned with blinders that confine our ability to perceive that same thought in a new way. (This makes more sense in my head than what it does typed out onto this keyboard, so my apologies if this makes no sense!) As for the fire-walking and hook-hanging, it was interesting to learn that once it was found that people who participated in such events could not only survive these but sometimes come away unharmed there was a new acceptance and notion of 'reality-potential' and such practices continued and grew. I can't help to think (in my westernized mind that is full of bias, blinders, and skepticism) that such dangerous practices that could potentially result in severe injury or death would receive such receptive audience participation simply because there were a few incidences that left the participants unscathed....what about the several others who WERE injured, disfigured or died?
Law Enforcement, Psyc. Societies
Law Enforcement Against Entheogens
This is a tough one, because I understand what the author is saying, that there are certain ways to change our bodies chemistry to allow for a devine expierence that involve crugs. It is crappy that the drugs used souly for religious purposes were outlawed along with the drugs that people used for fixes and are addictive. At the same time, though, they do have to make all mind altering drugs illegal because anyone could use the excuse that it is for religion(even when they are just doing it to get high.) Drugs have a lot of bad affects on our society.. "Having seen the guns of crack dealers, the skid rows where the junkies shuffle, the hospitals where inconsolable babies cry..." Unfortunately, the religious leaders who were using peyote as a means in thier ceremonies, have to be affected, because it is a mind altering drug. I am sure that everyone who uses peyote is not doing it for religious purposes...and then how do you define a religious purpose? I am sure someone desperate enough could make somthing up.
Psycodelic Societies
The statement, "When you believe something, you automatically preclude yourself from believing its opposite; which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeitedin in the act of committing yourself to this belief." This is pretty good..it has a huge point. Also..I agree that no reconstruction of scoeity can be done with the use of psycadelics because we have gone so long witout them. My generation has been raised(for the most part) to believe that 'drugs are bad' there is no gray area.
This is a tough one, because I understand what the author is saying, that there are certain ways to change our bodies chemistry to allow for a devine expierence that involve crugs. It is crappy that the drugs used souly for religious purposes were outlawed along with the drugs that people used for fixes and are addictive. At the same time, though, they do have to make all mind altering drugs illegal because anyone could use the excuse that it is for religion(even when they are just doing it to get high.) Drugs have a lot of bad affects on our society.. "Having seen the guns of crack dealers, the skid rows where the junkies shuffle, the hospitals where inconsolable babies cry..." Unfortunately, the religious leaders who were using peyote as a means in thier ceremonies, have to be affected, because it is a mind altering drug. I am sure that everyone who uses peyote is not doing it for religious purposes...and then how do you define a religious purpose? I am sure someone desperate enough could make somthing up.
Psycodelic Societies
The statement, "When you believe something, you automatically preclude yourself from believing its opposite; which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeitedin in the act of committing yourself to this belief." This is pretty good..it has a huge point. Also..I agree that no reconstruction of scoeity can be done with the use of psycadelics because we have gone so long witout them. My generation has been raised(for the most part) to believe that 'drugs are bad' there is no gray area.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Huxley
Huxley: The Doors of Perception
What a hek of a read. It took me a week to try to finish this book and do this blog. I didn't particularly like it because it was too hard to follow. I don't understand this drug. Where was this author heading with this drug mescalin and what is so special about it. To me he was just blabbing on about nothing substiantial. Probably the worst reading yet. He completely lost me.What does he mean by such quote that "each person is capable of remembering all that has happened to him and of percieving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe"?
What a hek of a read. It took me a week to try to finish this book and do this blog. I didn't particularly like it because it was too hard to follow. I don't understand this drug. Where was this author heading with this drug mescalin and what is so special about it. To me he was just blabbing on about nothing substiantial. Probably the worst reading yet. He completely lost me.What does he mean by such quote that "each person is capable of remembering all that has happened to him and of percieving everything that is happening everywhere in the universe"?
Psychedelic Society/ Law Enforcement
Psychedelic
I would have to agree with McKenna when he states, " Our ability to destroy ourselves is the mirror image of our ability to save ourselves." Because, the shamans as he describes use psychedelic drugs to help them guide themselves to the truth, and finding the truth sometime comes with harming yourself (by doing drugs) to find the state of mind you seek. I think that the "new language" he describes is the truth one will find in a psychedelic stage. I must agree with this statement, " The salvation of your immortal soul may depend on what you do with the opportunity life places before you." I believe this because you have the right to salvation through God, you have the choice to live by God and be rewarded in Heaven or go against God, and remain in hell. I believe we create our own universe because each one of use is unique in our own ways and has the power to do what we want.
Law Enforcement
I think this passage has great inspiration for the Native American Indian/ Church. They discussed that Peyote was being used in an un mannorly way to help people find the peace and security that they seeked through their religion. I think that if your religion has you worshiping through these psychedelic drugs then by all means you must use them but do not abuse them to the extent of death. I am not permitting the useage of drugs but each culture is its own culture. I do believe that if you are not of these groups and just join them to be able to use the drugs because their religion its allowed to is un called for.
I would have to agree with McKenna when he states, " Our ability to destroy ourselves is the mirror image of our ability to save ourselves." Because, the shamans as he describes use psychedelic drugs to help them guide themselves to the truth, and finding the truth sometime comes with harming yourself (by doing drugs) to find the state of mind you seek. I think that the "new language" he describes is the truth one will find in a psychedelic stage. I must agree with this statement, " The salvation of your immortal soul may depend on what you do with the opportunity life places before you." I believe this because you have the right to salvation through God, you have the choice to live by God and be rewarded in Heaven or go against God, and remain in hell. I believe we create our own universe because each one of use is unique in our own ways and has the power to do what we want.
Law Enforcement
I think this passage has great inspiration for the Native American Indian/ Church. They discussed that Peyote was being used in an un mannorly way to help people find the peace and security that they seeked through their religion. I think that if your religion has you worshiping through these psychedelic drugs then by all means you must use them but do not abuse them to the extent of death. I am not permitting the useage of drugs but each culture is its own culture. I do believe that if you are not of these groups and just join them to be able to use the drugs because their religion its allowed to is un called for.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
The Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell
Yikes...
I had been under the impression that this book would document the experiences of an intelligent mind under the effects of mescalin. Instead it seemed to spiral into an abstract breakdown of reality in which points of view and experiences were supported with notions of "is-ness", something referred to as a "not-I", the "Mind at Large" and "the All in every This". The further I read, the farther away from understanding I ended up. In truth, I was barely able to finish the reading because I was not able to relate to what Huxley was trying to say. I understood certain aspects of the writing, such as the drugs effect on the perceptions of color, space and time, but overall, the idea that the "effects of a cerebral sugar shortage" (page 28) exposed a new universe of understanding...of BEING, was lost on me (personally).
I had been under the impression that this book would document the experiences of an intelligent mind under the effects of mescalin. Instead it seemed to spiral into an abstract breakdown of reality in which points of view and experiences were supported with notions of "is-ness", something referred to as a "not-I", the "Mind at Large" and "the All in every This". The further I read, the farther away from understanding I ended up. In truth, I was barely able to finish the reading because I was not able to relate to what Huxley was trying to say. I understood certain aspects of the writing, such as the drugs effect on the perceptions of color, space and time, but overall, the idea that the "effects of a cerebral sugar shortage" (page 28) exposed a new universe of understanding...of BEING, was lost on me (personally).
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Hughes and Walsh
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Hughes and Walsh
This whole chapter along with Walsh had me thinking. These Shamans supposedly were one with themself and had underlying powers. I dont believe in this kind of stuff because i also dont believe in powers or other out of body experiences. In the chapter from Hughes, it said that the Shamans could dream while they are in a conscious state. How is that possible? Now i have heard of day dreaming but to be completely out of it while still being concscious is a little far fetched for me to even consider about! They also talk about the fact that the Shamans will port out to another "world". That sounds like some nonsense to me. Now i have heard of going into shock but not just going into a new state of consciousness.
Walsh's chapters also had me thinking. He comes up with alot of myths about shamanism that maybe with time i could believe in. I am very optimistic and open to experiencing new things and this would defiently be one of those instances. I feel that after i learn more and more about the subject, i will be able to believe in it a little more than i do now. Good reading though! : )
Posted by Kapone at 8:17 AM
Hughes and Walsh
This whole chapter along with Walsh had me thinking. These Shamans supposedly were one with themself and had underlying powers. I dont believe in this kind of stuff because i also dont believe in powers or other out of body experiences. In the chapter from Hughes, it said that the Shamans could dream while they are in a conscious state. How is that possible? Now i have heard of day dreaming but to be completely out of it while still being concscious is a little far fetched for me to even consider about! They also talk about the fact that the Shamans will port out to another "world". That sounds like some nonsense to me. Now i have heard of going into shock but not just going into a new state of consciousness.
Walsh's chapters also had me thinking. He comes up with alot of myths about shamanism that maybe with time i could believe in. I am very optimistic and open to experiencing new things and this would defiently be one of those instances. I feel that after i learn more and more about the subject, i will be able to believe in it a little more than i do now. Good reading though! : )
Posted by Kapone at 8:17 AM
Cosmic Egg
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Cosmic Egg
Reality? What is it viewed as in today's society. It is a funny thing. This was a very interesting reading. It had me thinking for a little bit. At first i was confused due to the weird nature of the title but then things began to get more clear. Pearce offered good explanation on the lack of thinking people actually do. We tend to only think about things that are relatively important. We tend to lose sight on things that will go down in the future. I can't even lie. I do that all the time! I tell myself that i will keep in mind all things i have to do but for the most part, i just worry about the things most important to me determined by date. On the other hand, it is good to just prioritize what you think about. A person can only handle thinking about so much at one time. I know it would be even harder for children due to the fact that they already have a whole lot to think about.
Personally, I think that this book might be really interesting. I like how he said that autistic individuals are not the ones missing things, it is the normal people. I agree with him. I worked with autistic children over the summer and they most defiantly are creative. They have ways to think and do things that normal people would not regularly do. All you have to do is give them time.
Cosmic Egg
Reality? What is it viewed as in today's society. It is a funny thing. This was a very interesting reading. It had me thinking for a little bit. At first i was confused due to the weird nature of the title but then things began to get more clear. Pearce offered good explanation on the lack of thinking people actually do. We tend to only think about things that are relatively important. We tend to lose sight on things that will go down in the future. I can't even lie. I do that all the time! I tell myself that i will keep in mind all things i have to do but for the most part, i just worry about the things most important to me determined by date. On the other hand, it is good to just prioritize what you think about. A person can only handle thinking about so much at one time. I know it would be even harder for children due to the fact that they already have a whole lot to think about.
Personally, I think that this book might be really interesting. I like how he said that autistic individuals are not the ones missing things, it is the normal people. I agree with him. I worked with autistic children over the summer and they most defiantly are creative. They have ways to think and do things that normal people would not regularly do. All you have to do is give them time.
Weird movie with a whole lot of reading!
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Weird movie with a whole lot of reading!
Hughes 4:
Yet again.........another long and interesting read. They brought up alot of interesting thoughts about dreams and how the brain constructs them. The brain has a whole lot of CREATIVITY. (Had to put in caps since it has been so stressed.) The brain has people thinking about a whole lot of interesting things and/or ideas. Near death experiences do bring back memories. I say this because in 2006, i was shot at in one of the neighborhoods. It was like i blacked out to another world. When i came back to sense, i was in an alley. I had ran 3 blocks without even realizing it. This just shows what near death experiences can offer. I look forward to reading more of this work.
Pearce 4:
Blake began to say that all people can not properly utilize their mind and i agree with him 110% on that. I feel that some people do not allow themself to do so. Some people are so straight edge or precise, that they do not allow themselves to think out of the ordinary. I on the other hand love to think out of the box. I dont like to be like others. I do on the other hand like like-minded people and people who think like me. Something i didnt agree with was the hypnotizing. Im not buying it for a second. I find it hard to believe that one person can control someone else through hypnosis. I think it would have to be done on me before i could believe something as far fetched as that.
Movie:
Man o man did that movie have me thinking. I kept trying to figure out why people would take something that would immediately make them sick. I know that you have to do whats cultural but there has got to be a line drawn. That movie was wild. The people had interesting lifestyles to say the least. The Shaman culture sure is special.
Weird movie with a whole lot of reading!
Hughes 4:
Yet again.........another long and interesting read. They brought up alot of interesting thoughts about dreams and how the brain constructs them. The brain has a whole lot of CREATIVITY. (Had to put in caps since it has been so stressed.) The brain has people thinking about a whole lot of interesting things and/or ideas. Near death experiences do bring back memories. I say this because in 2006, i was shot at in one of the neighborhoods. It was like i blacked out to another world. When i came back to sense, i was in an alley. I had ran 3 blocks without even realizing it. This just shows what near death experiences can offer. I look forward to reading more of this work.
Pearce 4:
Blake began to say that all people can not properly utilize their mind and i agree with him 110% on that. I feel that some people do not allow themself to do so. Some people are so straight edge or precise, that they do not allow themselves to think out of the ordinary. I on the other hand love to think out of the box. I dont like to be like others. I do on the other hand like like-minded people and people who think like me. Something i didnt agree with was the hypnotizing. Im not buying it for a second. I find it hard to believe that one person can control someone else through hypnosis. I think it would have to be done on me before i could believe something as far fetched as that.
Movie:
Man o man did that movie have me thinking. I kept trying to figure out why people would take something that would immediately make them sick. I know that you have to do whats cultural but there has got to be a line drawn. That movie was wild. The people had interesting lifestyles to say the least. The Shaman culture sure is special.
Mr. Aldous Huxley
Huxley's essays were full of valuable insights. In fact, there were several parts of the Doors of Perception that I found fairly fascinating. Huxley the "sleuth", disclosed his own personal experiences with inebriation. In the beginning of Doors of Perception, Huxley mentions his decision to swallow four-tenths of a gram of mescaline dissolved in a glass of water. It was in this part of the essay, that Huxley made note of the problem with our experiences. He writes, "Sensations, feelings, insights, fancies— all these are private and except through symbols and at a second hand, incommunicable. We can pool information about experiences, but never the experiences themselves." Yes.
Talking about experiences... In the last class, a female student said that she and her father came to the conclusion that life is about experiences. I believe this.
I remember years ago thinking about the purpose of life. Sure, life might have NO PURPOSE at all, BUT I find this hard to believe.
I believe life is to be lived to experience. To experience is so much different from a lot of other beliefs. Even if a moment is bad, disastrous, it is another experience to be absorbed.
In the next sentence, Huxley writes, "From family to nation, every human group of society is a society of island universes." This is a powerful statement. It makes a lot of sense. At times I think I about my friends. We are so much different from most people. As the years have passed, we seem to have become one person... a lot like a family unit. My family isn't much different.
I know this was just a small part of a larger idea, but it's just some things I have been thinking about recently.
Later in the essay, Huxley writes about the condition of the human being. He says that the mind and nervous system literally filter out anything that is not useful for survival. I raised this point a couple of blogs ago. I first read of this philosophy in a Kabbalist text. Huxley writes, "To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funneled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us stay alive on the surface of this particular planet."
In Heaven and Hell, Huxley writes that not just spiritual, but religious insight can be gained through drugs. Surely this section will offend some, but after doing my own research for the Analysis Paper I can see where he is coming from. One of the topics that I proposed in my analysis paper was the story of the Moses on Mount Sinai. There is lots of compelling evidence to suggest that Moses was a shaman, disseminating messages from the divine with the aid of mushrooms. Really at this point, anything is possible.
Talking about experiences... In the last class, a female student said that she and her father came to the conclusion that life is about experiences. I believe this.
I remember years ago thinking about the purpose of life. Sure, life might have NO PURPOSE at all, BUT I find this hard to believe.
I believe life is to be lived to experience. To experience is so much different from a lot of other beliefs. Even if a moment is bad, disastrous, it is another experience to be absorbed.
In the next sentence, Huxley writes, "From family to nation, every human group of society is a society of island universes." This is a powerful statement. It makes a lot of sense. At times I think I about my friends. We are so much different from most people. As the years have passed, we seem to have become one person... a lot like a family unit. My family isn't much different.
I know this was just a small part of a larger idea, but it's just some things I have been thinking about recently.
Later in the essay, Huxley writes about the condition of the human being. He says that the mind and nervous system literally filter out anything that is not useful for survival. I raised this point a couple of blogs ago. I first read of this philosophy in a Kabbalist text. Huxley writes, "To make biological survival possible, Mind at Large has to be funneled through the reducing valve of the brain and nervous system. What comes out at the other end is a measly trickle of the kind of consciousness which will help us stay alive on the surface of this particular planet."
In Heaven and Hell, Huxley writes that not just spiritual, but religious insight can be gained through drugs. Surely this section will offend some, but after doing my own research for the Analysis Paper I can see where he is coming from. One of the topics that I proposed in my analysis paper was the story of the Moses on Mount Sinai. There is lots of compelling evidence to suggest that Moses was a shaman, disseminating messages from the divine with the aid of mushrooms. Really at this point, anything is possible.
Hughes, walsh, and santa
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Hughes, walsh, and santa
Hughes:
Interesting to say the least. I refuse to sit here and admit to taking drugs but lets just say it enables you to think outside the box. Some of the greatest writers and artists have been linked to many different drugs including Edgar Allen Poe. Now don't get me wrong, i know enough creative people who do not look towards drugs for creativity. I feel that the people who do use drugs just use them for their own sake. Im sure Poe didn't need the opium for his creativity. He just probaly used them for his own recreational purposes. Someone can not look at him as a bad person just because his drug use. Nothing negative came from it so everything should be ok.
Walsh:
I found this a little far fetched but then again i do agree. Once again, i do believe in the altered states. Like i have said in previous weeks, i believe there is another atate of consciousness. I believe that it is ypur choice if you want to visit this place or not. You have to be up for change and something different.
Fat man in the red suit:
This was an intresting read. Im confused on how santa clause was compared to the little mushroom. I felt that this was really odd. I didnt like this reading because it was not interesting to me. The author needs to sit down and evaluate himself. He needs to ask himself........"What am i talking about?
Hughes, walsh, and santa
Hughes:
Interesting to say the least. I refuse to sit here and admit to taking drugs but lets just say it enables you to think outside the box. Some of the greatest writers and artists have been linked to many different drugs including Edgar Allen Poe. Now don't get me wrong, i know enough creative people who do not look towards drugs for creativity. I feel that the people who do use drugs just use them for their own sake. Im sure Poe didn't need the opium for his creativity. He just probaly used them for his own recreational purposes. Someone can not look at him as a bad person just because his drug use. Nothing negative came from it so everything should be ok.
Walsh:
I found this a little far fetched but then again i do agree. Once again, i do believe in the altered states. Like i have said in previous weeks, i believe there is another atate of consciousness. I believe that it is ypur choice if you want to visit this place or not. You have to be up for change and something different.
Fat man in the red suit:
This was an intresting read. Im confused on how santa clause was compared to the little mushroom. I felt that this was really odd. I didnt like this reading because it was not interesting to me. The author needs to sit down and evaluate himself. He needs to ask himself........"What am i talking about?
2`qqqqqqqqqqqq
I feel like Huxley wanted more than anything for the people reading these essays to “Get A Clue!” I don’t think what was written has to be applicable to our lives, but I do think it should make us wake up a little in the day to day. He said in reference to the books “The mind was primarily concerned, not with measures and location but with being and meaning.” I find that so pivotal in a mindset, seeing as many of us are not concerned with being or meaning whatsoever. I was walking behind a girl today and she was telling her friend that she was on the way to a yoga class. The friend said, “Oh, that’s cool. How did you get involved in that?” and the girl replied “It’s for ten extra credit points. I don’t really want to go.” I know I am no aficionado of Yoga, but I do know it has/had significance. On the Wiki yoga page it states, “Yoga is an Indian spiritual path aimed at achieving the union with the Supreme Consciousness.” Now when supreme consciousness can be traded for ten extra credit points, I think a problem is starting to form. We have had so many distractions and variables placed in our lives we could care less about the meaning and being of most anything we do.
Huxley goes on to talk about how cigarettes are bad for us and that they are linked to lung cancer. (Where was he when Big Tobacco sprung up!?!) Anyway, he points out how “practically everybody regards tobacco smoking as being hardly less normal and natural than eating. From the point of view of the rationalist utilitarian this may seem odd. For the historian, it is exactly what you would expect.” More implicit than “hindsight is 20/20”, we as a species seem to be aware of our downfalls but we write them off to happenstance. Everyone thinks, “It’s not going to be me,” and continues on in blind oblivion, never minding the descent until they hit the ground. Perception is so important to our consciousness and once we are aware of something, it shouldn’t be dismissed. Likewise, perception is such an explorative creature, and there is so much to be garnered from a new point of view.
As far as Heaven and Hell, I loved where Huxley said “for primeval Nature bears a strange resemblance to that inner world where no account is taken of our personal wishes or even of the enduring concerns of man in general.” I think this idea of “go, go, go” to survive is an illusion and actually an allusion as well. We are not animals and are not in “danger” so to speak. These value systems are placed upon us by ourselves, and through our society. They have no inherent meaning other than to keep us contained and controlled.
Huxley goes on to talk about how cigarettes are bad for us and that they are linked to lung cancer. (Where was he when Big Tobacco sprung up!?!) Anyway, he points out how “practically everybody regards tobacco smoking as being hardly less normal and natural than eating. From the point of view of the rationalist utilitarian this may seem odd. For the historian, it is exactly what you would expect.” More implicit than “hindsight is 20/20”, we as a species seem to be aware of our downfalls but we write them off to happenstance. Everyone thinks, “It’s not going to be me,” and continues on in blind oblivion, never minding the descent until they hit the ground. Perception is so important to our consciousness and once we are aware of something, it shouldn’t be dismissed. Likewise, perception is such an explorative creature, and there is so much to be garnered from a new point of view.
As far as Heaven and Hell, I loved where Huxley said “for primeval Nature bears a strange resemblance to that inner world where no account is taken of our personal wishes or even of the enduring concerns of man in general.” I think this idea of “go, go, go” to survive is an illusion and actually an allusion as well. We are not animals and are not in “danger” so to speak. These value systems are placed upon us by ourselves, and through our society. They have no inherent meaning other than to keep us contained and controlled.
Chemical Vacation
It was fascinating to read about mescalin, a plant based hallucinogen and its similar chemical make-up to adrenalin. Huxley’s description of experiencing moment by moment of naked existence is very profound and thought provoking. The ability to recognize the pure aesthetic nature of reality must be divine. I found it interesting that Huxley, in this estimation, could function normally with misjudging objects – space was there but was not important. His awareness and ability to perceive the universe and its inner light must be surreal.
For some reason, maybe it is my own learning process, Huxley’s explanation and experience on mescalin seemed less contrived than some of the other readings… Huxley seemed to enter the experience with out any pretenses and he quietly enjoyed his enlighten experience. Maybe it is all “Hollywood” but I am amazed that he was not driven to act out in any way.
I enjoyed reading he experiences of the Native American Church and their sacramental use of plant. It is intriguing to thing about our forefathers and their use of plants from the earth. I wonder if people who ate pure unprocessed foods can more easily experience because their bodies are not poisoned by synthetic means.
Knocken’ on Heavens Door
Although I enjoyed the readings I found it difficult to synthesize all its many components. I am looking forward to reading the comments and hypothesis from my classmates.
Visions vs Dreaming was a very interesting section. During this class I had my first, to my recollection, dream with parts of color. It must have been memorable because I mentioned it to my husband upon awaking… The idea that color is the touch-stone of reality is pretty cool!
The section on heaven and hell helped to cement many of the concepts we have been discussing over the past month or so. I really liked the idea that light is aggressive as it pervades even our subconscious. So much of the Christian Bible is filled, as Huxley described, references to light, gems, metals, and color in general. In fact Christian are referred to at being a light - Matthew 5 14"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.
Relating the blissful visionary experiences to religion is not new but Huxley provided me with a new way to look at myself and my own beliefs and practices.
For some reason, maybe it is my own learning process, Huxley’s explanation and experience on mescalin seemed less contrived than some of the other readings… Huxley seemed to enter the experience with out any pretenses and he quietly enjoyed his enlighten experience. Maybe it is all “Hollywood” but I am amazed that he was not driven to act out in any way.
I enjoyed reading he experiences of the Native American Church and their sacramental use of plant. It is intriguing to thing about our forefathers and their use of plants from the earth. I wonder if people who ate pure unprocessed foods can more easily experience because their bodies are not poisoned by synthetic means.
Knocken’ on Heavens Door
Although I enjoyed the readings I found it difficult to synthesize all its many components. I am looking forward to reading the comments and hypothesis from my classmates.
Visions vs Dreaming was a very interesting section. During this class I had my first, to my recollection, dream with parts of color. It must have been memorable because I mentioned it to my husband upon awaking… The idea that color is the touch-stone of reality is pretty cool!
The section on heaven and hell helped to cement many of the concepts we have been discussing over the past month or so. I really liked the idea that light is aggressive as it pervades even our subconscious. So much of the Christian Bible is filled, as Huxley described, references to light, gems, metals, and color in general. In fact Christian are referred to at being a light - Matthew 5 14"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.
Relating the blissful visionary experiences to religion is not new but Huxley provided me with a new way to look at myself and my own beliefs and practices.
My doors of perception have been opened...
It's true. Huxley is/was/will be considered a genius in my book. He is one of the most influential people in the psychedelic world and his influences permeate my thoughts on a daily basis. Next time you listen to "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band", check out Huxley on the album cover. I have read this book several times and some things I get perfectly, some things I still don't get, and some things I can never understand because of the importance of personal experience. I believe so far we have just been fed facts and theories about these altered states - Huxley is our first example of what someone can do while influenced by one of these ASCs. It is obvious that just because someone takes a drug, it doesn't mean they are some crazy, drug fiend. Huxley shows us that these substances can take us to levels of awareness and consciousness that help us better understand our ability as a human and he did so in an appropriate way. One of my favorite parts of the book is when Huxley talks about this chair. He describes the chair in all of its brilliance being a possibility of mankind. I think what he is saying is that our possibilities as a human are LITERALLY ENDLESS. Whether someone needs a drug to realize this is irrelevant. The fact is simply that he has realized it. Huxley speaks and writes with such a graceful tone that it is not hard to be pulled directly into the state of mind that he is in. I remember the first time I read the entire book in one sitting. After reading it I felt like I had dropped the Mescalin with him. I can definitely dig his theories and ideas about schizophrenia. He shows us that there are always two sides to everything and this thing is called life. There are obviously going to be positive and negative aspects to entering (and exiting) these states. I love when he describes the aesthetically pleasing things in life to be these gateways to heaven. I totally agree with him. It's not a place that you go after life, with him it's seeing beauty here in the Now. If anyone really dug this book, I highly recommend looking for a documentary/movie about Huxley called "The Gravity of Light". It is filled with all of the brilliance of Huxley featuring interviews with him and interviews with people who have devoted their life to the psychedelic state of mind and how it can help us as humans. I think the moment I put this book down I became one of these "mind-at-large" recruiters. I hope that this book encouraged some people to think twice about pointing the finger at people who use these drugs (and other drugs even). To each their own right?
Stop and smell the roses...and stare at a chair
I really enjoyed Huxley's two essays. I thought they were very interested and were easier reading than what we've been doing. Although it was easier reading, the content was very thought provoking.
The first thing that became obvious to me in The Doors of Perception was that during his experience on mescalin, Huxley said space and time ceased to matter, which was mostly what I remember from our last class discussion. We talked a lot about the present, and how that's all there would be without space and time. The more I think about altered states of consciousness, space and time seem to be key markers in noting what an ASC is and whether you're in one. This concept of space helps me understand, especially as a bartender, why drunk people lose control of their motor skills. The more they drink, the further into the altered state they get and the less concerned they are with staying seated on their barstool. Consequently, I'm much less concerned with serving them more alcohol. Similarly, a characteristic of smoking marijuana is that people don't do anything while they are high. A friend of mine says she can't smoke while she is taking classes because she won't get anything done. Perhaps this is because in the altered state, time doesn't matter, so we take time to stare at a chair and respect its beauty. I guess I always knew the side effects of drugs but never questioned why they were that way.
I also found it fascinating when Huxley said that language is both beneficial and harmful, that we are both the beneficiary and the victim of it. Again, I only ever viewed language as beneficial (if I ever even really thought about it--it's always been there) and never realized language can be restraining as well. As Huxley says we are "the victim in so far as it confirms in him the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things." So words aren't things, they only represent things. The only reason a chair is a chair is because we agree to call a chair a chair. I think what Huxley is suggesting is that as children, before we learn to speak or have a large vocabulary, our minds are extraordinary, experiencing many different worlds and many adventures. But as we learn a language, we learn that "reality" is this certain state of consciousness, which Huxley calls reduced awareness, and all the other realities we've experience, like the world where we have "imaginary" friends, don't really exist. Perhaps as children, we actually know more than we do as educated adults.
I don't know why but when I'm reading I always instinctively compare things with religion. Perhaps it's because I am choosing not to define my religion and am constantly exploring things, but I am always thinking of Bible stories and how this is so similar to that in religion. When Huxley began explaining human relations and himself as a "Not-self", I thought of the story of creation, of Adam and Eve, and the garden. Huxley says, "This participation in the manifest glory of things left no room, so to speak, for the ordinary, the necessary concerns of human existence, above all for concerns involving persons." This made such an impression on Huxley that he should be able to experience this altered state while at the same time care for others in the room with him, but he could not. Maybe before Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they were in the ultimate altered state where you experienced the joy of human interaction and the bliss of timelessness and spacelessness. See, everything comes back to Adam and Eve screwing everything up for the rest of us!
One question I thought of during the reading was if we actually have a need for altered states? Not for drugs, but for the actual altered state. Do we need to experience an ASC to fill a need we don't even know we have? Can we only be truly content if we have experienced an ASC?
Back on the religion track, Huxley argues that Christianity and alcohol mix as well as drinking and driving. This made me think of a friend in high school who was a very Christian boy, but he drank a lot. I asked him once why he did that. "Keith," I said, "You are such a Christian, it's not funny. You're saving yourself for marriage and everything. But you drink. Doesn't that go against what you believe?"
His response was so simple, but so undeniable that I often think of it when I'm pondering religion. He said, "Alli, Jesus drank wine." And that was that.
Now I think of it and I wonder if Jesus drank wine to reach an altered state where he could talk to God. Perhaps Jesus could only hear God when in an altered state. I don't think it makes it any less real. So what if Christianity were to re-embrace alcohol? (I say re-embrace it, because many churches did and some still do use wine in Communion.) Maybe it would make the whole personal relationship with Jesus more attainable.
In Heaven and Hell, I think Huxley's strongest point is that there is still so much we don't know about the brain. He says, "Like the earth of a hundred years ago, our mind still has its darkest Africas, its unmapped Borneos and Amazonian basins." I know from watching Grey's Anatomy an House that the brain is the least understood and most important organ in our body. It controls the rest of our body, our emotions, and our thoughts. Everything we do, our brain controls. If someone can't feel their legs, check the brain. But scientists and doctors are constantly finding out new information about our brain. We only know a relatively little bit about the powers of our brain, so we can't scientifically rule out even the craziest of hypotheses.
I also like how he compares the brain to Australia and kangaroos. He says, "All he can do is to go to the mental equivalent of Australia and look around him." I think what Huxley is saying has been embraced by Nike in their famous slogan, "Just do it." Huxley is saying to just try it. Go to an altered state of consciousness and see what you're brain is up to. Look in the corners and the shadows. What's the worst thing that could happen? Enlightenment? Just do it...why not?
When Huxley is describing elements of old churches and synagogues and religious art, like stained glass windows and shiny metals and polished stone and bright shiny glass, I realized that many churches do not include any of these traits. For example, I think of the sanctuary of the church I grew up in. It has little windows along the side, which let in little light, horrid green carpet and even worse goldish-yellow (gold without the metallic aspect) covered pews. The shiniest thing in the entire sanctuary is the baby grand piano. The cross at the very front is even dull. I think it's either made out of wood or it could be just a dull metal. Then I thought of how Jehovah's witness churches have no windows at all. I just think this is weird that religions used to include certain traits that induced ASCs in their architecture and art, but they don't as much anymore.
My last point also has to do with religion...go figure. When Huxley talks about how singing actually deprives increases the concentration of CO2 in our lungs and blood, which then affects our brain, I couldn't help but wonder if the worship part of church, singing "for God", isn't actually to bestow our praise onto Him, but for the singers to actually reach a religious high that is purely biological.
Huxley
I found this quote interesting and funny cosidering that we recently turned in an assignment where we had to define 'altered states of consciousness'---"The mind is its own place, and the places inhabited by the issane and the exceptionally gifted are so different from the places where ordinary men and women live, that there is little or no common ground of memory to serve as a basis for understanding or fellow feelings. Words are uttered, but fail to enlighten. The things and events to which the symbols refer belong to mutually exclusive realms of experience" (13). This almost sounds like you wouldn't be able to define a ASOC without having been in one before. Huxley talks about his mecalin experience and how place and time are insignificant. In discussing the experience and seeing his books on a shelf he notes that "What I noticed, what impressed itself upon my mind was the fact that all of them glowed with living light and that in some the glory was more manifest than in others" (20). I'm curious as to what he means by the "glory was more manifest than in others" part. What does glory look like? Maybe even more importantly, which books? Was there something that just looked different about them or was it related to their contents? I own/have many books that sit on my shelf---some of which I like more than others. I wonder if his 'favorites' looked different to him or if I'm just not understanding what he means by 'glory'. The anti-drug campaign has a new argument thanks to Huxley's summarizing of the mescalin users reaction to the drug: "The mescalin taker sees no reason for doing anything in particular and finds most of the causes for which, at ordinary times, he was prepared to act and suffer, profoundly uninteresting" (25). According to this then, you might find enlightenment or gain a new perspective on life but you won't want to do anything productive (doing work, taking care of responsibilities, running errands, etc.) I realize that work, work, work is not any way to live your life but can you imagine what would happen if enough people decided to give up on their work/family/daily activities? I can't help but picture in my mind a bunch of people on mescalin just staring at books, furniture, etc. I know it's not necessarily realistic but it did make me laugh to think about it.
I also found the part about why we dream in black and white interesting. Huxley quotes Prof. Calvin Hall, "We have come to the conclusion that color in dreams yields no information about the personality of the dreamer" (90). He goes on to say that color in dreams is analogous to color in 'reality', in that, they are both useless. We perceive or 'see' color in reality but it doesn't tell us anything, does it? Additionally, he states that "Color turns out to be a kind of touchstone of reality. That which is given is colored; that which our symbol-creating intellect and fancy put together is uncolored" (91). I must not be getting this. I'm thinking about how things can be red (a color) when they are hot. Such as: a burner on the stove or metal when it is still being molded/formed. I've learned through experience that things can be hot when they are red---but the color red didn't teach me that. The color red didn't come first (as in the chicken or the egg), but rather, my experiences taught me not to touch things that are hot (or red, that is). So if 'red' is a symbol to me of 'hot', then where did it come from? I'm so confused. He also says, "Thus the external world is perceived as colored. Dreams, which are not given but fabricated by the personal subconscious, are generally in black and white" (90). I completely lost my thought I had about this---it had something to do with the word 'fabricate' that he uses. I don't know---anyway, I'm going to have to try to remember some of my dreams because I feel like I do dream in color.
I also found the part about why we dream in black and white interesting. Huxley quotes Prof. Calvin Hall, "We have come to the conclusion that color in dreams yields no information about the personality of the dreamer" (90). He goes on to say that color in dreams is analogous to color in 'reality', in that, they are both useless. We perceive or 'see' color in reality but it doesn't tell us anything, does it? Additionally, he states that "Color turns out to be a kind of touchstone of reality. That which is given is colored; that which our symbol-creating intellect and fancy put together is uncolored" (91). I must not be getting this. I'm thinking about how things can be red (a color) when they are hot. Such as: a burner on the stove or metal when it is still being molded/formed. I've learned through experience that things can be hot when they are red---but the color red didn't teach me that. The color red didn't come first (as in the chicken or the egg), but rather, my experiences taught me not to touch things that are hot (or red, that is). So if 'red' is a symbol to me of 'hot', then where did it come from? I'm so confused. He also says, "Thus the external world is perceived as colored. Dreams, which are not given but fabricated by the personal subconscious, are generally in black and white" (90). I completely lost my thought I had about this---it had something to do with the word 'fabricate' that he uses. I don't know---anyway, I'm going to have to try to remember some of my dreams because I feel like I do dream in color.
Huxley: The Doors of Perception/Heaven and Hell
At the beginning I liked how Huxley explains all about the chemical breakdown of Mescaline and it's research. I mean, I guess when your high on drugs you can achieve an altered state of consciousness but not all drugs give you the same effect; so it was relevant for him to go in detail about what you feel under this drug. Huxley goes on to talk about his first effects on the drug (which weren't so successful at the beginning). He was waiting to reach this other "Universe" and experience the unknown. Little did he know that he was getting into. I really enjoyed the part when he was at home and realized that he was looking at the bouquet of flowers on the table with a different light. He saw colors and textures beyond what he'd ever seen. Without words and brilliant was when he noticed the chair and desk as a composition like no other. He probably passed this chair and desk a million times and never understood it this way. He didn't see this composition as just his furniture but as someone who is only concerned with "forms and their relationship within the field of vision or the picture space".(22) He spent several minutes contemplating this piece of furniture, it's texture, color and space and not for it's actuality of being but because HE was the being this piece of furniture.
When the investigator asked numerous times about how long did he (Huxley) think this altered state was for, Huxley responded, "My actual experience had been, was still, of an indefinite duration or alternatively of a perpectual present made up of one continually changing apocalypse." (21) This is some wild quote, I mean i know it may sound like everyone who has done some kind of hallucinogens can say this because they are high on the drug but really "one continually changing apocalypse" (21); it's like he is saying that no space and time and "Universe" as we may know it would or could compare with this feeling and realization.
Huxley also touches on the topic of how "man" has made a language and domesticated society to the extend that we are separated or a "victim" of our own man made linguistic tradition making our experiences those of others and vice versa and thus forth only allowing ourselves to be "reduced" in awareness of what is reality. He goes on to say that along with all the majority of mescalin tested, usually everyone experiences the same effects, intensified visuals and no sense of time as if you were in a long vacation and didn't care whether it was night or day. Huxley continues, " In some cases there may be extra-sensory perceptions. Other persons discover a world of visionary beauty. To others again is revealed the glory, the given, unconceptualized event." (26) I can say that maybe, yes there's some known related effects under mescalin but for those to whom it affects in different ways can be translated as what you could have taken for granted; the little things can mean so much.
On another note, I was really interested by the differences between visionary experiences and ordinary dreams. I didn't know that we can't see color in dreams or some partial color. All this time I was under the influence that I could see colors just fine. Huxley quotes Professor Calvi Hall, " Only one dream in three is colored, or has some color in it."(89) Only a few people dream entirely in color. Looking back into my dreams I don't remember if I am a partial color dreamer or all black or white.
When the investigator asked numerous times about how long did he (Huxley) think this altered state was for, Huxley responded, "My actual experience had been, was still, of an indefinite duration or alternatively of a perpectual present made up of one continually changing apocalypse." (21) This is some wild quote, I mean i know it may sound like everyone who has done some kind of hallucinogens can say this because they are high on the drug but really "one continually changing apocalypse" (21); it's like he is saying that no space and time and "Universe" as we may know it would or could compare with this feeling and realization.
Huxley also touches on the topic of how "man" has made a language and domesticated society to the extend that we are separated or a "victim" of our own man made linguistic tradition making our experiences those of others and vice versa and thus forth only allowing ourselves to be "reduced" in awareness of what is reality. He goes on to say that along with all the majority of mescalin tested, usually everyone experiences the same effects, intensified visuals and no sense of time as if you were in a long vacation and didn't care whether it was night or day. Huxley continues, " In some cases there may be extra-sensory perceptions. Other persons discover a world of visionary beauty. To others again is revealed the glory, the given, unconceptualized event." (26) I can say that maybe, yes there's some known related effects under mescalin but for those to whom it affects in different ways can be translated as what you could have taken for granted; the little things can mean so much.
On another note, I was really interested by the differences between visionary experiences and ordinary dreams. I didn't know that we can't see color in dreams or some partial color. All this time I was under the influence that I could see colors just fine. Huxley quotes Professor Calvi Hall, " Only one dream in three is colored, or has some color in it."(89) Only a few people dream entirely in color. Looking back into my dreams I don't remember if I am a partial color dreamer or all black or white.
Huxley
This reading was a bit interesting for me. I will admit that I did have a hard time following the text at some points, but otherwise was thought-inspiring in its own way. The number of metaphors within the text is astounding, and oftentimes I had to take a step back and ponder what I had just read. While I have never been under the influence of such substances, I was given a sort of first-hand look at the effects of such a drug. One particular passage of interest to me was “To see ourselves as others see usis a most salutary gift. Hardly less important is the capacity to see others as they see themselves. But what if these others belong to a different species and inhabit a radically alien universe? For example, how can the sane get to know what it actually feels like to be mad?"(Huxley, 13) It is in these lines that Huxley challenges us to define reality, when (no pun intended) in reality, such a definition is nigh impossible. There is also a sense of spite in some of his words, as he appears to mock the ignorance of the “civilized” human at some points, including his comment that such individuals, saying that, “We cover our anterior nakedness with some philosophy—Christian, Marxian, Freudo-Physicalist—but abaft we remain uncovered, at the mercy of all the winds of circumstance.” (Huxley, 72) This clearly is a shot at the skepticisms of such a text as this. In a world full of conformity and political misdirection, Huxley encourages us to look within ourselves and within various arts in our world (including music and portraits) and finding a deeper meaning than what is considered scientific fact.
Heaven and Hell was a little more difficult to comprehend than Doors of Perception (once again, I have never been under such influence as mescalin and the like, yet I understand altered perceptions thanks to my skill as a writer). Mainly, it compares views of various paintings that often involve various vices to achieve different states of their visionary heaven or hell, such as intoxication, drugs, and lust. However, oftentimes by undergoing such a vice, enlightenment can occur. It involves not looking at the whole picture, but rather the fine details, as he gives several examples of physicists and astronomers. He then makes a comparison, writing that “Something analogous happens to the myopic artist and the happy lover. In the nuptial embrace personality is melted down; the individual (it is the recurrent theme of Lawrence’s poems and novels) ceases to be himself and becomes a part of the vast impersonal universe.” (Huxley, 130) He goes on to discuss that of the artist and his portrayal of “‘mere things,’” (Huxley, 130) that continues to emphasize that we must look beyond pre-fabricated perceptions crafted by society and find our own meaning through observation.
As another note, I find it ironic that the more I type about the part of the book I don’t understand too well, the more clearly I can comprehend it. Go figure.
All in all, it was a pleasant read. I did a little research on Huxley’s other work and I’d be interested to see what other forms of perception he might elaborate on, such as in his Brave New World.
Heaven and Hell was a little more difficult to comprehend than Doors of Perception (once again, I have never been under such influence as mescalin and the like, yet I understand altered perceptions thanks to my skill as a writer). Mainly, it compares views of various paintings that often involve various vices to achieve different states of their visionary heaven or hell, such as intoxication, drugs, and lust. However, oftentimes by undergoing such a vice, enlightenment can occur. It involves not looking at the whole picture, but rather the fine details, as he gives several examples of physicists and astronomers. He then makes a comparison, writing that “Something analogous happens to the myopic artist and the happy lover. In the nuptial embrace personality is melted down; the individual (it is the recurrent theme of Lawrence’s poems and novels) ceases to be himself and becomes a part of the vast impersonal universe.” (Huxley, 130) He goes on to discuss that of the artist and his portrayal of “‘mere things,’” (Huxley, 130) that continues to emphasize that we must look beyond pre-fabricated perceptions crafted by society and find our own meaning through observation.
As another note, I find it ironic that the more I type about the part of the book I don’t understand too well, the more clearly I can comprehend it. Go figure.
All in all, it was a pleasant read. I did a little research on Huxley’s other work and I’d be interested to see what other forms of perception he might elaborate on, such as in his Brave New World.
Perception
At the beginning of class we made a list of things that helps you decide whether you are in an altered state or not. This list included, but was not limited to, sense of time and sense of space being a factor. Aldous Huxley wrote, in The Doors of Perception, that when he took mescalin as a supervised experiment one day he experienced no sense of time and space. He said that they did not matter to him. All that mattered was the colors and textures of the everyday things around him that he normally didn’t pay attention to. The bamboo chair was one that I found interesting. He just stared at it for a long time so enraptured by the texture. Also, when they went to the Worlds Biggest Drug Store and he looked at the books of paintings. He saw how, even though he did not like some of the pictures before, these paintings could be so well known. Huxley was, yet again, fascinated by the textures of dresses and drapes. This interests me because he said that he did not like these paintings when in an ordinary state of mind but when he was on mescalin and looked at them he couldn’t look away. He always said that painters can turn this way of looking at things on and off or that it is permanently on for them. Wouldn’t that drive some people crazy? Their way of looking at things would be so much different from everyone else’s.
Something else that interested me a lot was the beginning of Heaven and Hell. Huxley writes that the majority of people, when in a normal state, dream in black and white. Really? I have never heard this before and I have never noticed this before. When I dream, and for some reason I do a lot, I guess I never really noticed whether it was in black and white or vibrant color. I always assumed that my dreams were in color but now, when I wake up from dreaming, I will have to attempt to remember what it was like color wise. One thing about color he mentions in the first book is that it turns on your emotions when you are on drugs. How can colors have such an effect of people and why do we dream in black and white? I had a couple of dreams 3 days in a row that scared me and I am almost positive that at least two of them were color. Why would those have been in color? What is the difference between certain types of dreams that allow some to be in color and others not?
Something else that interested me a lot was the beginning of Heaven and Hell. Huxley writes that the majority of people, when in a normal state, dream in black and white. Really? I have never heard this before and I have never noticed this before. When I dream, and for some reason I do a lot, I guess I never really noticed whether it was in black and white or vibrant color. I always assumed that my dreams were in color but now, when I wake up from dreaming, I will have to attempt to remember what it was like color wise. One thing about color he mentions in the first book is that it turns on your emotions when you are on drugs. How can colors have such an effect of people and why do we dream in black and white? I had a couple of dreams 3 days in a row that scared me and I am almost positive that at least two of them were color. Why would those have been in color? What is the difference between certain types of dreams that allow some to be in color and others not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
