|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
|
It’s kind of odd to consider that pursuing a psychedelic ego dissolving experience is desired.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,225
Last seen: 23 minutes, 17 seconds
|
|
DXM gives good ego release..
It disassociates the subjective ego completely and puts you in a state of perfect objectivity.
Bliss..
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,829
|
Re: McKenna on Novelty [Re: sudly]
#27111258 - 12/27/20 07:44 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: Are we our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago?
basically yes still waring, fucking, shitting, torturing, shortsighted, selfish.
Animals don't need police, prisons, and so on, to control themselves, or birth control that still can't control their populations, and generally are not so stupid as to shit in their own drinking water, and pollute all of their living space. Or so arrogant as to forget and ignore these obvious facts.
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,954
|
|
Haven't changed an inch in 2.5 million years??
Do that thing called reflection and get back to me if you don't mind
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 16 days
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
sudly said: Are we our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago?
basically yes still waring, fucking, shitting, torturing, shortsighted, selfish.
Animals don't need police, prisons, and so on, to control themselves, or birth control that still can't control their populations, and generally are not so stupid as to shit in their own drinking water, and pollute all of their living space. Or so arrogant as to forget and ignore these obvious facts.
The problem with this argument, though, is if we were living by law of the jungle like the animals, the weakest and least-productive would be killed off immediately. I don't think people take this into consideration, and if they do, they're either fooling themselves pretending to be humanists, or they're actually more rational than they let on for the sake of political correctness (my hunch, honestly).
Modern society subsidizes the weak/unproductive (actually, more like the middle class is fooled into thinking the poor are robbing them, so the elite can funnel money and power UP, but that's another thread LOL). This is not a moral or political or socioeconomic argument, it's an objective difference based concrete social variables in contrast to your analogy above. For all of the correct reasons you argue from, there are an equal number of even more fucked up scenarios we're barely avoiding as is, and that's not an argument for the current system at all.
Just context because while agree with you, it's not as straight forward as what you're positing here.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,706
|
|
weakness is a contextual description: in some contexts slender, light, small, clever all add up to dexterity, and elusiveness, and that combo is a huge adaptive advantage in the jungle and here, over strength, size, brutality etc.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,829
|
|
Quote:
Loaded Shaman said:
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
sudly said: Are we our ancestors from 2.5 million years ago?
basically yes still waring, fucking, shitting, torturing, shortsighted, selfish.
Animals don't need police, prisons, and so on, to control themselves, or birth control that still can't control their populations, and generally are not so stupid as to shit in their own drinking water, and pollute all of their living space. Or so arrogant as to forget and ignore these obvious facts.
The problem with this argument, though, is if we were living by law of the jungle like the animals, the weakest and least-productive would be killed off immediately. I don't think people take this into consideration, and if they do, they're either fooling themselves pretending to be humanists, or they're actually more rational than they let on for the sake of political correctness (my hunch, honestly).
Modern society subsidizes the weak/unproductive (actually, more like the middle class is fooled into thinking the poor are robbing them, so the elite can funnel money and power UP, but that's another thread LOL). This is not a moral or political or socioeconomic argument, it's an objective difference based concrete social variables in contrast to your analogy above. For all of the correct reasons you argue from, there are an equal number of even more fucked up scenarios we're barely avoiding as is, and that's not an argument for the current system at all.
Just context because while agree with you, it's not as straight forward as what you're positing here.
. To put it all in context, initially i commented on the idea (earlier in the thread) that:
"His stoned ape theory was the one idea that stuck. Fundamentally it makes sense, it's a simple idea, an intriguing one. His view was that psilocybin catalyzed the revolution of contemporary perpetuity."
. I ridiculed this nonsense, which one poster continued to defend, becoming more and more defensive while making posts with less and less meaningful content.
. You bring up some other problems of modern society. I see no conflict. . Humans remain a rather lopsided and unproven experiment of evolution. Many species from dinosaurs to cockroaches to sharks have, or had, far better track records (time wise) than humans and their relations have had, or do, (or are likely to have in the future given their many follies); and there is no evidence that psychedelics furthered our evolution or are are likely to do so in the future. . Whereas there is much evidence for other factors that have influenced human evolution, which by the way have resulted in many obvious flaws; which these books point out, among other such books.
Idiot Brain: What Your Head Is Really Up To
https://www.amazon.com/Idiot-Brain-What-Your-Really/dp/0393253783/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1609184273&sr=1-1
the author is a scientist "Dean Burnett is a neuroscientist and research associate at the Centre for Medical Education at Cardiff University."
Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches, from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes
https://www.amazon.com/Human-Errors-Panorama-Glitches-Pointless/dp/1328974693/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1609184234&sr=1-1
the author is a scientist NATHAN H. LENTS is a professor of biology at John Jay College, CUNY and the author of Not So Different: Finding Human Nature in Animals. He has appeared as a scientific expert in a range of national media, including...
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,706
|
|
let us not blame the mushrooms for all of our science!
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,829
|
|
and visa versa let us not blame the science for all of our mushrooms! Or the mushrooms for all of our continual follies.
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
|
Science therefore is egotistical being as the mushrooms dissolve ego and are not credited with man’s interesting evolutionary trajectory
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,706
|
|
those sneaky mushrooms rule in hyphae space!
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
|
They really do. They subtract calculation and language in some way where the here and now becomes more prominent. Naturally planning and strategizing fall by the way side and a nice immediacy overtakes. Here is the shroom and it’s lair ! 
Yet the question is if or how the introduction of such an effect would have on a human being. I have no idea. Especially if you’re talking about homo erectus or Neanderthal etc. That’s right, tell me what effect the psychedelic shrooms would have on homo erectus?
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,954
|
|
Cut all mention of mushrooms.
Do you think any changes of behaviour were involved in the developments of society?
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: McKenna on Novelty [Re: sudly]
#27112806 - 12/28/20 05:32 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
sudly said: Do you think any changes of behaviour were involved in the developments of society?
Of course. With certainty
|
Goatrance
Moon is real


Registered: 09/01/14
Posts: 42
Loc: Mars
Last seen: 2 years, 11 months
|
|
When you touch something not experienced before, you get that novelty feeling. It can be wrong, it can be right, it can be whatever but it will be novelty which will twist your brains to the level of experiment. Too much of novelty will make you mumbo jumbo but not too much will make your life more rich in everything.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,225
Last seen: 23 minutes, 17 seconds
|
Re: McKenna on Novelty [Re: Goatrance]
#27113320 - 12/29/20 12:23 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The science of mushrooms..
One thing of many that furthered our evolution..
Is the first mushroom user worth nothing.. I highly doubt it!
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 16 days
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: weakness is a contextual description: in some contexts slender, light, small, clever all add up to dexterity, and elusiveness, and that combo is a huge adaptive advantage in the jungle and here, over strength, size, brutality etc.
Right, which is going to depend entirely upon cultural context, not arguing that point.
Once that context has been achieved, my initial post still stands, regardless of the culture.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
|