|
 ninjapixie
newbie
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 417
|
 Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit  [Re: Twirling]
#4073704 - 04/19/05 06:01 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
that's just as judgemental as what you are accusing him of doing.
Yeah I'm being judgemental considering how dodgy the evidence is. There are hundreds of herbs/foods that would have had a greater effect then shrooms, so why focus on shrooms other then to glorify it?
--------------------
Put that monkey back in the oven.
|
 Twirling
Barred Spiral
Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 2,468
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: ninjapixie]
#4073717 - 04/19/05 06:05 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Had a greater effect? Eat a carrot one day, and psilocybin mushrooms the next. Which one would have a greater effect on your behavior?
|
ninjapixie
newbie
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 417
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: Twirling]
#4073741 - 04/19/05 06:10 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I never said carrots. Besides Mckenna says for shrooms to have a positive effect they need to be at low doses below tripping level. Sugar and caffeine would have a greater effect, not to mention the plethora of other energising herbs and food.
--------------------
Put that monkey back in the oven.
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: UnderTheRose]
#4073751 - 04/19/05 06:13 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
mckenna found mushrooms interesting. what do you have against this exactly? yes, he focused on one specific aspect of evolution. he could have picked anything else, but he happened to like mushrooms. is there a problem here?
as i said, i'm sure sugar and caffeine have had profound effects on evolution.
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: entiformatie]
#4073775 - 04/19/05 06:18 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Are you suggesting that mushrooms alter DNA?
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
ninjapixie
newbie
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 417
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: entiformatie]
#4073779 - 04/19/05 06:19 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
The problem is he makes it seem like such a big influence on our evolution choosing to ignore other more likely senarios, then sells it to the public. He is clearly trying to justify his use of shrooms,(or using the fascination of shrooms to sell his books).
--------------------
Put that monkey back in the oven.
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate
Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God 
Last seen: 1 year, 8 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: ninjapixie]
#4073836 - 04/19/05 06:36 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Something missing from this discussion:
McKenna suggested humans stopped their physical evolution, and began their TECHNOLOGICAL evolution about 100,000 years ago. He suggests entheogens MAY have played a roll in this change.
Recordings of Terrance McKenna
Many hours of McKenna speeches.
More McKenna Information
--------------------
Fiddlesticks.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: Rose]
#4073926 - 04/19/05 06:52 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Cervantes said:
Something missing from this discussion:
McKenna suggested humans stopped their physical evolution, and began their TECHNOLOGICAL evolution about 100,000 years ago. He suggests entheogens MAY have played a roll in this change.
..."also sprach Zarathustra" playing in background...
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: UnderTheRose]
#4073930 - 04/19/05 06:53 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
mmm, i think humans are still physically evolving. and will continue to do so. although it would seem that new technologies have made physical and mental (and perhaps spiritual) evolution less of a priority.
i don't think he was trying to justify his drug use. i guess we'll never really know
as has been said, it would seem more like he gave us ideas to work with. i'm not sure if that is what he intended, but it definitely works for me.
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: entiformatie]
#4073952 - 04/19/05 06:56 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
I would like to see you pick a fight with one of the early hunters
How is it possible that we are evolving phisically if we are not fighting with out arms on streets to survive, nor are we wrestling with bears to protect out family
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
Twirling
Barred Spiral
Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 2,468
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: ninjapixie]
#4074014 - 04/19/05 07:11 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ninjapixie said:
I never said carrots. Besides Mckenna says for shrooms to have a positive effect they need to be at low doses below tripping level. Sugar and caffeine would have a greater effect, not to mention the plethora of other energising herbs and food.
Well you can see what I mean. Psychoactive mushrooms are going to have a far greater effect on behavior than sugar or caffeine. You really have to listen to the lecture though because McKenna discusses more on why exactly mushrooms would have such a large effect on evolution. At this point you're trying to shoot him down on the basis that he's just trying to push the use of mushrooms - that may very well be the case, but without listening to what he has to say you're making judgements from lack of information.
I do think McKenna was, in ways trying to advance the cause of using mushrooms to better the human race and condition. But that wasn't his only motivation, I think he was naturally interested in the work he was doing.
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
|
how is fighting without arms on the streets to survive a prerequisite to physical evolution?
what does this have to do with our wrestling with bears, or lack thereof?
not trying to be an ass, i just don't get what you are trying to say.
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: entiformatie]
#4074028 - 04/19/05 07:13 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Those with stronger, healthier, faster bodies survive and carry genes, that's physical evolution.
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
Twirling
Barred Spiral
Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 2,468
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
OldWoodSpecter said:
I would like to see you pick a fight with one of the early hunters
How is it possible that we are evolving phisically if we are not fighting with out arms on streets to survive, nor are we wrestling with bears to protect out family
Well physical evolution doesn't have to be just a matter of strengh, it could be neurological. I'm sure there are also plenty of weightlifters who, because of technology and understanding of biology, would be stronger than early hunters.
Evolution also isn't always progressively linear (in terms of being "better"). That's where the band Devo comes in. 
I would suggest we would still be evolving physically in some way, but there are two sides of this:
1. It would be too slow for us to be aware of, other than things like genetic subspectabilty to various disease etc...
2. The variety in lifestyles and environments that people exist in are so vast that evolution would be extremely diverse.
Animals are always going to be evolving physically, changes are just very, very slow most of the time.
|
ninjapixie
newbie
Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 417
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: Twirling]
#4074067 - 04/19/05 07:24 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
No I'm not trying to shoot him down cos hes trying to promote shrooms, its cos his theory doesn't make sense. It was mentioned earlier that the shrooms need to be at a low dose below tripping level for them to have a positive effect, which would make sugar and caffeine more useful for hunting. The lack of shrooms in Africa is another aspect he didn't address adequately. And as I said earlier, full blown tripping doses would have negative consequences on hunting.
Ok I haven't heard the lecture, but I've read Food of the Gods where he discusses this and I think its a load of crap. Once again, the way he quoted Huxley left a foul taste in my mouth.
--------------------
Put that monkey back in the oven.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: Twirling]
#4074111 - 04/19/05 07:32 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Neurological?
That would mean the intelligent survive while retards die out,
and that females like intelligent males...
So no, there is no foundation for neurological evolution since
anyone can live up to 70 and have children in modern world, even if you are so stupid that you can't work any job, society does not let you die of hunger, you can go to public kitchens for homelss people, and get some money from the government.
So stupid don't die out, they live as much as others.
So next question..
are intelligent people the ones that are most sucessfull and have most babies? No
You can be an idiot and a millionaire in capitalism, all you need is enough start money, and you can pay others to think for you.
Do females get attracted to intelligent people and born lots of babies to them? I think not
You get to have children and live similar lifetime no matter what group to you belong to, stupid smart, strong, tall, short etc.
There can be no progress neurological or physical in such an environment.
Our evolution is based on acomulating knowledge, and tradition.
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: ninjapixie]
#4074122 - 04/19/05 07:33 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ninjapixie said:
No I'm not trying to shoot him down cos hes trying to promote shrooms, its cos his theory doesn't make sense. It was mentioned earlier that the shrooms need to be at a low dose below tripping level for them to have a positive effect, which would make sugar and caffeine more useful for hunting. The lack of shrooms in Africa is another aspect he didn't address adequately. And as I said earlier, full blown tripping doses would have negative consequences on hunting.
Ok I haven't heard the lecture, but I've read Food of the Gods where he discusses this and I think its a load of crap. Once again, the way he quoted Huxley left a foul taste in my mouth.
Either way, no matter what chemical you take, and no matter if it makes you a superman or not, you can't pass that to your children because it does not change your DNA.
The only thing you can do is pass the habit of taking shrooms to your children
--------------------
I descend upon your earth from the skies
I command your very souls you unbelievers
Bring before me what is mine
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: UnderTheRose]
#4074124 - 04/19/05 07:34 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
heh, i haven't seen the bit where he misquotes huxley, i'll take your word for it though. i don't believe what the guy said, i think he makes a great fiction writer though. i just like the idea of considering possibilities. but most of it is pseudoscience.
i think that somewhere along the line though, cultures discovered mushrooms, and used them. maybe low doses made them hunt better, i have no idea, i'm not a hunter. but they definitely had a profound affect on cultures, on mythology, and on interactions amongst cultures.
terence mckenna doesn't really talk much about this though, besides to promote time-wave whatever it's called, which i used to consider, but now find to be false science. real science with fake logic. it uses truths to convey a falsehood.
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
entiformatie
EvolutionaryMovements
Registered: 03/06/03
Posts: 1,043
Loc: miami, florida
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: UnderTheRose]
#4074148 - 04/19/05 07:38 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
there can be progress yes, but it's much slower.
anyways, this is not the point. we have evolved in the past, and continue to evolve. every time you reproduce, there is a case of microevolution (yes, a real term, refers to all the evolution that eventually leads to macroevolution, or the big changes in species). i'm not going to claim great understanding of genetics, but people mating leads to natural selection leads to evolution.
i guess i'll have to come back with some examples when i find some
--------------------
/opinion
.sean
|
Twirling
Barred Spiral
Registered: 02/03/03
Posts: 2,468
Last seen: 2 years, 2 months
|
Re: McKenna: Newton or just horeshit [Re: ninjapixie]
#4074152 - 04/19/05 07:39 PM (19 years, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Ah, okay, I haven't read Food of the Gods, so I can't really go off the book.
What he talks about is that the amount of mushrooms which would be consumed in a natural diet would not be enough to be full-blown tripping.
The other significance, and more importantly, is the effect mushrooms would have on communal breeding instead of monogamous relationships (orgies basically). This, according to him, leads to a communal tribe which doesn't see off-spring as being the possession of parents, but the general tribe (since people don't know who the father is). On top of which the experience of ego-loss would make human beings less territorial. This is why he is mentioning mushrooms and not sugar or caffeine.
Now I could see this happening. It's entirely plausible. The bigger question to me is whether if this happened. My guess is that there is some truth to it in certain societies, but not in the way McKenna was suggesting.
To me, the largest significance here is that male dominance is extremely prevalent in our society and has disastrous results. Men are taught to impose their will on others as a sign of power, and so on. I think mushrooms are a way to develop a healthier mentality, but the irony is that it can?t just be forced on people even if it was legal. My interest is more in psychotherapeutic sessions where these types of issues could be worked out on an individual level. So what McKenna has to say is relevant to me, even if it?s not entirely accurate (which I think it?s too difficult for me to determine at this point).
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
c0sm0nautt
Icelander