|
alphatrion
journeyman
Registered: 08/01/01
Posts: 64
Last seen: 19 years, 3 months
|
objectivity
#597864 - 04/03/02 05:54 PM (21 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
dear fellow truthseekers, truthabolishers or truthtranscenders, Suppose you were discussing the merits or dangers of the effects of the psychedelic experience and then admit that you have experienced something like this. After this you get this argument: "A scientist collects a lot of data before he even forms a hypothesis. It is really shortsighted and irresponsible for you to use yourself as a guinea pig: you lose objectivity and credibility." How can i counter this argument? Or is every statement i make from now on doomed as unscientific, unobjective and not to be taken seriously? I was thinking of quoting Derrida on this, but i am not sure. which angle should i take in tackling this argument from someone who deeply mistrusts the merits of the entheogenic experience. Can somebody enlighten me on this issue of being objective and loose ones objectiveness?
|
Anonymous
|
Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
#597902 - 04/03/02 06:50 PM (21 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
First of all, this isn't science it's exploration. I am gathering data. Science comes in at the point I decide what to do with the data. As for being shortsighted and using myself as a guinea pig, it is usually the scientific establishment who are shortsighted. Take for example the work of Semmelweis who was infected himself before others would accept as valid, the idea that germs could cause illness. The scientific/medical establishment of his day refused to listen to him and people were dying because of their shortsightedness. He saved lives. Credibility with the current order is not as important as discovery. If people were to only stick to what is credible, doctors would still be practicing bloodletting and astronomy would embrace the concept of gods manning chariots that pull the sun across the sky. There is no other way to explore the realms and bounds of the human psyche without some humans volunteering to do the exploring, who or what would you suggest do it... a chimpanzee... a computer?
Edited by evolving (04/03/02 06:59 PM)
|
BuzzDoctor
Runs withscissors


Registered: 08/10/99
Posts: 948
Loc: Atlantis
Last seen: 6 years, 2 months
|
Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
#597947 - 04/03/02 07:39 PM (21 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I agree with evolving - The study of entheogenics isn't a science as in we're conducting laboratory experiments per se. At least in my case, I am testing the limits and awareness of my own mind and body. This will not apply unilaterally to anyone of course so I'm not looking for or expecting any awards. I also discourage this for anyone not capable of handling the consequences. This is something that I feel needs to be done, for whatever reason, to better understand our own minds and bodies. It is not something that can be done by one individual or even many individuals devoid of sharing. Not even one of the greatest minds in the history of our world, Sir Isaac Newton, would take credit without giving credit. If I have seen further it is because I have stood upon the shoulders of giants. I'm not sure why you feel you have to defend yourself in this matter, as long as you believe in it, that should be all you need. Buzz
-------------------- Is the glass half-full or half-empty? I say it is both.
|
Tannis
ZoneTrooper
Registered: 12/13/01
Posts: 508
Loc: MD.USA
Last seen: 20 years, 8 months
|
Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
#598572 - 04/04/02 11:47 AM (21 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
To hell with arguements........they are like court cases..... Court cases are not about truth or who is right......they are about the evidence presented and admited into the court. Experience is valueable even if it can not be proved scientifically. If you take your experience and maintain a thoughtful approach.....you can maintain objectivity.......
|
|