Home | Community | Message Board

Original Seeds Store - Cannabis Seeds
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Original Seeds Store Shop: CBD Compare

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
Registered: 08/01/01
Posts: 64
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
    #597864 - 04/03/02 05:54 PM (16 years, 8 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?

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator

Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
    #597902 - 04/03/02 06:50 PM (16 years, 8 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)

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Runs withscissors

Registered: 08/10/99
Posts: 948
Loc: Atlantis
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
    #597947 - 04/03/02 07:39 PM (16 years, 8 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.


Is the glass half-full or half-empty? I say it is both.

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Registered: 12/13/01
Posts: 508
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
Re: objectivity [Re: alphatrion]
    #598572 - 04/04/02 11:47 AM (16 years, 8 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.......

Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

Original Seeds Store Shop: CBD Compare

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* can you prove the existence of absolute, objective morality?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 16,357 157 12/21/04 06:31 AM
by deafpanda
* The Objective Existence of the Mystical Experience
( 1 2 all )
Sclorch 2,066 26 10/19/05 08:03 PM
by psychomime
* Reality: Our objective, benelovent friend SkorpivoMusterion 1,146 11 11/19/05 03:04 PM
by Ped
* An Aristotelian Foundation for Objectivity SkorpivoMusterion 1,302 8 04/22/06 05:40 AM
by fresh313
* Subjectivity/Objectivity Paradox Mr. Mushrooms 2,251 8 04/14/09 07:26 PM
by Mr. Mushrooms
* Objectivity, reality and philosophy of science. OMniversal 1,099 5 06/19/07 05:08 AM
by Booby
* Can God create an object so heavy he cannot lift it?
( 1 2 3 all )
MycoUnderground 2,736 59 09/07/09 03:13 PM
by laserpig
* Karma = objective morality
( 1 2 all )
deafpanda 3,813 30 01/12/05 12:46 AM
by fresh313

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Jokeshopbeard, DividedQuantum
571 topic views. 0 members, 2 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
MRCA Tyroler Gluckspilze
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2018 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.02 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 19 queries.