Psychedelics are in a realm of their own, when dealing with outside neurological stimulus. Across all users, there are many different mindsets, intentions, enviorn[mental] settings, and preparation that goes into each trip. This causes many discussions and debates about the proper usage of psychedelics, from everything to advice and scientific data; The very nature of psychedelics makes this article very subjective in relation to them.
Certain aspects about psychedelics can be objectified (or identified) enough where they become somewhat predictable. For instance, with proper mind to dosage, LSD and Psilocybin will cause open eye visuals and closed eye visuals for most people. There are exceptions, wild cards of course, that goes with out saying. However, it is prevalent enough to have some sort of ground level when communicating about these drugs. Other effects follow this same trend besides visuals: Audio hallucinations, thought loops, sweating, etc, but clearly some happen more than others. The visual aspect is perhaps the most interesting because it serves such common ground.
Objectivity starts to disappear when interpreting the trip, and when applying meaning to the trip. My general rule of thumb is the less people that are aware and can identify aspects of your experience, makes that aspect more subjective. Communication is the goal to objectification. Colloquial ways of putting this are: coming to a point, meeting someone halfway, agreeing.I have ran the gauntlet of my fair share of "spiritual" and "recreational", yet I always run into barriers between some people who only use psychedelics for recreation for I have my fair share of "religious investments" with them; communication becomes difficult.
If there is one thing I'd like to try to make MORE objective is that of trying to come to a point with people when conversing about experiences. Specifically, if you experienced on psychedelics was useful to you, try to express why it was, and just as importantly how you came to that conclusion. There is a thought process to everything, and even whimsy itself is a thought process. It is useful conclusions and the mechanisms that formed them is one thing that interests me very much so; even something as "simple" as Cannabis.
How does subjectivity translate to being communicable? The visual aspect which I feel is the most objective, falls to a paradox for isn't this writing subjective? Can equal benefits come from the subjective and objective aspects? Aren't some subjective experiences pretty common and objectified, to a degree I.E. Feeling "mystical experiences" with Mushrooms?
--------------------
"I'm looking at you looking at it" SUBSCRIBE TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL PLEASE! www.youtube.com/apollyphelion Creator of the World's Worst Comic Book
|
I enjoy a kind of 3-d gestalt visual effect that I think others get but I never asked.
I sense myself in space as well as seeing the view, I notice a glassy or filmy aspect to everything as if reflections of everything were compounded inside of everything - little glass worlds, but it is still quite clear.
this eye candy effect does not freeze up, but keeps on moving, naturally.
the compounded elements or atoms of reality can take on content from the view or from memory, they seem to have a common motif which is often quizzical to me (i.e. not exactly as expected but usually pretty good).
separate from that there is also the amazing multicolored & branched radiances from streetlights etc.
I always assumed that it was somewhat like this for most people, but it is extremely hard to articulate these effects any beter than you did, since the theories get bogged down in vague mechanics and we lose the story trying to see the mechanism.
--------------------
_ 🧠_
|
The best way to quanitfy the subjective nature of the experience is to use standardized questionnaires. Indeed there are questionnaires and scales which can be used to objectify subjective, even "mystical" experiences.
It is also helpful to "standardize" set and setting. Usually these things are only possible in the rigors of a scientific study.
-------------------- ...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did. Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27. ...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely. Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|