Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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!

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Experience vs. Relationship
    #9036044 -

An idea, proposed by Martin Buber in I and Thou, is that human existence (or, its association with things outside itself) can be separated into two areas: that of a person engaging in an objectification of something (he calls an "experience"), or that of someone entering into a "relationship" with someone/thing.


I-It "experiences" treat the foreign thing in a purely objective state; one might gain knowledge about a tree, for instance, by considering it as an image. Brown bark, green leaves, faded yellow veins, etc. Alternately, one could conceptualize its atomic structure; think of it as a life-form, actively cycling through nature's timetable; or, at its philosophical root - "the tree" as idea, as form, as thought. Each of these conceptions represents man "experiencing". A subject to an object.


I-Thou "relationships" are different in that they have a deeper meaning to us. One can view a fellow human (a relative, perhaps) with emotion, considering them as a "brother" in the sense of love, compassion, and caring. We can attach such emotion to any thing; once that boundary of objectification is crossed, all boundaries of this "relationship" are destroyed; this in effect creates the relationship. For our tree, we might have grown up around it, had childhood meetings and hangouts near it; as such, it might hold some deeper connection with us than simply as a bunch of molecules. A subject to a subject.

These are not exclusive inasmuch as that same tree can be considered at one time an object, and at another a subject.


Considering this board, which of these might you term your association with psychedelics? As an objective "experience", or as something more?

I find that I can enter into either one of these dualities with them; but, as I find it hard for me, personally, to shake off the feeling that drug-fueled transcendence is too "artificial," I probably look at drugs in an objective light more often.


--------------------


||== all posts fictional ==||

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: psycroptic]
    #9036932 -

Quote:
I find that I can enter into either one of these dualities with them

I think the key is that both of these perspectives are dualistic, and as such bound to be limited in efficacy...As far as entering the psychedelic experience and coming down from it....it's not easy to remain objective (or a more accurate word would be detached).  Detachment comes of its own accord days, weeks, months after a psychedelic experience.

I'm curious about what you mean by "drug-fueled transcendence" being "artificial".  Could you elaborate?


--------------------
“Strengthened by contemplation and study,
I will not fear my passions like a coward.
My body I will give to pleasures,
to diversions that I’ve dreamed of,
to the most daring erotic desires,
to the lustful impulses of my blood, without
any fear at all, for whenever I will—
and I will have the will, strengthened
as I’ll be with contemplation and study—
at the crucial moments I’ll recover
my spirit as was before: ascetic.”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: Lion]
    #9038077 -

As an experience.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: psycroptic]
    #9039079 -

can't I be in an objective relationship both with the open feelings and the clear observation?


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: redgreenvines]
    #9041065 -

redgreenvines said:
can't I be in an objective relationship both with the open feelings and the clear observation?


Lion said:
I think the key is that both of these perspectives are dualistic...



I get the feeling that, in response to your question, Buber would say, "not simultaneously." I sense that the message here is that all associations can be termed under either one of these headings. Objective reasoning has its layer, and feelings and emotion its own as well.

Though I am curious as to whether gradation between the two sides is possible; if one can view something as largely logical, but still possess a small 'relationship' with it.


Lion said:
I'm curious about what you mean by "drug-fueled transcendence" being "artificial".  Could you elaborate?


When I experience psychedelia, my sensation, my reactionary instinct is (in most cases) that I am "connecting" or developing a relationship with this drug/fungi/whatever, but I chalk such a reaction to the illusions of the senses. Of course the experience feels deep; your faculties are being temporarily re-wired in such a bizarre and intense fashion that I think many, if not all, humans would instinctively think such a thing. The more I consider what it is that I'm actually doing, the more my reasoning urges me towards the idea that this experience is illusory. It is illusory in the sense that it makes reality seem "warped" or "transcendental," when in truly logical reality I'm just tripping balls.

Psychedelics "expand the mind" in that they force it into a wholly different and insober state because... they're drugs, and that's essentially what they do.

Not that the experience itself can't be spectacular :cool:


--------------------


||== all posts fictional ==||

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: psycroptic]
    #9043346 -

psycroptic said:
When I experience psychedelia, my sensation, my reactionary instinct is (in most cases) that I am "connecting" or developing a relationship with this drug/fungi/whatever, but I chalk such a reaction to the illusions of the senses. Of course the experience feels deep; your faculties are being temporarily re-wired in such a bizarre and intense fashion that I think many, if not all, humans would instinctively think such a thing. The more I consider what it is that I'm actually doing, the more my reasoning urges me towards the idea that this experience is illusory. It is illusory in the sense that it makes reality seem "warped" or "transcendental," when in truly logical reality I'm just tripping balls.



An illusion can only be seen as an illusion after it has been revealed. For a long time the world was flat in reality, for a long time atoms were the smallest parts in reality. The walls which hold your beliefs now; the periodic table, E = MC^2; are no less wrong than the last best guesses. The boundaries of reality are set based on functional convenience alone.

Psychedelics cause echoes of fallibility to become much louder than the "natural" sober-layman  mindstate generally condones. I would suggest that because of this accentuated awareness of reality as illusion the mind on psychedelics is actually more "natural" than sobriety. The "artificial" mindstate is thinking we can ever know "nature" with any certainty.

Nature is warped and transcendental, this is often hard to recognize when sober. Not to mention impossible to reconcile with reality.


--------------------
Know your self.
Know your substance.
Know your source.

The most distorted perspective possible is the perspective that yours is not distorted.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: ExplosiveMango]
    #9045258 -

Quote:
ExplosiveMango said:
The boundaries of reality are set based on functional convenience alone.


Limits upon the extent to which one human consciousness can truly "know" are most certainly not necessarily the extent of reality itself, IMHO. The less one can claim to know the better, to some degree.


Quote:
The walls which hold your beliefs now;


I mean, if what you're implying is that my personal philosophy eschews all but reason, you are extremelt mistaken mon amis.

I was being a tad cynical on explaining why I think a lot of this "I reached one world universal consciousness on acid" is bullshit for me. Psychedelics give me many new and creative insights onto things I never imagined I would ever concieve, but at the end of the day it's still a drug experience. Like I said, enjoyable and valuable in its own right, but just nothing much more - for me anyways.

Reality is manifold.


--------------------


||== all posts fictional ==||

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experience vs. Relationship [Re: psycroptic]
    #9045482 -

Quote:
An illusion can only be seen as an illusion after it has been revealed. For a long time the world was flat in reality, for a long time atoms were the smallest parts in reality. The walls which hold your beliefs now; the periodic table, E = MC^2; are no less wrong than the last best guesses. The boundaries of reality are set based on functional convenience alone.

Psychedelics cause echoes of fallibility to become much louder than the "natural" sober-layman  mindstate generally condones. I would suggest that because of this accentuated awareness of reality as illusion the mind on psychedelics is actually more "natural" than sobriety. The "artificial" mindstate is thinking we can ever know "nature" with any certainty.

Nature is warped and transcendental, this is often hard to recognize when sober. Not to mention impossible to reconcile with reality.


  :thumbup:

Quote:
Psychedelics give me many new and creative insights onto things I never imagined I would ever concieve, but at the end of the day it's still a drug experience. Like I said, enjoyable and valuable in its own right, but just nothing much more - for me anyways.


The difference being it isn't a 'drug' experience... it's an experience. Because we are walking chemical systems anyway, it doesn't matter what molecular arrangement you are under. That is part of the underlying implication, that the entirety of "you" can undergo a complete transformation by merely ingesting a substance. What does that say about the reality of "you"?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Unfolding Nature Shop: Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Artificial Life & Death
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,107 31 12/28/03 02:04 AM
by Zero7a1
* ESSAY:Psychedelic induced mystical experiences by Alan Watts tekramrepus 3,072 6 03/21/03 01:43 PM
by pattern
* We are spiritual beings having a human experience
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 ShroomismM 9,677 75 10/03/17 02:10 PM
by Apples in Mono
* H e a v e n chasingstardna 981 12 09/16/03 06:12 AM
by Leonopoly
* Temporal Experiment the_Landotter 954 3 06/25/02 10:03 AM
by the_Landotter
* My hiking experience (if you got the time)
( 1 2 all )		 Grav 2,727 20 05/24/03 11:12 PM
by Grav
* My Meditative Experiences lucid 1,184 10 12/07/03 07:44 PM
by lucid
* projecting thoughts (artificial entities) Monkah 1,758 11 11/12/02 06:59 PM
by FreakQlibrium

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
724 topic views. 1 members, 20 guests and 32 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 16 queries.