I haven't been posting much lately, in part because I had computer problems that finally obliged me to get a new MacBook. But the other reason is that I find myself increasingly less interested in the endless back-and-forth of the survival debate. It seems that the same arguments are endlessly rehearsed, with Skeptics propounding some non-paranormal explanation for every NDE, OBE, apparition, past-life memory, and after-death communication ever reported, and treating each as if it were an isolated and rare event, while the pro-survival side comes up with more and more cases, only to be told that it's not enough (and even, according to some Skeptics, that none of it qualifies as evidence at all). Barring some breakthrough that will settle the matter once and for all, the debate, such as it is, appears likely to continue forever. 

What does interest me these days is going beyond the empirical evidence, which has been aired pretty thoroughly on this blog and in countless books and on many other websites, and trying to formulate some kind of model that will make sense of things. Now, the first point to make about this is that it's an enterprise that cannot really succeed. What I mean is, no model is ever going to capture the full reality of what's going on. Any theoretical construct (much less a mere analogy or metaphor) will fail to encompass the complete range of the phenomena it's trying to cover. The menu is not the meal, the map is not the territory, etc. The value of a model is not that it is a complete or even an accurate representation, but that it can be useful. It is a way of organizing disparate observations into a more coherent whole. Its value is epistemological, not ontological; it can be an aid to thinking, even though it is by no means a perfect reflection of reality. 

With that in mind, I'd say that the model that currently appeals most to me is the virtual reality model. I realize that this approach is open to the standard objection that we're just using the latest and most fashionable technology to conceptualize our world. As Newton's clockwork universe reflected the intricate clockwork mechanisms of his day, so we now turn to VR, the newest and coolest tech, to explain things in our time. This is true, but again, the goal is not to capture what is really going on, but to find a useful way of visualizing it. That being the case, it's not surprising that each new iteration of technology should provide us with new opportunities for metaphors and analogies. As long as we don't mistake the menu for the meal, we should be okay.

The virtual reality model is perhaps best summarized by words attributed to Roger Ebert shortly before his death: "It's all an elaborate hoax." Or perhaps by a well-known campfire song, which is more philosophically acute than most campers realize: 

Row, row, row your boat
Gently down the stream
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, 
Life is but a dream 

Or by Prospero's soliloquy in The Tempest:

You do look, my son, in a moved sort,
As if you were dismay'd: be cheerful, sir.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors,
As I foretold you, were all spirits and 
Are melted into air, into thin air:
And, like the baseless fabric of this vision,
The cloud-capp'd towers, the gorgeous palaces,
The solemn temples, the great globe itself,
Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve 
And, like this insubstantial pageant faded,
Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff
As dreams are made on, and our little life
Is rounded with a sleep.

It has much in common with Plato's theory of Forms or Ideas and with his allegory of the cave. It also has points in common with the broodings of mystics throughout the centuries, and with the insights of all those who are said to have experienced Cosmic Consciousness. 

For me personally, it seems the richest and most satisfying model — though again, only a model, and not even a fully developed one, as yet — of reality. So what exactly is the virtual reality model? 

Basically, it's the view that earthly life is a fully immersive role-playing game. This game is designed by our higher self, with which we are in only tenuous contact while embodied. The game is meant to be challenging and instructive. The stakes are, in one sense, real — we gain real wisdom and personal growth. In another sense, the stakes are illusory —Ebert's "elaborate hoax." Our physical gains and losses are of no real consequence, and even our joy and suffering are transient and ultimately trivial, no matter how powerfully they may affect us here and now. What matters is what we take away from our travails. As Kipling wrote in his most famous poem, If

If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;
If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’

The game is about winning and losing, but the real victories are those of the mind and spirit. Being embodied, we tend to forget this. And as might be expected, our immersion in the fully convincing virtual environment tends to become more complete over time, as we gradually forget whatever we knew of our origins. Children are known for not treating reality as fully real, blurring imagination and facts, and engaging in endless play. Adults usually grow out of all that. We settle in to our circumstances and become more firmly nested in the familiar "real world." Or as Wordsworth wrote in Intimations of Immortality

Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:
The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star, 
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And cometh from afar:
Not in entire forgetfulness,
And not in utter nakedness,
But trailing clouds of glory do we come 
From God, who is our home:
Heaven lies about us in our infancy!
Shades of the prison-house begin to close
Upon the growing Boy,
But he beholds the light, and whence it flows, 
He sees it in his joy;
The Youth, who daily farther from the east
Must travel, still is Nature's priest,
And by the vision splendid
Is on his way attended; 
At length the Man perceives it die away,
And fade into the light of common day.

Those who don't quite grow up, the mystics and dreamers, are derided by those practical types who, having more efficacy in the workaday world, tend to dominate the action here. But while these hardheaded realists are on top now, they often prove least insightful and least spiritually mature, and they are not learning the lessons that matter most. Ultimately, the last shall be first and the first shall be last; unless you become like  a small child, you will not enter heaven's kingdom; the only treasure worth having is spiritual mastery, which is the pearl of great price.

Life on earth is hard and painful. There is no getting around this fact. Dr. Pangloss's encomia to "this best of all possible worlds" simply do not ring true for most of us. The "problem of pain" has vexed spiritual seekers of all descriptions. Why would a loving God or a beneficent universe allow so much pointless suffering? The usual explanation, that original sin and plain old human cussedness are responsible, doesn't account for such purely natural calamities as earthquakes, tidal waves, and malarial mosquitoes. And even human-caused catastrophes like war and tyranny plague those who are innocent of any wrongdoing. So what's it all about?

Well, just how interesting or instructive would any role-playing game be if there were no obstacles, hazards, and challenges? We seek conflict and drama in movies and novels — why not in the ultimate fictional story we've devised, the story of our own lives? An author does not shrink from making things difficult for his characters; he knows that the more they struggle, the better the narrative. Our higher self, with a kind of pitiless creativity, lays traps and snares for us as we navigate the virtual environment of our personal drama. To us, it may seem like sadism, just as an animal may perceive nothing but hostile intent in the jab of the veterinarian's needle. It takes a higher intelligence to know that the pain of the injection is the necessary price of avoiding rabies. 

Moreover, while the game is planned in some respects, it is not planned out in detail. The players themselves can and will make pivotal decisions, writing their own script, which may deviate significantly from what the planners had in mind. Sometimes our higher self will nudge us back on track when we threaten to go too badly off course; others times, we are on our own. Like children learning to walk, we have to be allowed to fall. 

But the real answer to the problem of pain is that the game, however real it seems to us while we are immersed in it, is only a game, and a brief one at that. It's a cliche that as people age, they look back on their lives and wonder where the time went. All those years look like only a moment — a lifetime seems like little more than a waking dream. I think this perception is correct. It is only a moment, only a dream. When viewed from the perspective of the higher self (a perspective as alien to us as the perspective of Spaceland is to a Flatlander), all this Sturm und Drang is only the passing agitation of troubled sleep. 

Better be with the dead … 
Than on the torture of the mind to lie
In restless ecstasy. Duncan is in his grave;
After life’s fitful fever he sleeps well;
Treason has done his worst: nor steel, nor poison,
Malice domestic, foreign levy, nothing 
Can touch him further.

(Macbeth, Act III, Sc. 2

Life's fitful fever is the restless excitement of the chase, the urgent pursuit of elusive goals, the playing of the game. Our seemingly real world — our virtual reality — affords us endless opportunities to strive and suffer. By playing the game, we learn and grow, or we fail to learn and repeat the same self-defeating mistakes.  Either way, "it's all an elaborate hoax," and to the extent that we see through it, we become better players — more focused, more aware, less fearful.

And when we lose the need to win … we've won. 

Posted in
  1. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Personally I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t use marijuana, ayahuasca or other street drugs and have never ‘tripped out’ on anything but I do occasionally use prescription medications which affect the same receptors in my brain that alcohol does. I also have an occasional alcoholic drink. All of these probably rot my brain in the same way that illegal drugs do. (I have a familial tendency toward alcoholism so I have guarded against becoming an alcoholic all of my life.)
    Most of us can choose what kind of a brain we want to have by what we choose as our life style and for those who knowingly choose to give up a few or many brain cells, I say, “be my guest”.
    I have seen young people who abuse drugs including legal drugs and the long-term effects on their lives are often devastating. I have seen families destroyed by the behaviors of adult children whose behaviors are the result of damage to their brain caused by abuse of drugs. I have seen the deaths of several healthy young people from the foolish use and abuse of legal and illegal drugs. It’s such a waste of a beautiful person.
    I agree that marijuana should be legal for the reason that Michael gave but I think that people should be aware of the effects it can have on the brain if they abuse it—same as alcohol!
    In reference to Hillary and Trump I just can’t bring myself to vote for Hillary and I detest the dirty tricks Trump used to gain notoriety and support from the uninformed and minimally-educated voters but I will hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils I guess because to not vote (which is my gut reaction) is a win for Hillary. – AOD

  2. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    AOD said:
    “Bruce, I have to laugh and shake my head in wonderment at your response. Even with the evidence in front of you that drug usage destroys one’s brain you still defend to the death your use of it. ”
    This is from an article in the Washington Post on Daniel Amen, the source of this evidence you find so convincing:
    ||Officials at major psychiatric and neuroscience associations and research centers say his SPECT claims are no more than myth and poppycock, buffaloing an unsuspecting public.
    None of the nation’s most prestigious medical organizations in the field — including the APA, the National Institute of Mental Health, the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging and the National Alliance on Mental Illness — validates his claims.
    No major research institution takes his SPECT work seriously, none regards him as “the number one neuroscience guy,” and his revelations, which he presents to rapt audiences as dispatches from the front ranks of science, make the top tier of scientists roll their eyes or get very angry.
    “In my opinion, what he’s doing is the modern equivalent of phrenology,” says Jeffrey Lieberman, APA president-elect, author of the textbook “Psychiatry” and chairman of Psychiatry at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. (Phrenology was the pseudoscience, popular in the early 19th century, that said the mind was determined by the shape of the skull, particularly its bumps.) “The claims he makes are not supported by reliable science, and one has to be skeptical about his motivation.”||

  3. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    What I want to say in terms of Drugs and Alcohol having just done a uni paper, is that the public don’t get to see the statistics. Its all rather scary. And alcohol is the worst.
    What they do know about drug use, any drug, is how you use it. People have been using drugs and alcohol for time memorial however, with studies showing many manage to delve, hold down jobs, and be useful members of society.
    I agree with Michaels statement partly. I don’t like to see anyone go to jail for drug use, far too many do. They need treatment.
    Whether it be alcohol or drugs, adolescents fair poorly. Adolescents commonly binge, and drink to access, this results in school dropouts, failure, and absence from school, crime, assault, depression and suicide. It also leads to brain changes in youth and hippocampal shrinkage in older adults.
    Marijuana acts similarly, early use can lead to depression, poor concentration (it affects thinking), school drop outs and failure. Long term use has a similar action to tobacco, and more so with a bong, peripheral arterial narrowing and possible heart damage. Long term use also depresses dopamine, so many end up on anti-depressants, and can exhibit some forms of psychosis, mirroring schizophrenia.
    Alcohol surprised me the most, causal to fires, fatal car crashes, in fact most deaths for teens are from fatal crashes and late teens, suicide. Under 15 years, death on the roads is by another drinker.
    Half of all homicides in 2006 in NZ were by the perpetrator drinking or the victim. A third of all rape cases, the perpetrator was drinking. Then theres assault, of women, partners, child injury and neglect- extremely common. Violence is the most common act from a drinker towards a youth ( some 500, 000 cases a year in NZ).
    Most young people drink heavily, and the baby boom generation drink heavily and take drugs, or self medicate. They are also likely to take drugs, and drink and drive like adolescents do.
    Half of all NZers for example over 75 drink frequently (three to four times a week).
    Now I know thats a big speel, and obviously the point is, to use drugs and alcohol responsibly. Most countries try to encourage responsible usesage. Tobacco regulations have worked, but many social campaigns for alcohol are less effective, as it pervades society.
    Just some stats, I tell you alcohol stats were the most sobering I found, and drug use in baby boomers and their affects, are obviously more common. Not so good when ageing either, as they are more injurious then. But hey, everything in moderation. Lyn x.

  4. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    You win! I’m done Bruce. Believe what you want. Whatever works for you must be true. – AOD

  5. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    I have to add Bruce, that mainstream medicine has its vocal skeptics just as parapsychology has its skeptics and in a similar way, mainstream media supports mainstream beliefs. Wikipedia trashes many good doctors because their innovative treatments are not blessed by the American Medical Association and other ‘authoritative’ organizations in the same way that it trashes many good mediums.
    Dr. Max Planck reportedly said that, “Advances in medicine occur one funeral at a time.” I think that is very true but very sad that many good therapies and treatments are lost because people who have their careers invested in one therapy or technique refuse to consider that another treatment might provide better results. – AOD

  6. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck

  7. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    AOD said:
    ||Wikipedia trashes many good doctors because their innovative treatments are not blessed by the American Medical Association and other ‘authoritative’ organizations in the same way that it trashes many good mediums.
    Dr. Max Planck reportedly said that, “Advances in medicine occur one funeral at a time.” I think that is very true but very sad that many good therapies and treatments are lost because people who have their careers invested in one therapy or technique refuse to consider that another treatment might provide better results.||
    Amos, I’m delighted to hear how open-minded you are towards approaches that may be controversial, and you talked about Daniel Amen as someone who has spent his life helping people through his brain research.
    Might you also be interested in another subject that’s out of the mainstream? Namely, professionals who dedicate their lives to helping others through the use of certain medicines?
    While they’re different from the medicines you say that you use, different isn’t automatically bad, right?
    Since I went to the trouble of visiting Dr. Amen’s site, please do likewise and read this. Then, tell me what you think.
    http://www.maps.org/news/bulletin/articles/383-bulletin-winter-2014/5430-my-experience-as-a-guide-in-the-johns-hopkins-psilocybin-research-project

  8. Luciano Avatar
    Luciano

    AOD, I don’t know about marijuana, but here are two articles that suggest that ayahuasca could have beneficial effects for it’s users and no long-term negative effects.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23662333
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22761152

  9. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Thanks for the quote Julie. In normal conversation I didn’t think it was necessary to research the exact quote. – AOD

  10. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Bruce,
    Sorry to hear it was trouble for you to visit Dr. Amen’s site. I hope it didn’t tire you out too much. I will visit the site you linked and tell you what I think about it. – AOD

  11. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Luciano,
    I read the PubMed abstracts of literature reviews of possible effects of ayahausca use on mental and physical health of those who use it. I suppose ayahuasca could have beneficial effects for its users ( anything is possible) but there is nothing in these abstracts that provides any evidence that there are beneficial effects. A statement that there might be good effects is not evidence.
    Both articles essentially end by saying that more studies need to be done. Here are quotes, one from each abstract. I think they are very telling.
    “However, methodological bias of the reviewed studies might have contributed to the preponderance of beneficial effects and to the few adverse effects reported. The data up to now do not appear to allow for definitive conclusions to be drawn on the effects of ayahuasca use on mental and physical health, but some studies point in the direction of beneficial effects. Additional studies are suggested to provide further clarification.”
    “Researchers must take caution when extrapolating nonhuman data to humans and more data are needed in basic and human research before a definite opinion can be made regarding the possible toxic effects of ayahuasca in pregnant women and in their children.”
    These literature reviews don’t provide any real evidence that ayahuasca is harmful or beneficial. For my purposes such reviews are useless and a waste of my time. – AOD

  12. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Well Bruce,
    I don’t know what you are referring to when you use the term ‘certain medicines’. Do you mean hallucinogens?—like Psilocybin which is mentioned in the article you linked. I am not sure of the relevance of that article to anything we have been discussing other than Johns Hopkins University is experimenting with the use of psilocybin and other hallucinogens in cancer patients and others. And the hallucinogens marijuana and ayachausca have been mentioned in comments on this blog.
    I just am not into hallucinations caused by medications, drugs, herbs or anything else so I have little sympathy for people who find it necessary to ‘trip out” in order to find God. I see God in everything around me and I don’t find it necessary to drug myself into a psychotic stupor to find Him.
    Are you suggesting that the imprimatur of Johns Hopkins means that Psilocybin and other hallucinogens are safe to use?
    The author of the article, Mary Cosimano a social worker says that, “Psilocybin offers a means to reconnect with our true natures—our authentic selves—and find meaning in our lives.”
    Well isn’t that nice! There is way too much ‘New Age’ pap in that article.
    “I believe that love is what connects us to each other and that such a connection is brought about by being intimate with each other, by sharing ourselves with others. I believe that the nature of our true self is love.”
    All we need is love! Right?
    That article is all over the place. Cosimano says that “Professor Brené Brown, Ph D. helps us understand how important this sense of connection is on a deep level. Briefly, she states that connection is why we’re here. It’s what gives purpose and meaning to our lives. The way to connect is by being vulnerable, which means having the courage to face our fears—fears that we might fail, fears that others will realize that we aren’t perfect, fears that we are somehow unworthy of connection.”
    Well, that sounds sweet and ‘nice’ but it is just a lot of ‘crapola’. I’m not going to quote any more of it. How many people are ready to accept that their true self is ‘love’, that connection is why we’re here and that being vulnerable is the way to do it. Tell all of that to ISIS and other hate groups and see what being vulnerable and loving gets you with them. – AOD

  13. Luciano Avatar
    Luciano

    AOD, maybe I come from a country where we are easily offended… but saying that an article that I point to you to read when we’re engaging in a civilized debate is “useless” and a “waste of your time” sounds quite rude… but it must be me having a bad day and feeling paranoid. You know… this damaged brain of mine…
    So ok, no conclusive info of ayahuasca being beneficial or harmful… fair enough. While some of the evidence points to ayahuasca having beneficial effects… So are we choosing to ignore that part?
    According to you ayahuasca destroys one’s brain, but when I point you to a peer-reviewed article that states that what you have to say doesn’t make sense and even quite the contrary could be happening, you say that is useless? What kind of rational thinking is that? At least accept that your statement of ayahuasca being for addicts with damaged brains was false…
    But for some reason I don’t expect you to do that, seems like you have made up your mind and it’s ok… different people find spirituality in different places. And everyone should be free of doing whatever they deem positive for their bodies, their brains and their life.
    Sorry for having wasted your time.-

  14. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    AOD said:
    “Sorry to hear it was trouble for you to visit Dr. Amen’s site. I hope it didn’t tire you out too much.”
    This kind of sarcasm I do not need. Find someone else to talk to.

  15. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    Amos, if you have one fault it’s that you’re not grumpy enough. 🙂

  16. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Luciano, those were not peer reviewed articles. They were literature reviews. The articles per se had no evidence in them that ayahuasca was beneficial or harmful. I cannot accept general statements that ayahuasca is beneficial unless the evidence is spelled out. Just saying that something is beneficial is not the same as proving it with evidence.
    I don’t think that I said that Ayahuasca destroys the brain. What I did say is that there is evidence that abuse of marijuana does cause damage to the brain and I provided evidence by way of a SPECT scan that one young man, who abused marijuana and other street drugs had damage to his brain.
    I am sorry that you feel offended but I said nothing to offend you personally. Just because I don’t see things the same way that you do is my intellectual right. I have read many peer reviewed articles and literature reviews. Many literature reviews are not worth the time and effort spent to read them. IMHO. – AOD

  17. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Julie,
    There is no doubt about it, I am a grumpy old man and I am getting grumpier as the years go by. – AOD

  18. Luciano Avatar
    Luciano

    You are right, not peer-reviewed actually. I read them and your reply in a hurry and English being only a second language I made a mistake.
    I’m still not sure what marijuana has to do with ayahuasca… even when the girl took marijuana to trip harder during her ayahuasca experience, many people who do not use marijuana say they experienced the same feelings of being “God” or “godlike”…
    I’m not in for the use of marijuana (I’m not against it either), but I think it’s pretty different to ayahuasca. And I have no reason to think ayahuasca can cause brain damage.
    It even helped my sister’s formerly ex-husband to stop abusing of cocaine… until he came back with my sister. (Not a joke, actually happened)

  19. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Luciano said:
    “It [ayahuasca] even helped my sister’s formerly ex-husband to stop abusing of cocaine”
    I’m not surprised, Luciano! One of the most exciting uses of psychedelics like ayahuasca, ibogaine, and others, is helping addicts overcome their dependence on the sorts of drugs that really *should* be illegal.
    For an introduction to the research being conducted these days (and for the last 60 years, really) into psychedelic therapy:
    http://www.maps.org/

  20. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    Aldous Huxley’s book, ‘The Doors of Perception’, has always inspired me to want to experiment with psychedelic drugs such as mescaline and LSD. But the possibility of getting trapped for hours in some nightmare trip rather puts me off.

  21. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “There is no doubt about it, I am a grumpy old man and I am getting grumpier as the years go by.” – AOD
    If I may offer a friendly word of advice, our Amos:
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Stop it. 🙂

  22. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Julie said:
    “But the possibility of getting trapped for hours in some nightmare trip rather puts me off.”
    Casual use of these drugs does have its risks, Julie. I’ve tended to view them as a form of therapy, both psychological and spiritual. And from that standpoint, when you look at the serious work being done today with psychedelics, all of it involving the creation of safe, supportive, environments, you begin to realize that substances like psilocybin, ayahuasca, and even the relatively new LSD, when used properly, may be some of the safest, most time-tested medicines now available.
    http://www.maps.org/research

  23. Juan Avatar
    Juan

    You have already derailed quite this post.

  24. Lynn bedford Avatar
    Lynn bedford

    Yep and I’m going to derail it further. We tend to be very linear in our thinking as humans, seeing the good for example of a drug used for recreational purposes and not the negatives. It doesn’t help that the public are unaware of the statistics, or that in many cases these are absent.
    People are gong to experiment, particularly young people, its human nature. But I do think that statistics and research should be made available so people are better informed.
    Regarding the legalization of marijuana, I feel it could have dire consequences, although I can see it uses for medical purposes. Young people are likely to dabble more, and it also affects people differently.
    I have known two long term smokers personally. One stopped smoking and the change in his personality was huge. Usually quiet, reserved, insular and vague, became animated, social, quicker at thinking, more motivated etc. The other long term user is on anti-depressants, and has had a minor heart attack with occluded leg veins. I have been in the car with him after smoking and I was terrified, he over compensated and under compensated and drove very fast.
    Marijuana affects thinking in a huge number of areas, e.g. memories of events are less likely to be activated associated with an event. Also sense of time and attention- e.g. half an hour passes with no awareness and discrete timing awareness is affected, ones attention also zeroes in on a particular area to the exclusion of others. So these can have drastic effects where concentration or discrete timing is needed, such as when driving or operating machinery as well as other behaviour.
    I don’t think there are many stats for drug related driving accidents and fatalities either. So we are in the dark, particularly in everyday functioning, causation of accidents etc. lyn x.

  25. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Juan said:
    “You have already derailed quite this post.”
    By golly, you’re right. Luciano, Lynn, Julie, Amos, Michael: we owe Juan an apology.

  26. Michael Prescott Avatar

    This is purely anecdotal, but my personal observations of habitual pot smokers track with Lynn’s. I’ve noticed that, in general, they seem to lack ambition, motivation, and focus. Since these qualities are important to me, I’ve never been interested in pot (I did try it one time, in college).
    I don’t doubt that some drugs, notably ayahuasca and DMT, can offer experiences that have mystical or transcendent aspects, but unless the drugs are taken under close, expert supervision, I would be worried about negative consequences. Even meditation can have side effects; recent reports have stated that some people who’ve tried mindfulness meditation have experienced panic attacks, depression, depersonalization, and other symptoms that persisted for years.
    Opening “the doors of perception” can be exhilarating but dangerous. The line between mystical transport and madness is pretty thin. I would advise caution.

  27. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Ahh–mind-altering drugs: the pros and cons. What could possibly be a bigger subject, seeing as how any substance that modifies our awareness, even slightly, can be shoved under that umbrella. That’s a lot of substances, a lot of patterns of consumption, and a lot of mental states!
    And Michael’s even bringing mindfulness meditation into the conversation.
    As I see it, there’s no other game in existence other than exploring the infinite varieties of awareness available to conscious beings. Experiencing oneself as a fish is one, as is spending a lifetime as a dog. Then there’s the adventure of inhabiting a human body, or the way the human feels while dreaming, sipping wine, being in love, ingesting MDMA, or temporarily having his or her heart stop.
    And we all have our thoughts as to what kinds of experiences are safe, helpful, dangerous, satisfying, etc. We all have our preferences.
    And boy, do they vary.

  28. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    To complete my last comment:
    Maybe there’s only a problem when we think of our preferences as being right or wrong—when we begin to judge and legislate.

  29. Luciano Avatar
    Luciano

    Bruce: “By golly, you’re right. Luciano, Lynn, Julie, Amos, Michael: we owe Juan an apology.”
    Lol!

  30. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    My intention wasn’t to judge you Bruce, and peoples opinions vary on everything. As for legislation. I guess its needed sometimes, like laws that prevent drinking and driving.
    I do agree that prosecuting people for possession is a waste of time and many of these people are casual users and not causing problems.
    I do think we are a bit blaze about some drugs e.g. marijuana, and even alcohol. In Thailand here people were up in arms when the prime minister said amphetamines weren’t a problem. What he didnt do was qualify what he meant, and thats that alcohol causes more death and injury than the lot of them.
    I was quite shocked at the stats, they affect every area of life. Even the police know that each hour after midnight, assaults escalate.
    But hey, I drink alcohol, everything in moderation – drugs included. And preferably those less addictive.
    When my children went to school in Thailand, and as drugs are prevalent here (you get offered them in the street sometimes). I said, do you really feel you need them i.e. if you are happy without them, why dabble. Now you may have a problem with that Bruce. But as an adult, you can make a choice. I tell you I didn’t need to, there were children at school addicted and they saw it first hand. The biggest put me off yet so they told me.
    However I can see why people may want to dabble for a few reasons e.g. a hallucinogenic experience. Like Michael, its a matter of insuring you and others are safe. I don’t have a problem with that. Lyn x.

  31. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Lynn said:
    “My intention wasn’t to judge you Bruce, and peoples opinions vary on everything. As for legislation. I guess its needed sometimes, like laws that prevent drinking and driving.”
    Lynn, I was neither offended by your comment, nor responding to you in particular. And I’m sure certain laws are needed.
    But now I *will* respond to something you just said:
    “However I can see why people may want to dabble for a few reasons e.g. a hallucinogenic experience.”
    Actually, you apparently *can’t * understand our motivations,, or you wouldn’t use the word “dabble.” You speak of two options when it comes to drug use: abstinence or dabbling.
    There’s an entirely different form of engagement, one that you and many others are either unaware of or don’t take seriously. What do you know of the typical ayahuasca or peyote ceremony conducted by dedicated individuals for spiritual purposes and healing? What do you know about the research that’s being conducted today to cure addictions, depression, and ease the pain of the terminally ill using various psychedelics?
    Dabbling implies that one is engaged in a casual, offhand, way, and that the likelihood of genuine growth is slim to none.
    Would you describe a near-death experience in similar terms? I don’t think so.
    So if one can have a transformative experience through being careless enough to get in a car crash, or by failing to adequately take care of one’s health and thus having a heart attack, why is it so hard to imagine that it’s also possible to have a life-changing spiritual experience by intentionally ingesting a time-honored substance like ayahuasca?
    And why should such an act be considered dabbling?
    Honestly, though, despite my passion for the subject, I’m not angry at you, Lynn. Your apparent lack of interest in these more profound uses for psychedelics is typical, and I wouldn’t presume to judge you for it.
    Though it is a sad commentary on the current state of affairs that you’d be encouraged to write a research paper on drugs, and discuss only one side of the issue.
    It’s as if you were researching knives, and all you talked about was their use in crimes, rather than how essential they are to the chef and to the surgeon.

  32. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Last line should be:
    It’s as if you were writing on the pros and cons of knives, and you dwelled on the danger of accidents through improper use, without ever touching on the importance of cutting implements in cooking and surgery.
    The knife analogy is an interesting one: knives can be lethal, yet they’re openly available in our homes, even around kids. That’s because kids are exposed to the appropriate use of knives as they’re growing up. In many indigenous cultures—and even in some Western homes today—a similar situation exists with spiritual medicines. (Just as kids in France grow up with wine at the dinner table, without necessarily becoming alcoholics.)
    Do you read much about such enlightened parents? Nope. Our laws make it difficult to speak openly about such things.
    http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v04n4/04457fam.html

  33. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    Ok Bruce. The course I did was on short term and long term effects of drug use, with statistics of drug use. Thats just the course.
    Just like if you took a course on cooking “with Knives” as you say of a surgeon talked of “knife use” in surgery.
    People do frequently “dabble” as I was suggesting with short and long term effects as indicated by the course.
    Another course could be for therapeutic uses. Lyn x.

  34. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    I might add I leant a lot about statistics for drug use that I and most of the public are unaware of. The history of drugs use and legislation in the world for drug use, as well as harm reduction strategies rather than prosecution measures to deal with drug use in society. A very good course I felt. Lyn x.

  35. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Lynn said:
    “A very good course I felt.”
    I’m glad your course drove home the point that alcohol is the worst offender of all. Because that shows the hypocrisy of a system that sanctions drinking, while punishing those who use less dangerous substances. Thankfully, in this respect, we in the US are gradually coming to our senses.

  36. Michael Prescott Avatar

    I suspect that alcohol does the most damage in large part because it’s the most widely used, and thus the most widely abused.
    If DMT, LSD, or ayahuasca were sold in stores and consumed socially, you’d probably see at least as many problems as you do with booze.
    I’ll reiterate what I said earlier — not everyone can handle experiments in “raising consciousness,” even when limited to something as seemingly harmless as mindfulness meditation, which has been reported to cause persistent panic attacks, depression, etc. in some people. The intense experiences associated with strong psychogenic chemicals can have lasting effects, and not always positive ones. And even the use of milder products like alcohol and marijuana can lead to dependency and undesirable personality changes.

  37. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    Like Michael said its most commonly used. Just statistics Bruce, not hypocrisy. Lyn x.

  38. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael said:
    “I suspect that alcohol does the most damage in large part because it’s the most widely used, and thus the most widely abused.”
    Actually, alcohol seems to be more injurious to your health, period. Google “what’s more damaging weed or alcohol” and see if that isn’t the consensus opinion.
    “If DMT, LSD, or ayahuasca were sold in stores and consumed socially you’d probably see at least as many problems as you do with booze.”
    The idea of those substances, except perhaps LSD in low doses, being used socially, is laughable. Particularly ayahuasca. Unless your idea of a pleasant night with friends is getting out the vomit buckets.
    Having said all that, I’m not one who would presume to know if mind-altering substances or activities are appropriate for any specific person. I *am* in favor of sharing our own experiences, educating others as to the dangers and rewards, and letting folks decide for themselves.
    “And even the use of milder products like alcohol and marijuana can lead to dependency and undesirable personality changes.”
    You could say the same about watching too much TV, or spending too much time on the internet. Anything on this earth that is of value—food, sex, work, whatever—will open the door to abuse.

  39. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Bruce, you may be right about marijuana. It seems to me, though, that it’s at least possible to be a high-functioning alcoholic (though most alcoholics don’t fit this category), while I’m not sure it’s possible to be a high-functioning marijuana addict. People I’ve known who used pot habitually have been pretty easily recognizable by their lack of focus and lack of drive.
    While most people lose their focus and clarity when they get drunk, a subset actually start performing at a higher level. Many writers seem to fit this description. I suspect that the author of the Shakespearean works was an alcoholic of this type, at least for part of his career. (His alter ego, Falstaff, was addicted to sack, or cheap wine, and praised it for bringing his wit to full fruition.) Hemingway famously said you should write drunk but edit sober. Stephen King wrote most of his novels in the 1980s while addicted to a combination of beer, cocaine, and cough syrup!
    I know that ayahuasca et al. can’t really be used socially, but that’s my point – comparatively few people ever partake of it, versus the vast number of social drinkers.
    The health effects of alcohol are controversial – there are reports that drinking moderately can reduce certain heart-related problems, but on the other hand, regular consumption can damage the liver, elevate triglycerides, and cause weight gain. Plus there is always the risk of addiction. It’s a mixed bag. People in Mediterranean countries drink more alcohol per capita than Americans, yet they generally have a cleaner bill of health and are much less prone to binge drinking.

  40. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael said:
    “It seems to me, though, that it’s at least possible to be a high-functioning alcoholic (though most alcoholics don’t fit this category), while I’m not sure it’s possible to be a high-functioning marijuana addict.”
    It’s an interesting question, Michael. But at least one of the words you use in asking it carries its own value judgement, no? I mean, you’ve written that you use a medication (I would assume daily) to prevent panic attacks. (Forgive me if I have this wrong.) So if that’s accurate, would you say that you’re addicted to this drug? And if not, then why would you automatically label someone who uses cannabis daily as an addict?
    Surely it’s not just because one has been prescribed by a doctor. There are children who ingest a form of cannabis daily to prevent seizures. Are they addicts? My friend Cal uses a similar form of cannabis daily to manage his anxiety.
    So you see what I mean? The word “addict” itself may not be easy to define.
    Interesting examples you cite, though. Maybe Willie Nelson’s relationship to weed is similar to Stephen King’s with his “cocktail.” I’m sure there are many other examples. I have friends who have smoked pot daily during certain periods, while holding down demanding jobs in the music and film industries.
    I myself only used pot daily for a brief period when I was in my 20’s. But while I did manage to hold down a job, I was not what I would call high-functioning. 🙂
    Overall, I’ve used pot and other drugs, very, very, rarely. The reason I talk about those few experiences so often is that some of them have been among the most insightful and transformative of my life.

  41. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    You are so right Michael. There are some people whose brain scans appear more normal when under the influence of moderate amounts of alcohol. – AOD

  42. Douglas Avatar
    Douglas

    Atheist poster boy Christopher Hitchins is another example. He was pretty much sloshed most of the time, but stated that he needed to be to be as focused as he was.
    Even when terminally ill, he didn’t regret his lifestyle, instead claiming that without alcohol and cigarettes, he would never have been able to do what he did. I do kind of admire his refusal give the healthy living moralists any ammunition!

  43. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael, it seems to me “high-functioning” also carries its own value judgement. As you use it, the phrase implies that writing a book (for example) is a worthier way to spend one’s time than enjoying a pleasant few hours listening to music or hanging out with friends.
    Suppose someone uses pot not because they want to accomplish anything, but simply to feel good? And what if it helps them enormously in that respect? Aren’t they then functioning exactly as they want to? Who’s to say that creating a work of art or climbing the corporate ladder is a higher form of functioning than simply enjoying oneself?
    Since the examples you cite are all writers, I think the question you’re really getting at has to do with what substance and/or pattern of consumption is most conducive to the creative or artistic life. And there are probably as many answers to that as there are people who create.
    I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that the answer involves alcohol at all. After all, you’re just speculating about Shakespeare, and King’s “cocktail” was only one-third beer.
    But as I said, it’s an interesting question, and it’s possible that for most people, sober is best!

  44. Michael Prescott Avatar

    “So if that’s accurate, would you say that you’re addicted to this drug?”
    Yes, I guess so. I’m dependent on it and would suffer withdrawal effects if I discontinued it. But I do think there’s a difference between medicating under a doctor’s care and self-medicating. People who use alcohol or recreational drugs to quell anxiety or depression are taking a serious risk. Such strategies seldom work in the long run and are likely to cause more serious problems. For one thing, the necessary dosage will probably get higher and higher over time.
    I’m not against value judgments, but “high-functioning” is a term of art used by people who study addiction. It refers to the ability to perform at a high level while intoxicated. It’s not limited to creative talents. There are people who are brilliant conversationalists or suave seducers when inebriated, but tongue-tied and shy when sober. Etc.
    The phenomenon of high-functioning alcoholism among writers is well documented. I gave only a couple of possible examples. I suppose it’s possible that marijuana and other drugs serve the same purpose for musicians.

  45. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael said:
    “I’m dependent on it and would suffer withdrawal effects if I discontinued it.”
    I appreciate your openness about this.
    “But I do think there’s a difference between medicating under a doctor’s care and self-medicating.”
    You clearly have more faith in doctors than I do. Another worthy topic for discussion.
    “I suppose it’s possible that marijuana and other drugs serve the same purpose for musicians.”
    Interesting. Even though I brought up Willie Nelson, I hadn’t thought of it in exactly those terms, but you’re probably right.
    Then, of course, there are the well-known scientists and others who credit LSD with helping them make key discoveries:
    http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/01/11/8-famous-people-whose-creativity-innovation-was-inspired-by-lsd/
    Talk about high-functioning!

  46. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Ian Stevenson’s experience with LSD is also worthy of note:
    ||A Role for Psychedelics
    While I was still involved with psychoanalysis, I began experimenting with hallucinogenic (perhaps better called psychedelic) drugs. I have taken or had administered to me a number of drugs and anesthetics as part of a search for
    drugs that would assist psychiatrists in interviewing or in psychotherapy. However, here I shall speak only of the effects on me of mescaline and LSD.
    The sensory apparatus of my body is defective: I have had poor eye-sight since youth, my hearing is imperfect, and my sense of smell extremely dull. My first wife was a gifted amateur artist and also a lover of natural beauty, especially that of forests and jungles. Her senses were extraordinarily acute, and I was often aware that she could perceive aspects of the world that I did not. Mescaline could not improve my vision, but it vastly bettered my appreciation of what I saw. The beauty of the colors that I inwardly saw under the influence of mescaline made me ever afterward far more sensitive to color both in nature and in art than I had been before. From my experience with mescaline I also became more aware than I had been of the subjective element in our sense of the passage
    of time.
    With LSD I had less experience of beautiful colors and much more of memories of my early life. With one of my experiences with LSD I also had a mystical experience by which I mean a sense of unity with all beings, all things. After the second of my LSD experiences I passed three days in perfect serenity. I believe that many persons could benefit as much as I did through taking psychedelic drugs under proper medical supervision, which is the only sensible way to take them.||

  47. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    Having said that, individual reactions to drugs differ. Some are more likely to have deleterious effects. Exstacy for example if used improperly can lead to liver damage or failure even after one dose. Lyn x.

  48. Matt Rouge Avatar
    Matt Rouge

    I’ve been enjoying the discussion here. Many excellent comments. Just a few points in reply.
    I had thought “high-functioning” referred not to the benefits alcohol could confer to certain people but rather to users ability to function relatively well (hold down a job, avoid trouble with the law, etc.) while being addicted.
    I think it’s easy to go Western Myth-y and think of things (drugs, foods/diet, meditation, etc.) as *designed* to be good or bad for us. When, in fact, it is a matter of happenstance that a thing may good or bad for us on a wide-spectrum and with much variation among individuals.
    One reason I’ve never taken any “illegal” drug is that I am a heart hypochondriac and easily feel anxious. (I also get baby panic attacks fairly easily and big ones rarely. Fun!) Anything that can cause a racing heart or anxiety is not for me. That eliminates a lot, including pot (don’t want to try the pot paranoia at all). I would be interested in trying psychedelics, but I tend to have very interesting dreams that cover that category for me. Plus, I meditate as needed.
    Our method of policing alcohol and drug use has been a big failure, IMO, starting with Prohibition.

  49. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Matt said:
    “One reason I’ve never taken any “illegal” drug is that I am a heart hypochondriac and easily feel anxious . . . Anything that can cause a racing heart or anxiety is not for me.”
    I hear you, Matt. The other side of the coin is that there’s substantial research showing that psychedelics have helped many people *overcome* anxiety—particularly the fear of death. My own journeys have certainly had that effect.
    Unfortunately, I still find other things to be afraid of. 🙂

  50. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    Well my last post didn’t post.
    Legislation on drugs has been a US world led one. With developed countries changing their legislation on drugs to suit. The first drug, convention was in 1909 in Shanghai (Opium), and dangerous drugs, narcotics, psychedelics etc followed. Nixon when in power advocated a war on drugs, and most developed countries followed suit. The NZ health department advocated harm reduction strategies in their last and latest policies, but this year we had the highest incarceration rate in a decade. All just talk and no action.
    Most of us have a degree of tolerance, e.g. me with my morning coffee, and Michaels writing need, ha ha.
    But addiction is poorly understood. Those who are addicted have loss of control over how much they drink for example, such as needing to have more and prolonged use, they reiterate a need to cut down, and their failed attempts, show occupational effects as well as lifestyle ones such as drink driving charges or school failure, have relationships problems because of use, limit family time and recreational time due to use and also exhibit physical and cognitive decline.
    Obviously more prolonged use is going to lead to addiction which is a problem, but a number of drugs even after short use can be harmful. e,g, exstacy, even benzodiazepines people show tolerance on moderate doses in just 3 to 4 weeks, which is why I dont like them.
    The trouble too with taking some drugs e.g. narcotics, is they are expensive, so people go through withdrawl between doses. So they top up on benzodiazepines, alcohol and marijuana in between. Which only makes it more likely fatal, as they are depressants. Cocaine for example is popularly taken with alcohol, as it is short acting, but it combines to form a new chemical that is even more potent for example. So people can find themselves in a right mess. Lyn x.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Michael Prescott's Blog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading