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. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    I should add, if you have tolerance, e.g. my morning coffee, you will get withdrawl symptoms. This is not addiction however. Those who are addicted go through withdrawl after abstinence also, but show craving and have a need to have a need to have a substance by any means. Enough said by me. Lyn x.

  2. lynn Avatar
    lynn

    Ahh posting mistakes, on this computer all the time, doing an Interior Design Diploma now and my flash drive isn’t updating. New computer coming up! Cheers.

  3. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “So people can find themselves in a right mess. Lyn x.”
    I don’t know of anyone who has found them self in ‘a right mess’ from taking mescalin or LSD, other than the reported ‘bad trips’, do you?

  4. Michael Prescott Avatar

    LSD can lead to recurrent episodes of psychosis, as well as flashbacks, panic attacks, and persistent hallucinations. These effects can last for years, even after the drug has been discontinued.
    From what I’ve read, mescaline is unlikely to cause long-term problems, other than the risk of psychological dependency.

  5. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael said:
    “LSD can lead to recurrent episodes of psychosis, as well as flashbacks, panic attacks, and persistent hallucinations. These effects can last for years, even after the drug has been discontinued.”
    And certain people, under certain circumstances, can die from eating peanuts. Here’s a less pessimistic assessment of the safety of LSD:
    https://mic.com/articles/118716/5-harmful-myths-we-need-to-stop-telling-about-lsd#.JFA5t31j8

  6. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    I’m sorry that I added the sarcastic bit about peanuts to my last comment. Caution is certainly advisable when considering the use of LSD or any powerful drug. Nevertheless, the more sanguine assessment at the link provided is worth considering.

  7. Eric Newhill Avatar
    Eric Newhill

    Have been reading these comments with interest. As an experience psychedelic user I think it is important to keep in mind that, IMO, these things do not create anything that isn’t already there. Rather they amplify what already fundamentally exists.
    If an idiot ingests them, the result will be a very high idiot who babbles inanities. Such a person is unlikely to experience meaningful insights. Instead he will focus on some of the somatic effects and, perhaps some of the visual disturbances. He will come away with a report that it was “really weird”. or “Oh man it was great! I was so F’ed up!”
    If someone who is a utopian at core takes these things, he comes away with visions of how everything could be so wonderful if only…..
    If a paranoid or psychotic takes them, it can be a bad trip and someone might get hurt.
    Therapeutically, these compounds can be helpful for those who are basically intelligent, insightful, good people, but have some kind of anxiety or depression that impedes their lives to some extent. The expanded consciousness can help them get past those impediments. However, laymen can make mistakes determining who is basically ok and who is basically not ok.
    IMO these drugs should only be used by people who are physically fit and mentally well grounded and who do positive things in their sober lives. We take these things to remind us of the infinity beyond our little ego existence when the demands of the world have caused too much emphasis on that ego existence. These drugs are NOT a way of life. They are tools. Serious tools – and should only be one in a very robust kit.
    The uninitiated (to substantial doses) simply cannot conceive of the profound transformation of awareness that these things can bring about. The heightened sensitivity, the heightened intellect, the spiritual unfolding can be beyond words. But it’s not like anyone can just randomly swallow some concoction and in a couple hours be there on demand. It just doesn’t work that way. That misunderstanding by promoters is disingenuous and dangerous.

  8. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “LSD can lead to recurrent episodes of psychosis, as well as flashbacks, panic attacks, and persistent hallucinations. These effects can last for years, even after the drug has been discontinued.”
    And is these effects more robust than those of taking any other powerful drug either medicinal or experimental?
    “From what I’ve read, mescaline is unlikely to cause long-term problems, other than the risk of psychological dependency.”
    So it differs not from most other mood-altering drugs?

  9. Robbie Avatar
    Robbie

    Yes LSD can cause these issues, every drug, legal or illegal carries a risk. However compared to alcohol and many other illegal drugs, psychedelic drugs are very safe and we should try to look at them objectively.

  10. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Julie wrote, “And is these effects more robust than those of taking any other powerful drug either medicinal or experimental?”
    Probably, since some of these folks end up as permanent residents of psychiatric hospitals. Anyway, it seems like you’re moving the goalposts, since I was responding to your comment: “I don’t know of anyone who has found them self in ‘a right mess’ from taking mescalin or LSD, other than the reported ‘bad trips’, do you?”
    Clearly, it is possible to be in a right mess from taking LSD. It may also be possible to get into a right mess from taking other substances, but that’s a separate issue. Not to mention that most people who take “medicinal” drugs do so under a doctor’s supervision.
    I do get a little tired of people who promote hallucinogenic drug use on my site, often insisting that it’s wonderfully safe and, at worst, no more dangerous than having a cocktail. Sometimes they also argue that it’s better to self-medicate than to rely on a doctor’s care.
    I think these people are being very irresponsible. We don’t know who’s reading these comments and what their level of maturity may be. And it should be obvious that taking powerful hallucinogens is potentially quite dangerous, as Eric points out. It should also be obvious that a trained physician is far more likely to spot dangerous side effects or signs of dependency than the untrained layman who is taking the drugs, especially since the physician often relies on blood tests and other physical exams to check for problems.
    I almost never post anything about drugs (and, in fact, did not mention drugs in the main post) because I know the comments thread will inevitably be bombarded with statements that minimize the risks and extol the mind-expanding possibilities. Meanwhile our rehab facilities and psychiatric hospitals host thousands of people suffering from the serious debilitating effects of drug abuse. (I could support that statement with a link or two, but why bother? The same people will just tell me it’s all “propaganda.” *Sigh.*)

  11. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “Not to mention that most people who take “medicinal” drugs do so under a doctor’s supervision.”
    What’s that got to do with anything, Micheal? Sorry I can’t find the quotes off hand, but there are endless long lived people (retired medics among them) who advise that the secret of longevity is to avoid doctors. Moreover, suicides (accidental or otherwise) are mostly the result of a overdose of prescription drugs – supplied by doctors – particularly among the rich and famous.
    Every drug has side effects that poses risk. To distinguish between psychedelic substances and others seems, at least to me, something of a pedestrian approach to the subject.

  12. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    ‘an overdose’ (just in case you quote my grammatical error, our Michael.) 🙂

  13. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Dare I say, “Amen” Michael to your post of 9/2/16? – AOD

  14. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    It is true that I have not tried marijuana or any hallucinogens, so according to some here that disqualifies me from commenting about them. But I have to bite my tongue when I read a comment that taking a prescribed medication to treat a malfunctioning nervous system was equated with being addicted to illegal drugs. I would never say that a diabetic is addicted to insulin, or that a menopausal woman is addicted to progesterone or estrogen, or that someone who has had a kidney transplant is addicted to immuno-suppressant drugs. To make that kind of comparison about someone taking medication to prevent anxiety and panic attacks, to me is just faulty thinking, perhaps evidence of the regular use of mind-altering illicit drugs. – AOD

  15. Eric Newhill Avatar
    Eric Newhill

    Agreed Michael,
    I know some users of psychedelics that ended up having serious mental health issues. I don’t know if the drugs caused or contributed to the issues or if the people would have ended up that way anyhow. To dismiss the possible involvement of the drugs is irresponsible.
    I have used these things once or twice (maybe three times, but some years none) a year for over 30 years. Even so, a couple years ago I consumed some mushrooms and got into a very bad space. With my experience I was confident at first I could pull out of it, but found myself unable to. I had been volunteering at hospice a lot, working too much at the office, had some painful family issues occurring and it was the middle of a cold bleak winter.
    I started to freakout on a trip about being on my death bed and all these regrets in life. A lot of these feelings and thoughts weren’t my own. I was taking in a whole massive physic overdose of bad mojo. I tried letting go and seeing where it would take me, but I couldn’t ride it out. It just got uglier and more painful with no end, no redemption in sight. I was too run down energy-wise to turn it around. I actually started praying, desperately, for it to end. seriously. Then that became part of the trip (dying people wanting death to release them in an almost suicide like way and not understanding what that really meant). It was so bad.
    Fortunately, I friend of mine had some valiums that were prescribed as a muscle relaxer for an injury. My wife called him up and he, being a good friend, gave me a couple valiums. Those and a couple beers took the edge off the trip and brought me down to where I could cope.
    It had been bad beyond words. And that’s an experienced user who recognized the signs and knew how to talk himself through a rough spot and what to do when that wouldn’t work. I shudder to think what could have happened to a novice without a caring competent caregiver. Lasting psychological effects or suicide would have been very possible outcomes.
    People are way too willing to be 100% for or against something. I don’t know why people can’t be balanced in their assessments. Psychedelics, in the dosage range that makes them really work, can be VERY DANGEROUS. You are opening yourself to the psychic energies of the universe. Yes, there’s a lot of good and beauty out there, but there is also a lot of pain and ugliness. This gets back to my criticism of people that think there is a big love god running everything. Maybe there, maybe there isn’t, but there is a lot that isn’t that and it can get you and get you good. Psychedelics leave you open to being got.

  16. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael said:
    “I almost never post anything about drugs . . . because I know the comments thread will inevitably be bombarded with statements that minimize the risks and extol the mind-expanding possibilities.”
    Maybe you don’t need to worry so much. Between Amos, Lynn, and you, I’d say the risks (accurately stated or not) are getting at least as much air time as the rewards.
    In a forum like this, drugs are an unavoidable topic. Because so many of the substances we consume—sugar, coffee, wine, antidepressants, weed, etc.—are pivotal in how we view reality.
    So where would you draw the line?

  17. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “In a forum like this, drugs are an unavoidable topic. Because so many of the substances we consume—sugar, coffee, wine, antidepressants, weed, etc.—are pivotal in how we view reality.”
    That’s a very good point, Bruce. Right now the government (here in the UK) is taking measures to reduce the amount of sugar that is consumed because of its effects on health (obesity) and its mood altering properties in children. That aside, I have never understood why alcohol isn’t regulated in the way that other ‘dangerous’ drugs are. If it was introduced tomorrow it certainly would be. Like so many of our current laws, there’s not much obvious logic behind it.

  18. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Julie said:
    ” . . . there are endless long lived people (retired medics among them) who advise that the secret of longevity is to avoid doctors. Moreover, suicides (accidental or otherwise) are mostly the result of a overdose of prescription drugs – supplied by doctors . . .
    Every drug has side effects that poses risk. To distinguish between psychedelic substances and others seems, at least to me, something of a pedestrian approach to the subject.”
    Brava, Julie!

  19. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    AOD said:
    “To make that kind of comparison . . . is just faulty thinking, perhaps evidence of the regular use of mind-altering illicit drugs.”
    Yeah, but you know, at least I had some good years before then. Since you don’t use drugs yourself, your stupidity must be genetic.

  20. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Julie,
    You say that, “Moreover, suicides (accidental or otherwise) are mostly the result of a overdose of prescription drugs – supplied by doctors – particularly among the rich and famous.”
    Now I don’t know where you get your information but take a look at this link.
    http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/9/07-043489/en/
    This link states that worldwide, hanging and firearms are the most common suicide methods although drugs and alcohol come in second in the United States.
    I don’t know why you need to take a jab at doctors. Who else writes prescriptions for medications? And why particularly among the rich and famous? Of course you hear about the “rich and famous” in the media but there are far more suicides among people who are not rich and famous, don’t you think?
    And yes, there may be an “endless [list of] long lived people (retired medics among them) who advise that the secret of longevity is to avoid doctors.” but so what? Opinions are a dime a dozen. There is an inside joke among medical personnel that ‘the last place they would want to be if they were sick is a hospital.’ But I can tell you that if I had a gall stone stuck in my bile duct, the first place I would want to be is in the hospital under the care of a good surgeon.
    There probably is an endless list of people who avoided doctors and died. It’s just that we don’t here from them. – AOD

  21. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    It’s ‘hear’ not ‘here’ of course. – AOD

  22. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Julie wrote, “I have never understood why alcohol isn’t regulated in the way that other ‘dangerous’ drugs are.” Seriously? Maybe you were a Prohibitionist in a previous life!
    I think it’s kind of funny how some people are so committed to the proposition that LSD, et al. are not (very) dangerous that they’re led to overstate the dangers of foods, prescription drugs, and even medical treatment as such. I don’t necessarily disagree with the idea that there can be positive, even mind-expanding effects from such drugs, but it ought to be obvious that there are also significant risks. To equate the dangers of powerful hallucinogenics with the health risks posed by sugar strikes me as absurd. And to suggest that relying on a doctor is bad for your health, and that you’re better off self-medicating with illegal drugs bought on the street, is just bizarre.
    I know a woman whose brother ended up in a nursing home for life after a single “bad trip” on some drug – I don’t remember which one. As I recall, it brought on a stroke that left him partially paralyzed and brain-damaged. When people blithely downplay the dangers of hallucinogenics, I think of that guy, who died last year. Is this anecdotal? Sure, but no more so than the octogenarians who’ve never seen a doctor or the suicides facilitated by over-prescribing meds.
    Here’s another anecdote. The mystery writer Edgar Wallace was in the midst of working on a screen treatment for the original “King Kong” when he came down with pneumonia. Being a Christian Scientist, he refused medical care and self-treated by drinking a lot of sweet tea. He died. Apparently not everyone who declines to see a doctor lives to a ripe old age.
    When smart people make glaringly fallacious arguments, it’s usually because they’ve been backed into a corner trying to defend a position that doesn’t make sense. I’ve found that the best option in that situation (which, sadly, I’ve been in more than once) is to admit error and start over. The second best option is to quietly withdraw from the discussion. The least desirable option is to keep flailing.
    Once you’ve gotten to the point where candy bars are as dangerous as heroin, doctors are more life-threatening than drug dealers, and Prohibition is an idea whose time has come, it would be best to either rethink or retreat. There’s just no winning from a position like that.
    Cheers!

  23. Eric Newhill Avatar
    Eric Newhill

    As far as toxicity goes, the psychedelics are very safe. You can’t overdose and experience a system failure (cardiac, respiratory) like heroin or cocaine.
    But that assumes the drug you’re taking is what you think it is.
    Nor do psychedelics cause brain damage. That’s old myth that has been debunked.
    The risks are psychological harm, accidents and suicide. These can be mitigated to a large extent by using responsibly, good setting, good mindset going in, with sober guides and a stand by drug to help one come down fast if needed (e.g. valium). However, there is always some residual risk even under the best of circumstances.
    A big problem is people not being responsible. The residual risk is something that each person needs to weigh on their own. But the must be made aware of that risk.
    I have to agree that alcohol is a far more dangerous drug in terms of physical health damage, addictive potential and being a major factor in accidents, fights,rapes and general mayhem. Prohibition doesn’t work. What’s different about alcohol is that we understand it and have well established rituals for its consumption and for dealing with the negative effects – though this doesn’t stop the negative effects from happening all too often. In my small town, we’ve had two college students die from alcohol poisoning in the past 5 or 6 years.
    IMO, psychedelics should be legal, but only to be used in licensed retreats by people that have passed a psychological exam and who have been educated as to the risks. Of course, someone like me knows how to identify certain mushroom species which are indigenous to where I live. They even grow on my property, sometimes abundantly. So legal status is something that is a bit fluid.
    Bottom line, IMO, is that nothing in life is 100% safe or “for sure” and we’re all going to pass out of the world sooner or later. Driving an car or, especially, a motorcycle, is incredibly risky. Many extreme sports are very risky, but not illegal. So it should be individual choice as to what risks will be taken and for what reasons. I do not like a government that treats its citizens like children and creates prohibitions for their own good. The key is understanding the facts. Neither the pro-psychedelic crowd not the anti-psychedelic crowd is very good at realism. So risk cannot be accurately assessed. Such is politics in America.

  24. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    LOL! Michael my point – which, clearly, I haven’t made sufficiently well – is that there is no point in outlawing some ‘dangerous’ drugs while condoning others. They *all* have risks. The person I had in mind who advised, in a quote I read recently, to avoid doctors if one wants to improve the chances of longevity was a retired doctor himself. I was pointing out the irony in that he should know. One might as easily say if you want to become wealthy avoid lawyers. Sometimes a lawyer is essential – but I imagine anyone here who wants to get my drift will do so.
    As for sugar being a dangerously addictive, health destroying chemical compound:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-37265752?SThisFB
    I don’t know if the above link will work here, and I don’t know if you Americans (as a nation) are battling an obesity epidemic, but here in the UK measures are being taken. I don’t agree with the approach outlined in the article above, but I do believe that people need to be educated to understand the the risks that everyday legal substances pose. Parents often condition their children into sugar addiction unaware of the lifetime consequences to their child.
    I could bang on, but I don’t find this subject particularly inspiring. We were (I though) discussing the psychedelics. So far I have seen no good reason to deny consenting adults, who are aware of the potential risks involved, to take such consciousness-expanding substances should they choose to do so in a responsible manner. There is no logic that I can see in denying such a right while allowing people free access to the equally (if not more) dangerous drug alcohol etc. etc. etc..

  25. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Michael said:
    “To equate the dangers of powerful hallucinogenics with the health risks posed by sugar strikes me as absurd.”
    Michael, are you really unaware of the problems caused by eating too much sugar, and that some consider it one of the gravest health issues we face?
    http://time.com/4087775/sugar-is-definitely-toxic-a-new-study-says/
    http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/eating-too-much-added-sugar-increases-the-risk-of-dying-with-heart-disease-201402067021
    Those are hardly radical publications.
    In my own life, the evidence is clear. Year after year, I used to suffer from hacking coughs that would last months at a time. Cutting way back on my sugar consumption, even avoiding eating too much fruit, has cured that completely—*unless* I start overdoing it again. Then I see the old symptoms creep back, until I cut back again.
    I’ve seen this cycle repeat too many times to doubt its validity. Not to mention that I no longer suffer from the hills and valleys of energy swings during the day.
    But these are only *personal* examples. From The Telegraph:
    “Around the world, a growing body of expert opinion – the ‘No Sugar’ movement – is leading a global fightback and warning that our sweet habit is completely out of control, leaving a nasty taste in the mouth of the body public. Sugar, whether added to food by you or the manufacturer, is the greatest threat to human health, bar none, they say. And unless we wise up and quit en masse, we don’t just risk personal obesity and disease, but national bankruptcy and collapse as the toll our ill health takes on our countries’ economies threatens to destabilise the modern world.”
    While this may strike you as hyperbole, it seems that you’ve given no thought at all to the matter. And to be clear—they’re not suggesting that we eat *no* sugar (which is obviously impossible) but that we cut way back.
    With its addictive powers, mood swings, withdrawal symptons, and health risks, sugar most definitely is a drug, and a dangerous one. And it impacts nearly everyone on the planet to some extent. So for you to say:
    “To equate the dangers of powerful hallucinogenics with the health risks posed by sugar strikes me as absurd.”
    Well, that’s exactly right. But not in the way you meant it.

  26. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Resorting to name-calling and insults Bruce does not speak favorably of your intellectual prowess and is beneath you. It does speak to the deterioration of a brain that once may have been brilliant but after years of regular use of mind-numbing illegal drugs is no longer able to shine. And sadly, typical of many other people who misuse drugs, you are not able to recognize your own impending doom. – AOD

  27. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Michael said:
    “Once you’ve gotten to the point where candy bars are as dangerous as heroin. . . it would be best to either rethink or retreat.”
    Now that I think about it, Michael, I’m not surprised you’re unaware of the dangers of sugar. Anyone who relies mainly on their physician for health advice might easily miss such a thing altogether. Doctors tend to care little about diet, and to put their faith, instead, in surgery and drugs.

  28. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Chronic overconsumption of sugar does indeed cause health problems, but one bowl of Ben & Jerry’s isn’t going to do you in. It takes long-term abuse of sugar to negatively impact your health. Meanwhile, a single bad heroin trip can kill you.
    As a thought experiment, imagine you are a parent, and your child comes to you and admits that he ate an ice cream cone. Now imagine the same child coming to you and admitting he injected heroin. Which scenario would you find more troubling?
    Or: imagine your spouse eats more sugar than he/she should. Now imagine your spouse regularly uses heroin. Which situation is more likely to cause problems for your family?
    FWIW, I avoid sugar and sugar substitutes as much as possible, but I would not say that a Snickers bar is as dangerous as a shot of heroin. It’s a question of perspective.
    Bruce, do you stay away from dentists too? 😄

  29. Lynn bedford Avatar
    Lynn bedford

    I think we all know there are a number of behaviours, foods, drugs etc with degrees of risk. Of which care is needed to be taken.I just think people are going to experiment, and need to be aware of the risks.
    Alcohol is just most commonly consumed and abused, as are cigarettes. Here’s a list of drugs by addictiveness based on some research.
    Herion (1), crack cocaine (2),nicotine (3), methadone (4), crystal meth (5), Alcohol (6),Cocaine (7), Amphetimines (8), Benzodiapines (9), GHB (10).
    https://www.thefix.com/content/10-hardest-addictive-drugs-to-kick7055
    Benzodiapines, are often used to cope with withdrawl, as is alcohol and marijuana.
    Cheers.

  30. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    AOD said:
    “Resorting to name-calling and insults Bruce does not speak favorably of your intellectual prowess and is beneath you.”
    What name did I call you?
    As to the insult, when you tell someone that their brain is damaged and their thinking is now faulty (to use your word), you need to expect that they might insult you right back.

  31. Bruce Siegel Avatar

    Michael, I was looking at the big picture. And from that perspective, I think it’s fair to say that overconsumption of sugar is a more pressing health concern than psychedelics use.
    “Bruce, do you stay away from dentists too?”
    Nope. I even brush my teeth.

  32. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Bruce wrote, “I think it’s fair to say that overconsumption of sugar is a more pressing health concern than psychedelics use.”
    It’s definitely not a more pressing concern than the heroin epidemic in our schools.

  33. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    I said:
    “I think it’s fair to say that overconsumption of sugar is a more pressing health concern than psychedelics use.”
    Michael said:
    “It’s definitely not a more pressing concern than the heroin epidemic in our schools.”
    Heroin is not a psychedelic! In fact, psychedelics are building a reputation for their ability to help cure addiction to heroin and other destructive drugs.

  34. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “Bruce, do you stay away from dentists too? 😄”
    I can’t speak for Bruce, but I rarely visit dentists and have remarkably good teeth and gums. The reason why I rarely visit dentists is because in my early twenties our family dentist did so much work on one of my molars that it, later, had to be removed. It’s the only adult tooth that I have lost.
    After we moved home, my new dentist remarked that with teeth like mine I should not have lost any. I later read that my former dentist had been prosecuted for doing unnecessary dental work in order to claim extra fees.
    The reason why my teeth and gums, although largely dentist free, are in such good shape is because I look after them religiously and take a daily dose of Plaque Off.

  35. Eric Newhill Avatar
    Eric Newhill

    Actually, both the heroin and the over consumption of sugar are very serious problems. Obesity is the major clinical driver of health care insurance costs in this country. It leads to a host of serious – and expensive – health issues. Everything from joint replacements to cardiovascular issues, diabetes, kidney failure……it’s just ugly. Heroin will kill you today and obesity will kill you tomorrow and at greater societal cost.
    But heroin is not a psychedelic drug. It’s an opiate. No one is using it to expand consciousness. It’s for pain relief and euphoria and escaping reality.

  36. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    ” imagine your spouse eats more sugar than he/she should. Now imagine your spouse regularly uses heroin. Which situation is more likely to cause problems for your family?”
    And just imagine if your spouse becomes a non-functioning, abusive alcoholic?
    Bottom line: the abuse of any kind of drug is harmful both to society and to health. No one is suggesting that illegal drugs should replace orthodox health care. The suggestion is that one should have the same degree of freedom to choose. Pure (properly sourced) heroin is not dangerous in the way that street heroin can be. In just the same way, legally produced alcohol is considerably safer than bootleg.
    Personally, I’ve never tried heroin – if only because I’ve never felt any need to. I tried cannabis once and it simply gave me cold hands and feet; perhaps it was poor quality. But it didn’t inspire me to try it further, and, although I drink wine, I don’t ever let myself get even approaching a state of drunkenness.
    As I said earlier, I would like to try LSD or mescalin, but I fear a negative effect and possible loss of control. I am, therefore, reluctant to do so.
    At the risk of making this discussion more petulant than it already is, I would add that I didn’t altogether appreciate the ad hominem attack you made against me earlier, Michael. When it comes to the moral issues of debating technique it’s often advisable that those who live in glass houses refrain from throwing stones.
    But I think, by now, we all understand each other and each other’s perspective on this subject sufficiently to be ready to move on to something more productive, don’t you? 🙂

  37. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Julie wrote, “I would add that I didn’t altogether appreciate the ad hominem attack you made against me earlier, Michael. When it comes to the moral issues of debating technique it’s often advisable that those who live in glass houses refrain from throwing stones.”
    You mean when I joked that you must have been a Prohibitionist in a previous lifetime? I thought it was funny, but I apologize if it came across as an ad hominem.
    While we’re on the subject, I don’t like it when you refer to me as “our Michael.” To me, it seems condescending. Not a huge deal, just something that gets under my skin a little.
    Bruce, I know heroin is an opiate, but I thought you were arguing that sugar is a greater health threat than illegal drugs in general. I can rephrase my thought experiment: if your child came to you and admitted that a) she had just eaten a pint of ice cream or b) she had just used LSD, which admission would worry you more?
    The point is that sugar can be dangerous in large quantities over time, but drugs like LSD can be dangerous in single doses.
    I like Eric’s idea of having (legal) retreats staffed by experts who supervise controlled experimentation with psychedelics by properly screened adults. That option could prove very beneficial to the individuals involved and to our understanding of consciousness.
    However, I think this change in policy is unlikely, because just as psi is marginalized in most societies, any sort of experimentation with consciousness is also marginalized. I think there is a deep-seated taboo against pulling back the curtain.
    Anyway, I agree with Julie that this topic is pretty well played out now.

  38. Julie Baxter Avatar
    Julie Baxter

    “While we’re on the subject, I don’t like it when you refer to me as “our Michael.” To me, it seems condescending. Not a huge deal, just something that gets under my skin a little.”
    In the part of the UK that I come from it’s a phrase used to show acceptance and affection within a family or social group. Clearly, that sentiment doesn’t appeal to you. My apologies for the unwanted familiarity.

  39. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Bruce,
    If you can’t see the forest for the trees then I am not going to point it out to you. – AOD

  40. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    Jumping from ‘sugar’ to ‘obesity’ is leaving out a few important steps I think. Very simply, obesity is usually the result of eating more food than is necessary to meet one’s energy needs. In well-off countries, sugary foods are only one of the causes of obesity. The bigger causes are overconsumption of carbohydrates, of which sugar is one, and lack of exercise. (There may be some genetic reasons for obesity too.) Sources of large amounts of carbohydrates include not only sugar but also, foods high in starch including all cereal grains, noodles, dumplings and all other pastas, all breads and things made from bread , crackers, pretzels, cakes, white and brown rice, white potatoes, sweet potatoes, yams, corn and corn products and on and on. Some of these high carbohydrate foods are often recommended as part of a healthy diet and some of them are part of a cultural identity.
    In a country with an overabundance of all foods, such as the United States, and in which children and adults spend the preponderance of their time sitting, either in school, at work or at home at the computer or watching television, it is not a surprise that its citizens are obese. It is not just a ‘sugar’ problem in the U.S. it is also a problem of life style and culture.
    I should add too that obesity is not always a death sentence. Many healthy overweight people live a long life and I believe that people with a few extra pounds have been reported to actually live longer than those people who are thin.
    Nevertheless, in my opinion the quantity of refined sugar in the American diet is its most unnatural ingredient and probably the American people would be healthier if it were reduced. – AOD

  41. Robbie Avatar
    Robbie

    As I’m from the UK I’ll just back up what Julie is saying about ‘our Michael’ – it’s an extremely friendly term and isn’t meant to be condescending at all!

  42. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Michael said:
    “I can rephrase my thought experiment: if your child came to you and admitted that a) she had just eaten a pint of ice cream or b) she had just used LSD, which admission would worry you more?”
    Surely you know that my thoughts never ran along these lines.
    “I like Eric’s idea of having (legal) retreats staffed by experts who supervise controlled experimentation with psychedelics by properly screened adults. That option could prove very beneficial to the individuals involved and to our understanding of consciousness.”
    This is exactly what is indeed happening. Is anybody here reading this? Hello?!!!!
    http://www.maps.org/research
    And the focus is exactly where it should be: not on some abstract experimental design, but on how we can use these substances to lead better lives. That’s the truth that matters, isn’t it? Anything else is mere distraction.
    “However, I think this change in policy is unlikely, because just as psi is marginalized in most societies, any sort of experimentation with consciousness is also marginalized. I think there is a deep-seated taboo against pulling back the curtain.”
    Yes! Except for the fact that, as I said, the policy change is already in its first stages, this is exactly what I want to say. And it brings us full circle back to how this discussion began:
    Your essay about how our world is a virtual reality, followed by Luciano’s pointing to someone who has seen beyond the illusion.
    Then Amos saying, this woman isn’t seeing any profound truth, she’s crazy! She uses drugs!
    As you point out, Michael, there’s a taboo against pulling back the curtain, and people who do so—and the means they use to do it—will have nasty things said about them.
    *That’s* the point I want to make. And apparently, you do too.
    Yes.

  43. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Okay, I stand corrected on “our Michael.” It’s not an expression used in the US, at least as far as I know. My apologies. Julie, feel free to keep saying it if you want to!

  44. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Michael said:
    “I can rephrase my thought experiment: if your child came to you and admitted that a) she had just eaten a pint of ice cream or b) she had just used LSD, which admission would worry you more?”
    To be clear: if the choice was between her being a sugar junkie year after year after year, or taking LSD once, I’d be more concerned with the former.
    Much more concerned.
    And if you think my answer is a radical one, here’s what Sam Harris has to say on the subject of LSD and daughters:
    “I have two daughters who will one day take drugs. Of course, I will do everything in my power to see that they choose their drugs wisely, but a life lived entirely without drugs is neither foreseeable nor, I think, desirable. I hope they someday enjoy a morning cup of tea or coffee as much as I do. If they drink alcohol as adults, as they probably will, I will encourage them to do it safely. If they choose to smoke marijuana, I will urge moderation.[2] Tobacco should be shunned, and I will do everything within the bounds of decent parenting to steer them away from it. Needless to say, if I knew that either of my daughters would eventually develop a fondness for methamphetamine or crack cocaine, I might never sleep again. But if they don’t try a psychedelic like psilocybin or LSD at least once in their adult lives, I will wonder whether they had missed one of the most important rites of passage a human being can experience.”
    Let me repeat that last part:
    “But if they don’t try a psychedelic like psilocybin or LSD at least once in their adult lives, I will wonder whether they had missed one of the most important rites of passage a human being can experience.”
    Does my answer still sound off the wall?

  45. Michael Prescott Avatar

    “Does my answer still sound off the wall?”
    To me, yes. And I think it’s funny that you use the word “junkie” with regard to sugar but not, apparently, with regard to illegal street drugs.
    Look, you and I are never, ever going to agree on this. You believe in avoiding doctors and self-medicating with drugs bought from dealers on the street. I believe this is the worst possible course of action. You believe it’s not a big deal if your child takes LSD. I believe it’s a very big deal. You believe that sugar will mess you up worse than powerful hallucinogens. I believe that while overconsumption of sugar is a problem, you’re overstating the risks compared with the risks of drug abuse. And I believe that most health professionals, social workers, and drug rehab experts would agree with me on all these things.
    So we’ll just have to agree to disagree, as I don’t see any point in arguing about this topic any longer.

  46. Michael Prescott Avatar

    Postscript: While I disagree with Bruce, Julie, and others, I admire their persistence in presenting their point of view.

  47. Bruce Siegel Avatar
    Bruce Siegel

    Michael, I agree that there’s no point in further discussion on this topic. But I’m disappointed that you would end with this summary, because none of it accurately reflects my viewpoint:
    “you use the word “junkie” with regard to sugar but not, apparently, with regard to illegal street drugs.”
    Junkie applies to the abuse of *any* drug.
    “You believe in avoiding doctors and self-medicating with drugs bought from dealers on the street …”
    Both are over-simplifications.
    “You believe it’s not a big deal if your child takes LSD.”
    I think it’s at least as big a deal as you do.
    “You believe that sugar will mess you up worse than powerful hallucinogens.”
    Yes—excessive sugar in the long-term, as opposed to psychedelics used judiciously.
    On the whole, I’ve enjoyed the back-and-forth with you. It always helps me to clarify my own thinking, and to understand where others are coming from.

  48. Amos Oliver Doyle Avatar

    I agree! This topic needs to end but I can’t let Bruce get by with saying, “Then Amos saying, this woman isn’t seeing any profound truth, she’s crazy! She uses drugs!” He is putting words in my mouth and another example of Bruce rewriting reality to fit his own views. For the record, I did not say that! – AOD

  49. Lynn Avatar
    Lynn

    Here’s some info I found interesting. Life may be a lot older than we think- beginning shortly after earth was formed.
    I often think about evolution and how it fits with a creation theory. But I tend to think being present on earth, evolving naturally occurs over time.
    http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-09-01/fossils-dating-back-37-billion-years-show-life-earth-may-be-older-we-thought
    Cheers.

  50. Lynn Avatar
    Lynn

    I have also always thought the placebo effect really does tell us that mind alters matter. Yet it gets very little recognition.
    I find it interesting here for example, (I think they are saying) if a person thinks they are getting morphine, but given instead a morphine blocker, the drug has no effect in blocking morphine. Cool
    http://gizmodo.com/5985864/5-amazing-scientific-discoveries-we-dont-know-what-to-do-with
    Cheers.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Michael Prescott's Blog

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

Continue reading