.

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_gramps
_Emeritus
Posts: 2485
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:43 pm

Re: Are entheogens/psychedelics against the Word of Wisdom?

Post by _gramps »

Fortigurn wrote:
Moron Brother wrote:Gravity is not beyond our physical senses. We have an organ in the ear that senses acceleration. Einstein proved that acceleration and gravitation are equivalent.

False. Scientists have often tested psychedelic substances. Research in this area is often limited because of the illegality of said substances.

I'm not so sure. Scientific discoveries often involve technological tools (like particle accelerators or telescopes for particle-astrophysics) that can detect "stuff" (like black holes, quasars, perhaps the elusive Higgs boson) that we can't with our senses. Drugs don't allow us to detect new subatomic particles or unexpected behavior of particles etc, but they do allow us to look at what is already known in an entirely context because they alter our thought pattern, as though they were to rewire the brain somehow.

Yeh, most drugs don't alter the input devices, but rather the processing devices. You could attack a high-resolution CCD camera to a large telescope and attach the camera to a 2-bit CPU and still get nothin. Or you could attach it to a Dual Core Pentium D (not trying to do product placement here :D). Of course it remains to be seen whether any drug does actually increase our "clock speed". The way I see it, our brains evolved in such a way to function in a way that ensures survival (those brains that didn't, died). However, since the invention of agriculture, fertilizer, industry etc, we have a little more spare time to deal with things other than immediate survival. Perhaps evolution has yet to catch up and allow for other brain-types to survive. In the mean time we can use drugs to do philosophy, the arts, and some psychological scientific stuff.


I see you didn't read my subsequent posts. Please do so.

It should be noted that we have cannabinoid receptors in our brains.


Noted. And?

It is said that the molecular shape of benzene came to Kekulé in a dream.


In other words, his mind was already working on a problem subconsciously, and came to the solution without the aid of hallucinogens. Exactly how this is an argument for the use of hallucinogens in solving scientific problems, I leave you to explain.

Stuff like that could come up in a drug trip potentially.


Examples, please. People have been taking this stuff for over a century. Let's see all the results. All the fantastic scientific discoveries. All the scientists rushing to elevate their minds with these incredible mind expanding substances.

Do you think perhaps there might be a reason why scientists prefer the 'old fashioned' method of using their brains, the one which involves them staying coherent?


There does seem to be some evidence that Francis Crick, and other scientists at Cambridge were experimenting with LSD. Crick, if this story can be taken as true, admits his usage of LSD assisted in his discovery of the double helix.

Here is the report:


Francis Crick, the Nobel Prize-winning father of modern genetics, was under the influence of LSD when he first deduced the double-helix structure of DNA nearly 50 years ago.

The abrasive and unorthodox Crick and his brilliant American co-researcher James Watson famously celebrated their eureka moment in March 1953 by running from the now legendary Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge to the nearby Eagle pub, where they announced over pints of bitter that they had discovered the secret of life.

Crick, who died ten days ago, aged 88, later told a fellow scientist that he often used small doses of LSD then an experimental drug used in psychotherapy to boost his powers of thought. He said it was LSD, not the Eagle's warm beer, that helped him to unravel the structure of DNA, the discovery that won him the Nobel Prize.

Despite his Establishment image, Crick was a devotee of novelist Aldous Huxley, whose accounts of his experiments with LSD and another hallucinogen, mescaline, in the short stories The Doors Of Perception and Heaven And Hell became cult texts for the hippies of the Sixties and Seventies. In the late Sixties, Crick was a founder member of Soma, a legalise-cannabis group named after the drug in Huxley's novel Brave New World. He even put his name to a famous letter to The Times in 1967 calling for a reform in the drugs laws.

It was through his membership of Soma that Crick inadvertently became the inspiration for the biggest LSD manufacturing conspiracy-the world has ever seen the multimillion-pound drug factory in a remote farmhouse in Wales that was smashed by the Operation Julie raids of the late Seventies.

Crick's involvement with the gang was fleeting but crucial. The revered scientist had been invited to the Cambridge home of freewheeling American writer David Solomon a friend of hippie LSD guru Timothy Leary who had come to Britain in 1967 on a quest to discover a method for manufacturing pure THC, the active ingredient of cannabis.

It was Crick's presence in Solomon's social circle that attracted a brilliant young biochemist, Richard Kemp, who soon became a convert to the attractions of both cannabis and LSD. Kemp was recruited to the THC project in 1968, but soon afterwards devised the world's first foolproof method of producing cheap, pure LSD. Solomon and Kemp went into business, manufacturing acid in a succession of rented houses before setting up their laboratory in a cottage on a hillside near Tregaron, Carmarthenshire, in 1973. It is estimated that Kemp manufactured drugs worth Pounds 2.5 million an astonishing amount in the Seventies before police stormed the building in 1977 and seized enough pure LSD and its constituent chemicals to make two million LSD 'tabs'.

The arrest and conviction of Solomon, Kemp and a string of co-conspirators dominated the headlines for months. I was covering the case as a reporter at the time and it was then that I met Kemp's close friend, Garrod Harker, whose home had been raided by police but who had not been arrest ed. Harker told me that Kemp and his girlfriend Christine Bott by then in jail were hippie idealists who were completely uninterested in the money they were making.

They gave away thousands to pet causes such as the Glastonbury pop festival and the drugs charity Release.

'They have a philosophy,' Harker told me at the time. 'They believe industrial society will collapse when the oil runs out and that the answer is to change people's mindsets using acid. They believe LSD can help people to see that a return to a natural society based on self-sufficiency is the only way to save themselves.

'Dick Kemp told me he met Francis Crick at Cambridge. Crick had told him that some Cambridge academics used LSD in tiny amounts as a thinking tool, to liberate them from preconceptions and let their genius wander freely to new ideas. Crick told him he had perceived the double-helix shape while on LSD.

'It was clear that Dick Kemp was highly impressed and probably bowled over by what Crick had told him. He told me that if a man like Crick, who had gone to the heart of human existence, had used LSD, then it was worth using. Crick was certainly Dick Kemp's inspiration.' Shortly afterwards I visited Crick at his home, Golden Helix, in Cambridge.

He listened with rapt, amused attention to what I told him about the role of LSD in his Nobel Prize-winning discovery. He gave no intimation of surprise. When I had finished, he said: 'Print a word of it and I'll sue.'


http://www.hallucinogens.com/lsd/francis-crick.html

For what it is worth in the discussion.
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil...
Adrian Beverland
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Mister Scratch wrote:A great and interesting thread. To my mind, the WoW really has little or nothing to do with actual foods / beverages / plants / drugs. The things singled out by the Brethren as being 'bad' have been shown time and again to have legitimate uses in a variety of contexts. The real point of the WoW is that it functions as a sort of "badge" of obedience. It's not so much that the Word of Wisdom really and truly benefits anybody's health, per se, it's that it helps prove how willing you are to follow the Brethren's dictates. The WoW could ban alcohol, psychedelic mushrooms, fried chicken, Juicy Fruit gum, and seedless watermelon, and the reasons for the banning would all be beside the point. The real point is obedience, plain and simple.


Scratch, "A great and interesting (post :-)!" I don't however agree with your first sentence: WW says veggies lots; fruits in season; meats little--when ya can't get veggies--but no BBQs!

"...things singled out by the Brethern as being (good) in time have been shown to be (bad)..." And of course the opposite coin side. Must remember why the Bs counted on Revs, they had little knowledge, & research was not yet much of a tool.

The 'lucky-guess' = good/bad; can't win 'em all! BUT On this one, i think they did better than on any other. Most health conscious folks abide the advice, & benefit by doing so. It's a Universal law ('Badge") i think worn by more NMs than by Mos. Which discloses more "disobedience" than obe within LDSism...IMSCO

To go the "obedience route" i suggest 'Garments' are THE badge! I had a Bishop state that as his criteria: even a fool wouldn't wear them unless he was obedient??? As for the WW there is an obvious physical reward!

About the other things?? Maybe, a "Word of Caution"???

"The real point is common-sense plain and simple." Warm regards, Roger
_Z
_Emeritus
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:24 pm

Post by _Z »

Ok, I've actually often wondered about this same thing myself. As I was sitting here pondering it, I thought of one angle that hasn't been addressed here yet.

My understanding is that the purpose of the WOW is to help us honor and protect two things: our physical bodies, and our free agency. Many of the items directly and implicitly forbidden by the WOW not only harm our physical bodies but also can take some control over our actions and chip away at our free agency through addiction.

Now before you start crafting your response I'm aware that many psychadelic drugs neither contribute to addiction nor cause significant physical harm, but they do alter one's mind-state, distort one's decision-making process, and while taking them a person is ultimately turning over a portion of their free-agency to something else.

Allowing one's free-agency to be infringed-upon in any way is generally frowned upon in the church, as can be seen in the Brethren's admonition against participating in hypnosis or certain types of emotional therapy.

When viewed from this perspective, forbidding psychadelic drugs fits pretty well into general Mormon philosophy and theology. Which is a shame, because before this explination occured to me I was pretty close to being able to justify buying some LSD from the hippies down the street. Which I would use purely for research purposes of course.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

The answer is No. Anything that alters reality is an absolute no-no.
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Post by _Pokatator »

D&C 89: 12-13

“Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly; and it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter or of cold, or famine.”

“And all wild animals that run or creep on the earth; and these hath God made for the use of man only in time of famine and excess hunger.”

I think that the bulk of the 89th section is vague and open to interpretation. And it is interpreted vaguely. But I think that the two verses dealing with meat are not vague. There are definite conditions stated needing to be met to eat meat. This has been a real stickler for me ever since I was a kid. Everyone in the Mormon church wants to play games with hot drinks, strong drinks, caffeine or no caffeine, on and on, but when something is stated that is not vague they want to pass over it. I guess you don’t want to get in between a meat eater and their meat.

From the two verses I would have to conclude that Mormons should be vegetarians in the summer and prudent meat eaters in the winter. If there is a famine, well eat what ever you can. There is not a call to be total vegetarians due to D&C 49:18 “And whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God.” And D&C 49:21 “And wo be unto man that shedeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need.”

Now to make this even more clear in the minds of Mormons let us turn to the “prophet” Joseph Smith. In the “Inspired Bible”, and the re-translation of Genesis 9:9-12 “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the herb have I given you all things, but the blood of all flesh which I have given for meat, shall be shed upon the ground, which taketh life, thereof, and the blood ye shall not eat. And surely, blood shall not be shed, only for meat, to save your lives; and the blood of every beast will I require at your hands.” This is clearer than the King James Version and clearer than the D&C. The only time Mormons should eat meat is to save their lives.

Of course, the defenders will give me the same arguments I got in 1963 when I was a 11 year old Mormon boy. The “Inspired Version” is not canon, or it was not finished. Well if Joseph was a prophet, didn’t he at least finish those 4 verses? Or the argument that the “Reorganized” church holds the copyright. What is of higher authority a man-made copyright law or a divinely translated Bible verses by a prophet of God? I was even told that, “We have a famine 3 times a day.”

I raised this issue at the ironically named FAIR board a couple of years ago. I got all the same arguments my Bishop and Elders gave me when I was eleven. I will give them credit that no one came up the, “We have a famine 3 times a day” argument.

The Word of Wisdom is more of the same vague rhetoric as the rest of the D&C and the rest of Mormon Doctrine. It is all up to personal interpretation. The same old pick and choose what you want to believe and when you want to believe it. Same old speaking as a man or a prophet argument. No systematic theology, nothing consistent, contradictions everywhere. Let’s just make this all up as we go.

I am not a defender of vegetarianism, I am a meat’n’tators guy. I just see a lot of hypocrisy in the implementation of the WofW.
_Z
_Emeritus
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:24 pm

Post by _Z »

I don't deny that there is a ton of hipocrisy in the implementation of the WOW. The way most Mormons understand and practice it is random and inconsistent. But to be fair that doesn't mean the doctrine is. Its vague in areas and I think its purposefully so. I know for a fact that at least several of the curent apostles are practically vegetarians and Joseph Fielding Smith was an outspoken advocate of vegetarianism. The explination I've always been given regarding the issue is that its far too difficult of a law for most members to handle and thus a strong statement by the Lord or by a general authority on the issue would condemn millions of people who aren't yet ready to change. similar to the church's current stance on divorce. While its unfortunate that that's the case, I like that explination much better than the ridiculous things you were told.
_Ezias
_Emeritus
Posts: 1148
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:40 am

.

Post by _Ezias »

.
Last edited by Anonymous on Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
_gramps
_Emeritus
Posts: 2485
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 3:43 pm

Post by _gramps »

Ezias wrote:
Thanks Gramps. I have read similar stories as this one. I have read about scientific discoveries made under the influence of marijuana as well, but don't know where to find them on the net. Marijuana is only a mild hallucinogen compared to LSD and others, and has many other effects other than changing mental perception, which makes it less valuable as a mind expanding substance in my opinion.

Psychedelics can alter perception in a way that allows the experiencer to look at situations and problems from a different point of view, thus finding solutions that might not have been found otherwise. It opens the door to the subconscious mind as well, bringing mental functions that usually go on behind the scenes or perhaps only in a dream state to the forefront of consciousness. It is like having a vivid dream while you are awake.

In a dreamlike state short term memory and other functions are impaired, but these in my opinion are minor temporary side effects. The same thing happens during an actual dream. The memory of the trip itself stays, and can have an enormous impact on the individual, as with my experience with cyanescen mushrooms 11 years ago. The experience permanently altered my perception of reality, I think in a positive way. Not that it permanently altered my brain physiology (there is no link to psychedelics and brain damage that I am aware of), but the experience itself, like any intense experience, can shape an individual.

I have never regretted my experience with entheogens, and look at them as much more than just intoxication. They were learning experiences.


I've always enjoyed Carl Sagan's description of his experiences with marijuana. His first experience went something like this:

I was lying on my back in a friend's living room idly examining the pattern of shadows on the ceiling cast by a potted plant (not cannabis!). I suddenly realized that I was examining an intricately detailed miniature Volkswagen, distinctly outlined by the shadows. I was very skeptical at this perception, and tried to find inconsistencies between Volkswagens and what I viewed on the ceiling. But it was all there, down to hubcaps, license plate, chrome, and even the small handle used for opening the trunk. When I closed my eyes, I was stunned to find that there was a movie going on the inside of my eyelids. Flash . . . a simple country scene with red farmhouse, a blue sky, white clouds, yellow path meandering over green hills to the horizon. . . Flash . . . same scene, orange house, brown sky, red clouds, yellow path, violet fields . . . Flash . . . Flash . . . Flash. The flashes came about once a heartbeat. Each flash brought the same simple scene into view, but each time with a different set of colors . . . exquisitely deep hues, and astonishingly harmonious in their juxtaposition. Since then I have smoked occasionally and enjoyed it thoroughly. It amplifies torpid sensibilities and produces what to me are even more interesting effects, as I will explain shortly.


And another vivid experience he describes:

I can remember another early visual experience with cannabis, in which I viewed a candle flame and discovered in the heart of the flame, standing with magnificent indifference, the black-hatted and -cloaked Spanish gentleman who appears on the label of the Sandeman sherry bottle. Looking at fires when high, by the way, especially through one of those prism kaleidoscopes which image their surroundings, is an extraordinarily moving and beautiful experience.


His explanation of the sense of the observer, while high, is helpful as well:

I want to explain that at no time did I think these things 'really' were out there. I knew there was no Volkswagen on the ceiling and there was no Sandeman salamander man in the flame. I don't feel any contradiction in these experiences. There's a part of me making, creating the perceptions which in everyday life would be bizarre; there's another part of me which is a kind of observer. About half of the pleasure comes from the observer-part appreciating the work of the creator-part. I smile, or sometimes even laugh out loud at the pictures on the insides of my eyelids. In this sense, I suppose cannabis is psychotomimetic, but I find none of the panic or terror that accompanies some psychoses. Possibly this is because I know it's my own trip, and that I can come down rapidly any time I want to.


What pot did for his appreciation of art:
The cannabis experience has greatly improved my appreciation for art, a subject which I had never much appreciated before. The understanding of the intent of the artist which I can achieve when high sometimes carries over to when I'm down. This is one of many human frontiers which cannabis has helped me traverse. There also have been some art-related insights - I don't know whether they are true or false, but they were fun to formulate. For example, I have spent some time high looking at the work of the Belgian surrealist Yves Tanguey. Some years later, I emerged from a long swim in the Caribbean and sank exhausted onto a beach formed from the erosion of a nearby coral reef. In idly examining the arcuate pastel-colored coral fragments which made up the beach, I saw before me a vast Tanguey painting. Perhaps Tanguey visited such a beach in his childhood.


And for music:
A very similar improvement in my appreciation of music has occurred with cannabis. For the first time I have been able to hear the separate parts of a three-part harmony and the richness of the counterpoint. I have since discovered that professional musicians can quite easily keep many separate parts going simultaneously in their heads, but this was the first time for me. Again, the learning experience when high has at least to some extent carried over when I'm down.


He said a lot more. But, I will just include here his musings on the religious experience while high:
I do not consider myself a religious person in the usual sense, but there is a religious aspect to some highs. The heightened sensitivity in all areas gives me a feeling of communion with my surroundings, both animate and inanimate. Sometimes a kind of existential perception of the absurd comes over me and I see with awful certainty the hypocrisies and posturing of myself and my fellow men. And at other times, there is a different sense of the absurd, a playful and whimsical awareness. Both of these senses of the absurd can be communicated, and some of the most rewarding highs I've had have been in sharing talk and perceptions and humor. Cannabis brings us an awareness that we spend a lifetime being trained to overlook and forget and put out of our minds. A sense of what the world is really like can be maddening; cannabis has brought me some feelings for what it is like to be crazy, and how we use that word 'crazy' to avoid thinking about things that are too painful for us. In the Soviet Union political dissidents are routinely placed in insane asylums. The same kind of thing, a little more subtle perhaps, occurs here: 'did you hear what Lenny Bruce said yesterday? He must be crazy.' When high on cannabis I discovered that there's somebody inside in those people we call mad.


Of course, these are just one scientist's thoughts. But, I thought people might enjoy reading what Sagan had to say about the matter.

For me personally, this sense of "communion" and the "existential perception of the absurd" are my favorite parts of the marijuana experience. It is silly to give those and other experiences up simply because Emma was upset with the men spitting tobacco all over the floors. (I know that is a simplified version of the beginnings of the Word of Wisdom. But, still....)
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil...
Adrian Beverland
_Ezias
_Emeritus
Posts: 1148
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:40 am

.

Post by _Ezias »

.
Last edited by Anonymous on Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
_Bryan Inks
_Emeritus
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:03 pm

Re: Are entheogens/psychedelics against the Word of Wisdom?

Post by _Bryan Inks »

Fortigurn wrote:
Stuff like that could come up in a drug trip potentially.


Examples, please. People have been taking this stuff for over a century. Let's see all the results. All the fantastic scientific discoveries. All the scientists rushing to elevate their minds with these incredible mind expanding substances.


Watson and Crick.

Eh. Seems someone beat me to it.
Post Reply