.

[Anonymous]

.

[_Fortigurn]

The thing is though, have the bretheren said it is a sin to use entheogens? Where is that documented? In the spirit of the WoW it indicates that no drug, regardless of which one, should be abused. The letter of it is somewhat ambigous though.

You've put your finger on your main problem - knowing full well what the spirit of the WoW is, but wishing to justify disobedience to it on the basis of the absence of specific instructions in the letter. This is textbook legalism, and is the product of a rigid and inflexible legalistic mindset.

[_Fortigurn]

As far as NDE's being random, I meant they cannot be repeated at will and tested under controlled conditions, whereas psychedelics can.

Do you have evidence for this?

All that can be studied with regard to NDE's is what the experiencer said happened after the fact.

Actually there's a lot of other data which can also be observed during the NDE, such as brain wave activity, heart rate, and other physiological data.

I believe the scientific value in psychedelics is in the study of consciousness, not as much (although perhaps) in the study of the physical universe.

Ok, that's a bit different to the idea that psychedelics can reveal a 'reality' out there which we cannot perceive with our normal senses. But how many acid heads are really taking psychedelics for research purposes? Very few, I suggest. When my mates in Australia want to get absolutely maggoted, they grab a couple of slabs of tinnies, and just go for it. They don't try to pretend they're discovering the meaning of life. It seems to me that these ad hoc justifications for dropping acid are merely apologetics for people embarrassed to acknowledge that they take drugs to get off their faces for a few hours, and to try and cover their recreation with the respectable air of serious research ('Oh, you might think I'm just an acid head, but you aren't aware that psychedelic drugs are being used in very serious scientific research', yeah sure, but that's not why you're taking them, are you?).

What is consciousness? Is it just chemical reactions in the brain?

Yep, electro-chemical processes. That's it.

What about the electrical aspect of brain activity? What about the energy the brain emits (brain waves, etc)?

What about it?

Are there other forms of energy the brain uses or perhaps senses?

Such as?

The limit of the study of consciousness is that it is subjective, however, many experiencers have had very similar subjective experiences that seem more than just a re-arrangement of pre-existing thoughts and memories. There seem to be universal aspects of the psychedelic experience, much like NDE's.

Or perhaps it's simply because certain drugs have certain predictable effects on the brain, just like other drugs.

Perhaps the mind senses what our current tools can't yet.

Can you point to any serious scientific research on psychedelics which has reached this conclusion?

About NDE's, DMT is a psychedelic drug that is found naturally in the brain (as well as some entheogens), and is releases during periods of stress. On theory is that it is released at the stressful time of death, and is responsible for the NDE experience.

Yes, that makes a lot of sense to me.

Asking why a scientist shouldn't just take LSD to find the answers to something instead of painstaking research is not related to what I am saying.

Well you said virtually that in your next sentence:

Somebody who has an insight while on psychedelic drugs may be able to create a theory which can then later be tested with math and science, but the insight itself should not be taken as a concrete fact or proof, until proven.

Given the vast number of acid heads out there, we should have a book full of such insights. Give me the title, and I'll buy a copy. In theory, you could successfully solve the Grand Unified Theory problem of physics by randomly grabbing Scrabble pieces out of a bag and throwing them onto the table. But do you think that's more reliable or less reliable than using standard methods of enquiry?

You said "I thought we were talking about studying a 'reality always there but beyond our normal physical senses'. The study of consciousness is an entirely different topic."

This theory of Lester Grinspoon that I mentioned is a theory, and insight, like I mentioned. It hasn't been proven. Although, I am open to the possibility that with more research, perhaps it will. I am also open to the possibility that perhaps it is all just a chemical reaction in the brain, and has nothing to do with anything external. The truth is I don't know.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever which even lends the merest suggestion of support to such a theory?

About the taboo thing, much of the scientific research on psychedelics has been stopped (in the US). Probably due to the hippy social movements and the subsequent government restrictions. There is the lingering association between psychedelics and the hippy movement which I think prevents many scientists from researching psychedelics seriously.

Can you provide evidence for this please? And is this the same in all other countries?

[_Gazelam]

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 is 100% right on this.

What was wrong with eating pork during the Old Testament times? Nothing. God simply asked them not to as a simple act of faith. It is a small and easy commandment to obey, a law that those raised in the church can look back on and say "I have always been obedient to that commandment, and if I can be obedient in that, I can be perfect in obedience to other commandments."

Nice to see you speaking out on a gospel principle Scratch, way to go.

[_Fortigurn]

Gaz, I think Mr Scratch had something a little different in mind when he penned that.

[_Mister Scratch]

Gaz, I think Mr Scratch had something a little different in mind when he penned that.

No.... I think that Gaz merely recognizes this kind of attitude in himself, as do many other hardliner TBMs. Of course, this mindset points to some other behavioral consequences and tendencies which are, shall we say, disquieting.

[Anonymous]

.

[Guest]

Is this Word of Wisdom the Book of Mormon? Or something else? The only other Mormon scripture I know of is Doctrines and Covenants. Or is it "Let it be" (from the Beatles song "Mother Mary comes to me, speaking words of wisdom: Let it be.")? :D

Please read this wikipedia article to understand what I am refering to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entheogen .

This article goes back and forth about the definition of entheogen. I would describe it as a psychedelic substance, many of which are found in nature, in plants and fungi. Personally I would not categorize tobacco and alchohol in the category of entheogen, although historically it has been used as one. Alchohol specifically has the oposite effect of psychedelics, it deadens the mind, whereas psychedelics amplify and expand it. In fact, alchohol is an antidote for LSD and other psychedelics, because it counteracts it's effects.

Psychedelic drugs are not mentioned specifically in the Word of Winsdom. I did some research on LDS.org and could not find much about them. In fact "entheogen" does not even produce any search results. LSD comes up in a search, but the articles lump LSD together with all other harmful drugs. It puts LSD and mushrooms into a category they don't belong in.

All drugs can be abused. Prescription drugs, even over the counter drugs, not just illegal drugs. Psychedelics, because they are such powerfull tools, can be abuse just like any tool. But, it seems that they may have significant value when used properly. In many cultures they are not used for recreation, but for specific purposes (shamanism for example). Many entheogens are in fact legal in the US, and many that are not legal in the US are legal in other countires througout the world.

What if I wanted to apply the useful benefits of entheogens and I lived in a country (such as holland) where they are not illegal? Are they completely forbidden by the LDS church? If so, where do you draw the line? Are all herbs that affect the body or effect conciousness against the Word of Wisdom? There are hundreds of plants and fungi that have psychedelic properties, and they are found all over the world, easily accessable to man.

D&C 89: 8, 10-11
8 And again, tobacco is not for the abody, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.
• • •
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome aherbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with aprudence and bthanksgiving.

Alma 46:40
40 And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many aplants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of bdiseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate—

Perhaps God created psychedelic substances to cure mental diseases (psychiatric uses), as well as provide us mortals with trancendent insights.

One theory by Harvard professor Lester Grinspoon is that psychedelic drugs allow human consiousness to grasp a reality that is always there but beyond our normal physical senses. (A spiritual reality perhaps, lifting the veil somewhat?) Is this against church policy?

I believe Joseph Smith named his religion the LDS church to hint at the future discovery of LSD. :D

But seriously. If the religious scriptures and dogmas you rely on don't mention that entheogens are forbidden, why not try some? I have tried shrooms and salvia divinorum a few times and obtained powerful experiences that could perhaps be classified as spiritual. I'm sure a religious person who believes in a "supernatural" entity or entities will experience intense interaction with said entity.

[_Moron Brother]

One theory by Harvard professor Lester Grinspoon is that psychedelic drugs allow human consiousness to grasp a reality that is always there but beyond our normal physical senses.

I'll be convinced of this when I see scientists abandoning the laboratory for psychedelic drug trips. There's certainly a huge 'reality out there' which is 'beyond our normal physical senses' (it starts with all the invisible forces, such as gravity),

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.

but I don't see scientists trying to find out about it by doping themselves up.

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

What's a better way to discover how the solar system works, pop a pill or invent the telescope?

What's a better way to discover how your mind works, invent the telescope or pop a pill?

As far as the US goes, there are many psychedelics that are in fact legal, but they are much less potent than the illegal ones.

Morning Glory as well as Hawaiian Baby Woodrose seeds for example.

Salvia divinorum is legal in most states in the US and 20x extract of it is more potent shrooms (which are the only other entheogen I've tried). Also, I've spoken to people who've tried other stuff (does extacy count?) and they claim salvia divinorum is more powerful. It should be noted that extacy is an euphoria inducing drug, while salvia is definitely not (=> very low risk of addiction).

Perhaps, in an altered mental state, the mind has an ability to sense and percieve what science is just starting to scratch the surface of.

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.

Perhaps. I'll believe it when I see it. What I see so far is people taking drugs and altering both their perceptions and their state of consciousness. They're not discovering any new data sources, they're simply rearranging the way their brains receive and interpret that data.

No it's not. You see, the telescope actually enhances our natural physical senses, so that we can detect the reality which is beyond them (that's not a tiny light in the sky, that's a huge great planet made of rock). The microscope enhances our physical senses, so that we can detect the reality which is beyond them (that spoon isn't clean, it's covered in bacteria). Both telescopes and microscopes have proven themselves extraordinarily useful in this way. Which pill can you give me which provides me with anything comparable? If I take LSD, can I see what's on Pluto? Will I have x-ray vision? Will I be even remotely coherent?

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.

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

Asking why a scientist shouldn't just take LSD to find the answers to something instead of painstaking research is not related to what I am saying. I think we are on different subjects here. Somebody who has an insight while on psychedelic drugs may be able to create a theory which can then later be tested with math and science, but the insight itself should not be taken as a concrete fact or proof, until proven.

It is said that the molecular shape of benzene came to Kekulé in a dream. Stuff like that could come up in a drug trip potentially. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kekul%C3%A9

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.

Agreed. But the thread starter seems to be a Mormon and is discussing the topic in a Mormon context. Your arguments are unlikely to sway his beliefs.

(I don't think mj should be smoked, by the way, I think it should be vaporized, to eliminate tar and carcinogens and prevent lung damage).

Indeed. It feels less harsh when inhaling from a vaporizer than through other means. I need to point out that I've smoked it only for recreational purposes (though it did seem to have side effects of healing random aches I had).

[_Fortigurn]

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?