Carl-Richard

I wasn't asking about that. I was asking about what happens during death in the brain.

It's true that the common conception of drugs is generally characterized by a lack of ability to make useful distinctions. However, I would only support taking a more liberal stance if it comes from making better distinctions. With that said, the soft/hard dichotomy is fallacious for many reasons. There exists more accurate ways of looking at a drug. One way is the distinction between consciousness expanding drugs and consciousness decreasing drugs. I would evaluate this is by looking at the long-term benefits: does it lead to a long-term net increase or decrease in consciousness? Most psychedelics tend to fall into the first category. Virtually all other drugs tend fall in that last category. My definition of consciousness here is more strict than somebody who would maybe want to include something like stimulants in the first category, because while you can have great intellectual breakthroughs on them and become more productive for a certain period of time, the issues around dependency, neural downregulation, cognitive and emotional instability, lack of refinement, compulsive patterns and habits; all of this impacts the long-term value. What about grey areas like cannabis? There I would say it depends on the way it's used and who is using it. It can sometimes be used for growth, but once you've exhausted that potential, it can also be used to stagnate growth. But isn't it then also true that careful use of purely hedonic drugs can sometimes lead to long-term growth? Maybe, but again, generally the more hedonic a drug is, the larger the potential is for stagnation than for growth. The term hedonic can also be confusing, because aren't psychedelics potentially very pleasureable? Well, the key there is "potentially". Psychedelics don't promote a fixed input-output relationship between stimulus and response. Your pleasure on psychedelics is contingent on a large array of different conditions. While heroin makes you feel pleasure irrespective of whether your life is in rapture or your body is damaged, psychedelics will most likely amplify those things. This is exactly why psychedelics increase consciousness, because they make you more aware of nuances. Consciousness decreasing drugs instead act to neutralize nuances in some way or another. Psychedelics don't produce pleasure per se, but if you're inherently peaceful within yourself, psychedelics will expand that within you. If your trip becomes hard, it will try to show you how to further cultivate that inner peace within yourself, and that is what spirituality is about.

Is there even any proof that endogenous DMT or 5-MeO for that matter is involved in endogenous mystical experiences? The idea that these things must necessarily boil down to the docking of a specific neurotransmitter is a reductive bottom-up approach and is for the most part pure speculation. It's largely a result of the widespread belief of pharmacological determinism (the idea that one type of molecule is exclusively tied to one type of response) which has both cultural and medicinal implications. When perception is described in neuroscience, there is also something called top-down mechanisms: the idea that perceptions are constructed with the help of higher-order cortical functions instead of merely being a result of a straightforward 1-to-1 mapping of raw sensory information (bottom-up). In other words, mystical experiences could also be explained by looking at the brain as a whole rather than simply looking at one type of ligand-receptor activity. An example of this approach is the research done on the Default Mode Network.

I live in southern Norway and we've had tons of snow lately, but we ait

In terms of Big 5, high Extraversion, high Agreeableness, high Conscientiousness, and low Neuroticism is considered the leadertype while high E, low A, low C, high N is associated with risky sexual behavior (a.k.a bad boy). I'm like none of those

Do our brains really flood with DMT when we die?

Confusing the map with the territory is about confusing a symbol (a thing) for the thing it represents (another thing). A symbol is something that represents something other than itself. Models are in essence nothing but a collection of symbols. Maps are like that, and humans are map-makers. Thoughts are symbolic in nature. For example, you have a thought (a thing) about a cat (another thing). The relationship between the cat-thought and the cat is symbolic. The thought is like an image of the cat. The image is not the actual cat - it's an image. "Think and act outside models" is therefore not a very meaningful statement. You're already involved in the very act of modeling or map-making by interacting with the symbolic content of your thoughts. You drawing images of cats in your mind is similar to drawing images of cats on paper. This video is a perfect illustration of what we're talking about (it's so funny ): The confusion also lies in thinking that symbols somehow exist independently of map-makers (humans). That would be impossible. These are all maps. They were all made by someone. In this case, if something is made by someone, it cannot be the territory.

Apparently Ethan from h3h3 is ENTP so I wouldn't doubt it

I was going to say that lol

Spot on. Same mannerisms, same voice, same look, same layout, same humor, same clothes style, vapes

Stop fooling around and answer my question. What do you mean when you say "don't you think people know why they are there?"? How does that justify insulting a cancer patient? Get down from the clouds and get real lmao

I'm an anti-composer. I have probably around 1000 audio recordings of different guitar ideas stored on 5 different phones over 10 years which I've never touched

Bro you gotta drop your elitist attitude lol. That is what is truly Red here

Plato feared that the sophists would lead to the collapse of society, so he created form/idea theory. Kant loved Newton too much to accept Hume's skepticism, so he wrote Critique of Pure Reason. Sometimes the self-bias becomes so abundantly clear.

One is inclusive and the other is exclusive.

When do we get to meet TheisticNonduality? I bet he is the cooler brother of the two

What does "know" mean?

I've done it 3 times. Last time was 5 years ago.

Or you're just a wimp . I cried the day after MDMA because I thought I had lost 50 bucks that I was just about to hand over to a friend of mine. Spent 30 minutes searching for it along the road while sobbing and people walking by. Turns out I had just put it in a weird slot in my wallet. Don't do drugs kids

You don't go into an AA meeting or a therapy session or a cancer treatment center and say "you're all deluded - this is actually pure perfection!" Your delivery should be laced with compassion and careful deliberation.

1:43 A little Tier 2 aswell

In what way are they moral objectivists? Sometimes they will make so many concessions to relativity that it becomes absurd to call them objectivists.

I give you 20 more posts. Good luck