Marsh Chapel Experiment
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Leary was probably a net force for good, but his drive to evangelize psychedelics apparently prevented him from doing good science.
" a considerable doubt on the assertion that mystical experiences catalyzed by drugs are in any way inferior to non-drug mystical experiences in both their immediate content and long-term effects "
is as much a statement of scientific 'fact' as it is a theological position -
how does one define a 'mystical experience'?
how does one 'grade' these nebulous 'mystical experiences'?
in terms of quality? severity of experience? ethical content? uniqueness? whether one hallucinated what they thought might be a divine presence or not?
These are all questions which ultimately stem from philosophical/theological beliefs. Of course if ones philosophical/spiritual belief is vague and relativistic, then anything goes, and these can all be conveniently 'meaningful' in some conveniently abstract and conveniently qualification-free sense.
The 'intellectuals choosing to consume spiritual experiences through specific quantities of purchased chemicals' shtick can just as easily be seen as an exercise in the narcissistic self-validation of ones own preconceived notions as a 'meaningful spiritual occurrence', if one chose to be so cynical - it all comes down to the theological context.
YMMV
This seems to be the current approach used:
Factor Analysis of the Mystical Experience Questionnaire: A Study of Experiences Occasioned by the Hallucinogen Psilocybin
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3539773/#
...using these survey questions:
APPENDIX - REVISED MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE (MEQ; 30 ITEMS)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3539773/bin/NIH...
This survey seems to be a variation of the above:
https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~jfkihlstrom/ConsciousnessWeb/P...
Some research into bad trips:
The Challenging Experience Questionnaire: Characterization of challenging experiences with psilocybin mushrooms
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5549781/
There's a surprisingly large body of proper scientific knowledge out there, despite the long-standing ban on conducting research. And depending on how open-minded one is, there is also a massive amount of anecdotal experiences from individuals, although these all suffer from not following a standard survey, among the other obvious problems one can easily imagine.
Empathy and creative thinking tend to get enhanced by psilocybin, not critical thinking and logic skills :)
an attitude of patronizing superiority; disdain.
Is this based on evidence of some kind (clinical peer-reviewed studies, personal experiences, anecdotal reading, other)?
The only studies I'm aware of that even approach something of the kind are linked in the article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelics_in_problem-solvin...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychedelics_in_problem-solvin...
Noteworthy:
> This experiment was a pilot that was to be followed by control studies as part of exploratory studies on uses for psychedelic drugs, that were interrupted early in 1966 when the Food and Drug Administration declared a moratorium on research with human subjects, as a strategy in combating illicit use.
Considering the complexity of this space, forming and asserting specific conclusions (ie: the ability to deceive yourself into believing something) seems a bit premature.
EDIT: I too am interesting in the meaning behind the smiley.