Comment by Lost_BiomedE | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Lost_BiomedE | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

A lot of the benefits that would be hard to achieve through time may be due to the shocking aspect or intensity of some of these drugs. Think of a rite of passage, it stresses people out of their normal thought/reaction/logic structure in order to help form a new one. Usually promises are made or responsibilities given that are then psychologically attached to the event. Given that, how the event is structured and to what ends is very meaningful.

The damaged people might be due to more factors than the drug. Besides possible use amphetamines or other drugs, too, your experimental pool would only consist of those who would choose to use these drugs a lot for lengths of time and advertise this. There are some decent studies on use of peyote and ayahuasca where participants use it weekly or more for many years. They scored the same on physical well being but scored higher than the control for mental well being.

BTW, I totally agree that the term 'geek wonder drug' is inappropriate.

What you say about indigenous peyote and ayahuasca users is very true. This is a very different use pattern from U.S.-style recreational use. For one thing, non-shamanic users are using doses that we'd consider sub-psychedelic, at least most of the time. The shaman knows the person and if he or she is ready before a person is taken to a level that would be considered "tripping" by our standards. People are only taken to that point when they are ready and know what to expect. Still, you're right that these practices (indigenous/religious psychedelic use) are not especially harmful-- a lot safer than our cultural institution of heavy alcohol use.

The illegality of these drugs, in my estimation, actually encourages irresponsible use patterns, through hard-to-control dosage and intermittent access. There's definitely a mentality of "trip hard now because you may not be able to get this stuff in a year" in the U.S. psychedelic culture, and the drug laws are culpable for creating it.

The term "rite of passage" is very fitting.

I've been thinking about this stuff all day, and trying to figure out how to reconcile the potential rewards with the dire risks involved; should I recommend dabbling with this crazy mojo, or should I tell people to leave it the hell alone and not to risk it?

I suspect some of the appeal for those of us who've been down this path, especially when young, was the risk itself; because "we are a generation of men raised by women," and we wanted to test ourselves against every boundary we could find - even the borders of reality itself, if we could find them - and to be tested ourselves.

I suppose the socially accepted alternative is to get as drunk as you can and pick a fight.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com