• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Albert Hofmann vs Alexander Shulgin

Migrated topic.
69ron, let's be fair. The problem with Shulgin's creations is that there is no set standard like in the case of LSD blotters. You buy LSD and you can be almost sure of how much you need to get off. But powders are a different story. Shady dealers, inaccurate scales, misidentification, and let's not forget that any kid with a gift card can buy a 2cX online. I am not as sure now that I think about it. This is a harder question than I expected. On one hand, would there even be a psychedelic community without Hofmann? Then again, did mainstream LSD use lead to the scheduling of many other psychedelic compounds?
 
Haha you beat me to it 69Ron. The first thing I thought when I saw this topic was that old show Celebrity Death Match on MTV. Hofmann with a squirt-gun full of LSD and Shulgin with a slue of "magic" potions.

Anyway I voted Hofmann, I think he made a much greater contribution to society. As far as Shulgin, SWIM has only tried 2cb, it was an amazing experience in the forest, one of those full moon nights where the atmospheric conditions cause there to be a MASSIVE halo around the moon. It was incredible.
 
Gotta pick Alexander Shulgin because he worked with Cacti.

Albert Hofmann did bring back the first Salvia divinorum plants tho.

Damn, I like them both!
 
Hofmann is the best advocate for the responsible use of psychedelics.
Where shulgin makes statements as that the use of XTC is not more dangerous then the use of aluminium foil as bread-wrapper, hofmann was wise enough to call LSD his problem child. Problemchild says it all; it is something of wich he sees the value (nobody would call landmines, nerve gas or those kind of things his problem child) as well as the dangers and downsides.

Hofmann also did research on traditional use of psychedelics. Plants of the gods is a classic. Shulgin has more in common with leary while hofmann has more in common with huxley.
 
A lot of the doses for the drugs in there are also wrong. Lots of inaccuracies like that are present. He did next to no research of his own in that book. It's basically a reprint of old inaccurate data re-edited and reformatted with some comments by him added to it. I hate that book. But I like PiHKAL.
 
I was under the impression that Shulgin sucsessfully synthesized the substances he gave synthesis notes on. Am I wrong?
 
Back
Top Bottom