Is the DMT-induced alternate reality purely a synthesis of the human mind?

[balaganist]

Yes I agree that there is a lot new age psychedelic crap out there. Perhaps I have been influenced by some of it. I do however believe in coming to my own conclusions.

I have had some experiences both with and without the help of psychedelics that forced me to re-evaluate what I was taught as 'reality'. It is a subject I have been fascinated with from a young age. To me, the scientific way of looking at these experiences ends up going mostly in circles, I find it much more useful and interesting to look at them from a spiritual/holistic point of view. I feel that getting caught up in scientific explanations hinders our learning from these experiences. Perhaps you would disagree with this.

I think, your accusation of 'new age propaganda' is a little strong. I understand you are coming from a scientific perspective and I respect and admire that. But please respect others' worldviews. Science is only one of many possible belief systems.

 

[Harbinger]

Individuals born blind would absolutely NOT see any significant visuals even on a high dose. This is physically impossible and they require a functioning cortex to do this. The visual cortex requires sensory input to function properly. Electrical stimulation of these individuals would also not cause the hallucinations. Furthermore they would have no idea what any of these visuals were.

All this means is those poor people have broken hardware, thus they can't perceive other realities...

Circuits of the brain control every aspect of our view of reality. Why is it so hard to believe that DMT is involved in creating everyday consciousness? Is this not an incredible thing on its own. How the brain generates the mind. DMT obeys all the laws of a classical neurotransmitter.

Why do you find it so hard to believe that 'Hyperspace' is just an extension of reality, not normally perceived?
Do you claim to have complete understanding of every aspect of reality?
Yes DMT obeys all the laws of classical neurotransmitters but do you have a complete understanding of EVERYTHING DMT is doing in the brain?

Science admittedly lacks sufficient data to fully understand the workings of the brain. Yet based on the insufficient data, you have already come to a conclusion. Sounds rather illogical...

I don't know 100% that hyperspace is real, but I do believe my senses and internal objective reasoning that I am not fabricating that experience.
Its not like when I dream about a movie I watched recently or an event in my life.

'Hyperspace' never seems to relate to anything going on recently in my life. It is like a universe with an infinite number of doorways and I randomly walk through one every time I take DMT. DMT is a key to open those doors, and the shape of the key will open different doors. The shape of the key is based on many factors, like the amount of DMT consumed and internal chemistry.

 

[Ayawasqero]

Those are the DMT revisionist/hyperspace sceptics among us, You know...

 

[bufoman]

I understand that all of the pieces are not in. I know this however this doesn't prove anything either way. We do know that regions of the brain are necessary for certain types of experiences to occur. You could use this to say that we need these areas to perceive hyperspace so it doesn't matter. Okay fine.

But what sense organs are we perceiving hyperspace with? Considering our eyes, ears, ...never left the physical world. Okay so it is direct experience. DMT somehow opens up the "third eye" and allows all this information into the brain. Maybe this occurs at a QM level and this is why we have not found it. I still find it strange that the effects are not consistent and they are heavily culturally influenced. Two people in the same room perceive two totally different things. Okay so this hyperspace does not obey the classical Cartesian coordinate system of the normal physical reality.

Furthermore with eyes open the visuals are influenced by the sensory input meaning DMT is altering the information processing of the visual input. Thus hallucinogens alter the information processing of the brain. (and DMT is not the only one in fact many other non-5-HT non-TAAR hallucinogens exist that create hyperspaces equaly or far more complex, strange, and realistic than those of DMT (PCP, Ketamine, MK-801, DXM, salvia). This explains there visual effects as well as there emotional effects. As well as the relationship b/w low and high doses.

In fact the effects we see are exactly what we would expect if a compound altered higher level cortical circuits involved in the formation of complex experiences and unified conscious states.

It seems likely that the fact that these compounds alter sensory perception and information processing at lower doses explains there intense effects at higher doses. There is a linear relationship of altering subjective experiences. Okay you could say low doses only open the "third eye" a crack. Again is hyperspace really made up of clowns that are floating through the air, or pharohs rotating through the wall? This seems strange to me. What about the non-visual hallucinogens? Which have all the same effects but lack the visuals? How do you explain them? It seems to me and many others more like it is my culturaly confined brain making this all up. But maybe not? Even if hyperspace was real it should be capable of being studied through science. If it is real and has an influence, and can interact with the matter of the brain than we can detect it and study it.

I just think that the explanation that DMT acts on regions of the CNS involved in generating complex subjective views of reality is what is altered. If endogenous DMT serves a similar purpose to generate complex perceptions of reality. I do not think this hyperspace is necessary.

There are too many questions and intuitive jumps to believe it. I admit I could be wrong, no one knows everything. However I have studied the CNS for years now as well as pharmacology. From a scientific stand point this theory is flawed. That does not mean it is wrong. In fact this occurs many times however I think of myself as open to logical new ideas. I just hope you guys actually familiarize yourselves with science before you dismiss it. It is becoming cliche to dismiss science in this new age phenomenon but the reasons for the dismissal are non-existent. Hyperspace is not inconsistent with science. Although based on our current knowledge of the brian the hyperspace explanation seems unlikely.

 

[bufoman]

I have just been repeating myself now. I admit we can not yet disprove "hyperspace" but I can easily make up anything I want and say disprove it? and you could not. Thus the burden of proof is on the individual with the new theory. I have stated why I feel the way I do, I have read both the scientific literature and the new age literature with an open mind. I have found the scientific far more useful, reliable, and accurate and more efficient as a potential tool in understanding these effects. Which is after all all that we want. I am always the biggest critique of my own ideas. I never believe things I read unless I see how the conclusion was made. So therefore I would be more interested in hearing some of your guys views on why you believe in hyperspace?

 

[Harbinger]

I understand what you are saying.

As far as what people see, like clowns or whatever, and it all being culturally influenced. You have to consider human error in interpretation.
The DMT experience is not an easy one to express by any means. I find it hard to put words to what I see. So for a person to say they saw clowns... perhaps that was just a clumsy way of describing something they saw. The same goes for any other description of Hyperspace entities like machine elves.
I have never seen any clowns or elves, and I am careful when I try to describe an entity to someone. I find it disappointing actually that I see people naming common place things they saw in hyperspace.
I can only speak for myself, but when I go to hyperspace I never see anything that is based in our normal reality. Though sometimes when my mind is trying to interpret what I saw, it tries to give it Earthly entity descriptions.

 

[Ayawasqero]

Is it so hard to believe DMT will send you on a magic carpet ride light years away in deep universe? Universe is big and ,mystic´ enough even for this eventuality. All Your arguments may be true, but from a scientific stand point DMT takes you to a dimension of which even the astronomy didn´t speak about. Remember chapter ,Hyperspace and the law´ in Food of the gods?

 

[balaganist]

I understand what you are saying.

As far as what people see, like clowns or whatever, and it all being culturally influenced. You have to consider human error in interpretation.
The DMT experience is not an easy one to express by any means. I find it hard to put words to what I see. So for a person to say they saw clowns... perhaps that was just a clumsy way of describing something they saw. The same goes for any other description of Hyperspace entities like machine elves.
I have never seen any clowns or elves, and I am careful when I try to describe an entity to someone. I find it disappointing actually that I see people naming common place things they saw in hyperspace.
I can only speak for myself, but when I go to hyperspace I never see anything that is based in our normal reality. Though sometimes when my mind is trying to interpret what I saw, it tries to give it Earthly entity descriptions.

This is very true. E.g., a modern american may experience aliens and images of some advanced technology. An indiginous person from the amazon may see the same vision as spirits and a spiritual realm. Of course they are interpreting what they see and experience using their cultural conditioning. But it does not mean that they are not essentially experiencing the same thing. Graham Hancock's book "Supernatural" has some interesting examples of this.

 

[Harbinger]

This is very true. E.g., a modern american may experience aliens and images of some advanced technology. An indiginous person from the amazon may see the same vision as spirits and a spiritual realm. Of course they are interpreting what they see and experience using their cultural conditioning. But it does not mean that they are not essentially experiencing the same thing. Graham Hancock's book "Supernatural" has some interesting examples of this.

Good comparison. It nicely shows the cultural influence phenomena is a result of end user interpretation and not the actual events of the experience.

 

[69ron]

One time SWIM had contact with God on ayahuasca. SWIM did not believe it was God. However, God told SWIM about many future events that were impossible for anyone to predict. Every single one came true as the weeks thereafter passed. Every detail of every event God said would happen was predicted with 100% accuracy. That was completely impossible. It had to have been God. There is no way SWIM’s mind could have predicted the events that happen with 100% accuracy. SWIM was totally amazed. It was actually very shocking because SWIM was an atheist. After that experience SWIM now believes in God.

69ron,
I have heard you explain this story before, but you didnt include the details. Have you writtin a trip report about this on here somewhere as i would like to read it. Or was it too much or a personal journey?

No, I never wrote down the full trip report anywhere. It’s quite complicated and a lot of what happened to SWIM would be very difficult to put into words. In that trip there was contact made with dozens of spirits, all very ancient and SWIM was given a whole bunch of information about how the universe works, some of which SWIM could not understand. He eventually saw God and was blown away. God revealed things about SWIMs future. Before that, SWIM was an atheist. Now SWIM can feel the presence of God in everything. He’s a changed person.

I don’t want to post it anymore. I don’t want to get into a debate about the existence of God or be told by people blinded by science that it was all in my head. I’m so sick of that debate.

 

[۩]

Time leaks in from the future. Usually right before it happens, if you are sensitive enough. Yes, there are many factors that can change what is to come, but some things are certain. The timeless observer knows this, and can see delineated.

 

[69ron]

I know exactly what you mean however what you are talking about is different than the discussion. I see what you mean that you can not prove their existance through science but this is not necessary as of course they exist otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation and science would not exist. You can still study their properties and relationships through science.

Reality is real because I am here now. Consciousness is real because I am here now. It is all how you define it. Consciousness depends on matter. Science will be able to explain how the brain creates consciousness (or the other way around!). As far as proving their existence that is different however this is not necessary as we know they exist. Science measures the properties of these systems and studies how they are related. This science can do. there is no need to prove they exist as this is obvious. If they did not exist than neither would science.

Science measures reality through the eyes of consciousness. The very fact that science exists proves the existance of both reality and consciousness.

You have a misconception of science. It is a powerful tool. It is a way to expain relationships and causations through observations.

You have no clue what I'm talking about! Not even a tiny bit! I'm not sure if I should break out laughing or what.

Oh well, I tried to explain it. You just don't get it.

I believe I understand science far more than you ever will. You don't understand it's limitations.

I did not start this discussion to get unpleasant remarks thrown at (i even considered it offensive, but others dont seem to see what im talking about) Particularly "I'm not sure if I should break out laughing or what." that part. I thought that users of this forum had a bit more respect for each other in the way they type. Apparently i was thinking too positively (one of my worse qualities) like i always do and got shot down. It seems as if you were taking your anger out at me, but who am i to say.

Im not going to sit an dwell on this. It was a bit shocking though for voicing my thought and getting shot down.

Dont get me wrong, i greatly respect you 69ron and your contribution the world/and website. But i think that was a bit harsh, and i have done nothing to be talked to that way. I will think twice from now on before starting a heated discussion. I didnt want to be the person always asking questions and wanted to start something intellectual, but if im going to get hurt from doing that, then i might as well not in hostile places

Anyways, all im saying is be impeccable with your word

This is a very heated discussion. I find a lot of what bufoman says in this thread to be very offensive. He’s basically saying we are all a bunch of idiots because we don’t believe in his views of science and that we don’t understand science, and all that crap. I am so sick of that. I’m trying really hard not to blow up. I frankly can’t see how no one else takes offence to that type of talk.

Every time I get into a serious argument with bufoman he says I don’t understand science. I find that so incredibly condescending. As if he thinks he’s superior to all of us. He’s does this sort of thing all too often and I’m sick of it.

I usually try not to say anything, but this time I had it. I’m so sick to death of it. No one else ever accused me of not understanding science. My dad is a scientist. I grew up with science all around me. To say something like that to me is the ultimate insult. He’s said it many times. Not just in this thread. I’m tired of that. I would like him to stop doing that.

 

[The Traveler]

Since this topic is generating too much heat I will close this down for the weekend. After the weekend this topic will be reopened.

Please do understand that this doesn't mean I take a stance for any side! This action is purely to prevent increasing heat.

 

[The Traveler]

This topic has been re-opened.

I hope the heat has laid down a bit. Either way, think about respect when making new posts in this topic.


Kind regards,

The Traveler

 

[Baffald]

My reality is I have to get up and go to work every day to make money to care for my family. IT IS WAY TO REAL FOR ME. Lolol.

I read somewhere that we humans only use about 10% of our brain. I think DMT, LSD, Mushrooms, Cactus alkoloids (now especially Ibogain- after reading that post) all open the doors to the remaining 90% of the brain that is not used. That is where we get our insights from and our perceptions about what is and what isn't. I think we already have all the answered stored away in ourselves, it just takes the right key to go looking and find them.

This is what happens when you change the chemical make up of your brain.

I also think there are things that happen that science just can't explain. That is part of the fun of it all.

 

[۩]

I read somewhere that we humans only use about 10% of our brain.

Hey Baffald, I have heard this too. Do you have any proof? I have reason to believe it's not true.

 

[Infundibulum]

I read somewhere that we humans only use about 10% of our brain.

Hey Baffald, I have heard this too. Do you have any proof? I have reason to believe it's not true.

We actually use 100% of our brain. Topologically speaking, there are no areas that are not being used. He might have meant that people use 10% of the capabilities of their brain. In which case, the 10% is only a rough guesstimate and possibly incorrect. A person using 100% of the capabilities of the human brain would possibly be the best philosopher, the best acrobat, the best astronaut, the best piano player the best in languages, the best in whoever-knows etc.

But this would overload a brain and fry it pretty quick!

 

[MagikVenom]

I must say the scientific method is the best tool we currently have to understand anything. And until someone proves to me a better way I have no choice but to follow the most logical path. This does not mean I come to any conclusions this just means that until a proper experiment can be designed to test these things I must err on the side of caution and not draw a concrete conclusion.

So yes my vote had to be all in the mind. That said the one aspect of this that feels the most undeniable is the Transpersonel I a wait the experiment. Hopefully in my life time.

MV

 

[polytrip]

It could also be possible that there are things within our everyday reality that are translated by our brains as "hyperspace-reality". It could be possible that hyperspace and this reality share some characteristics, so that in a sense, hyperspace does exist, but in a very different way.

There is a debate going on, on whether people like the medium 'char' are actually receiving messages from another plain or whether what they do is just some trick (known as 'cold-reading').

The fact is that in both cases, it would look exactly the same.
You could very well argue that in a sense, with the technique of cold-reading, you can indeed receive messages from spirits of deceased people: If you extract information from someone else's mind, about a loved one, you gather information about a mark someone has made, that is still living on.

So 'hyperspace' could be very well more then just a figment of your own mind. It could exist in the real world in a different way then we think.

Every entity you meet could stand for something in your real life, of wich you are normally not counsciously aware, but that is very real.

 

[ohayoco]

I voted 'still debating' (from what SWIM tells me).
-My scientific mind tells me that it's merely a vision synthesised by the molecule's interference with the workings of the brain, and I lean towards this explanation.
-But my philosophical mind tells me that the experience is an 'existential' one, and therefore as real as any other experience one could ever have... but qualitatively superior to everyday "reality" because it is a moment of "dasein", or "being", or "dharma".
-Either way, "reality" looks very different to the image my mind shows me anyway, and I see no reason for giving the "material" world precedence over the "immaterial" one of consciousness.