Man made??

[HumbledYouth08]

Hello nexus community I want to know if you smoke spice that has been extracted does that make it man made? Since you are using a variety of "unnatural" substances to create essentially a "naturally pure" substance? It makes me think are you smoking the pure and sacred molecule or are you smoking the chemicals you used to make it? And does smoking an extract take away from it's pureness or sacredness personally?

 

[Infundibulum]

Hello nexus community I want to know if you smoke spice that has been extracted does that make it man made? Since you are using a variety of "unnatural" substances to create essentially a "naturally pure" substance? It makes me think are you smoking the pure and sacred molecule or are you smoking the chemicals you used to make it? And does smoking an extract take away from it's pureness or sacredness personally?

What are the "unnatural" substances used to make a "naturally pure" substance? I cannot think of something unnatural.

How do these "unnatural" methods and materials compare with a shaman's preparation of ayahuasca? caapi and chacruna do not naturally shred and mix together in a pot. Man mixes them. Caapi and chacruna do not naturally boil for 10 hours. Man boils them. Similarly, naphtha is a natural product derived from petroleum (a natural product) distillation. Acids and bases are also abundant in the natural world.

 

[Yengu]

Hello nexus community I want to know if you smoke spice that has been extracted does that make it man made? Since you are using a variety of "unnatural" substances to create essentially a "naturally pure" substance? It makes me think are you smoking the pure and sacred molecule or are you smoking the chemicals you used to make it? And does smoking an extract take away from it's pureness or sacredness personally?

Either way, these "unnatural" substances are used, but do not affect the active product, i.e. they are not present in the spice you smoke. This DMT comes from the mimosa root bark.


I dont get the deal with natural drugs vs unnatural drugs anyways.
Theres plenty of natural harmful poisons out there.

And LSD is awesome, so...

 

[HumbledYouth08]

Yes when I said "unnatural" I was reffering to the chemical naptha when I think of naptha lighter fluid comes to mind right isn't that one of the uses of naptha? And yes I understand shamen do mix and boil etc but for me when I think of something "natural" I think of hells bells, marajuana, peyote. I'm asking You do think it is man made and when I think of an unnatural drug I think of meth so I just wanted to know if the chemicals you use resonate on the final product.

 

[Entropymancer]

What makes naphtha "unnatural"? As Infund pointed out, it's obtained from distillation of petroleum, a natural product. There is no naphtha in the final product. Even if you were concerned about it "resonating on" the final product (an odd choice of words, I assume you mean "have an influence on" from a spiritual/mystical/nonphysical perspective?), I don't understand why this would be a bad thing. Petroleum is the result of ancient organic material being slow-cooked by the earth over the course of millions of years.... does that sound like an unnatural or evil process to you?

Of course you could always use foodsafe products for your extraction, like d-limonene as the nonpolar solvent... but you'd be hard-pressed to argue that limonene is any more or less natural than naphtha; it too is obtained by distillation of a natural product (typically orange peels).

Also, I question your association of meth being an unnatural drug... I take it you're not aware that methamphetamine occurs naturally in Acacia berlandieri?

I find your question difficult to answer since so many of the premises seem antithetical to my understanding of the natural world.

 

[syn]

I just wanted to chime in on the "Meth" thing.

First off I wasn't aware that it occurred in nature but I'm sure the natural occurrence is rather different than most street peddled examples, though I am willing to accept the occasion of being wrong.

I feel the "evil" in this case is not the substance, but the proliferation of it by unscrupulous vendors.

This is the age old notion that the universe exists as a neutral energy. Only through our perceptions and actions is it tinted "good" or "evil". Selling a destructive and addictive chemical knowingly filled with toxic impurities for the sake of personal gain is quite obviously evil. The chemical doesn't really play a role in this situation.

That being said, this is not a "pick and eat" situation unless you are doing straight up aya.

However, the organic chemistry at work is fairly universal and this is not a specialized technique. The method works within the natural laws concerning all alkaloids.

In terms of natural vs synthetic this is (IMO) natural. It occurs in nature, you are not changing it's chemical structure...All we are doing is filtering it out.

It depends on how far you want to take it. The statement used in favor of MJ states : "God made marijauna, man made beer (or alcohol) - Which one do you trust?"
Obviously this statement implies that weed is more "natural" than alcohol....and while I agree, I still think the fermentation process which produces alcohol is a natural one.

I would view this process in similar terms.

 

[amor_fati]

What's in question here is various degrees of "refined" vs. "unrefined," but even brewing is refinement--using a solvent (water, usually filtered, distilled or however else purified) and heat to extract particular substances from plant matter. Even simple pulverization or the preparation of a snuff is refinement to some degree. The complexity of a process has no weight on its ethical value, simply its ergonomical sensibility. Sometimes a slightly more complicated process can be a bit more ecologically sensible (which would have a bit more weight, ethically) and sufficiently ergonomically adaptable--ergo limonene and limtek.

Using toxic chemicals is another matter which has next to nothing to do with its "naturalness" then with its particular chemical makeup, and to some degree, its manner of refinery. The problem with naphtha is that it's a petroleum product, has a variable and toxic chemical makeup, and is not manufactured with any consideration of coming into contact with substance intended for ingestion, let alone to evaporate cleanly.

 

[Touche Guevara]

Hello nexus community I want to know if you smoke spice that has been extracted does that make it man made? Since you are using a variety of "unnatural" substances to create essentially a "naturally pure" substance? It makes me think are you smoking the pure and sacred molecule or are you smoking the chemicals you used to make it? And does smoking an extract take away from it's pureness or sacredness personally?

This is called the 'naturalistic fallacy' or 'appeal to nature fallacy'. Basically, something being natural does not make it good (think snake venom) and something being man-made doesn't make it bad (think the internet you're posing this question on). Extracting just isolates a specific set of molecules from a given substance. If you think that you'd have a more "sacred" experience eating whole chunks of root bark and fistfulls of syrian rue seeds, then that's your choice.

Appeal to nature - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[HumbledYouth08]

I have not done dmt and don't know if I would feel safe "eating chunks" of mhrb simply because I have no experience in this subject which is why I came to you guys for your appreciated input. And i apologiz to who ever got a little affended with my question I did not mean to put down anyone who uses extracted spice but to ask for their opinion and yes you have ALL helped me so thanks!

 

[VisualDistortion]

I just wanted to chime in on the "Meth" thing.

First off I wasn't aware that it occurred in nature but I'm sure the natural occurrence is rather different than most street peddled examples, though I am willing to accept the occasion of being wrong.

I feel the "evil" in this case is not the substance, but the proliferation of it by unscrupulous vendors.

This is the age old notion that the universe exists as a neutral energy. Only through our perceptions and actions is it tinted "good" or "evil". Selling a destructive and addictive chemical knowingly filled with toxic impurities for the sake of personal gain is quite obviously evil. The chemical doesn't really play a role in this situation.

That being said, this is not a "pick and eat" situation unless you are doing straight up aya.

However, the organic chemistry at work is fairly universal and this is not a specialized technique. The method works within the natural laws concerning all alkaloids.

In terms of natural vs synthetic this is (IMO) natural. It occurs in nature, you are not changing it's chemical structure...All we are doing is filtering it out.

It depends on how far you want to take it. The statement used in favor of MJ states : "God made marijauna, man made beer (or alcohol) - Which one do you trust?"
Obviously this statement implies that weed is more "natural" than alcohol....and while I agree, I still think the fermentation process which produces alcohol is a natural one.

I would view this process in similar terms.

Also, fermentation by yeast to make alcohol is completely natural. All man has done is controlled the conditions under which it takes place to make a palatable drink.

 

[Entropymancer]

Visual, I think you misread my post... methamphetamine does occur in nature, in the Acacia berlandieri tree. Of course all the street meth is synthetic (and typically has some unpleasant impurities), but methamphetamine itself is a naturally occurring compound.

Of course to claim that because it is a "natural" drug that you could (in principle) obtain from a tree, that doesn't mean it's any healthier (or less healthy)... as Touche Guevara pointed out, that's a naturalistic fallacy.

 

[VisualDistortion]

Whoops

Lol, spoke to quickly. Interesting though. That'll be the new battle cry for the speed junkies. "God made meth, so why can't I smoke that shit!"

 

[Yengu]

Whoops

Lol, spoke to quickly. Interesting though. That'll be the new battle cry for the speed junkies. "God made meth, so why can't I smoke that shit!"

Hahaha. Why cant I smoke that indeed

But seriously, stay away from that stuff. It makes vacuoles (holes) in your brain.

 

[BananaForeskin]

I think Terence McKenna made a really good distinction on this topic. One of his beliefs (or at least public beliefs) was that you should use plants instead of "man-made" psychedelics. Though, he did once go on to specify that the reason for this isn't because plants are better, or safer, it's because many shamanic plants have thousands of years of historical use. If people have been taking ayahuasca for a loooong time, then it won't kill you that easily. Ditto marijuana. Or mushrooms. Coincidentally, these are all plant-based, given that fancy lab know-how hasn't been along for very long. Ergo, the only psychedelics which are backed by a long history of safe use are plants.
MDMA, or meth, are both things which have only showed up in 50-odd years (to my knowledge) and so don't have a bona fide history of use backing up their safety. As such, they should be treated cautiously. In the case of meth, the brain-rape became pretty obvious pretty fast. And who knos what long-term studies on MDMA will show, even though at the moment it seems pretty ok.

The coincidence is that all of the psychedelics that can be trusted come from plants, and most of the sketchy ones require laboratory know-how.

However, this doesn't mean that all safe psychedelics are from plants, or that all laboratory know-how psychedelics are sketchy.