-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
My theory on DMT
- Thread starter pechenek
- Start date
hug46 said:
Wisdom comes from experience. Experience comes from age. The younger you are the less experience you have in this world.
This is very generally speaking as I've met numerous young folks who seemed much wiser than me with much less experience... but this is what I see HF referencing. He is not discriminating, but making a correlation between age and experience/wisdom.
But now we are nitpicking words which is a tangent to the main discussion here and very distracting.
What a substance
Rising Star
Take stock of your genotyping data, your ego and all that you are. If you decide to tale experiential research, then do so, and report back to this forum.
To my reckoning, you are now playing some kind of victim role when in truth most people on here have given you the benefit of their time and experience, sincerely.
Your labouring this thread is tiresome, no?
Try it or leave it and I its the former, report back.
:!:
To my reckoning, you are now playing some kind of victim role when in truth most people on here have given you the benefit of their time and experience, sincerely.
Your labouring this thread is tiresome, no?
Try it or leave it and I its the former, report back.
:!:
To me age is irrelevant and maybe it was in poor taste for HF to bring it up. However, you are a new member here and as such your survival at these early stages requires a bit of respect toward the very explorers you are trying to study. I have been at odds with HF in the past but I recognize he has some valuable lessons to teach and therefore should be approached with respect... regardless of age.pechenek said:
Don't expect anyone here to be 'enlightened'. In fact, many of us here have a knee-jerk reaction to that word. Take the insults with a grain of salt and look at this community like you would any other -- consisting of flawed human beings. To me, a new member insulting an established member warrants suspension. However, I see you have some interesting thoughts and should be allowed the opportunity to discuss them.pechenek said:
But please, refrain from commenting on others' current brain state or intelligence.
Yes, we value scientific data and peer-reviewed work. Please be careful making statements you cannot back up with data.pechenek said:
What a substance said:
I just think it's disrespectful when a persons first sentence in the OP admits to having no experience, yet people are quick to use that against him, that's very weasel-like behavior. I am thankful for the responses, and re-read each one several times, but what I was looking for was posts like this by Nueral. Global's posts were also very satisfying.
Had I known this thread would be so controversial (I don't understand why:? ?), my OP would have simply been something like this: how dmt works - Open Discussion - Welcome to the DMT-Nexus
But at least the current OP stimulated more discussion.
Parshvik Chintan
Esteemed member
having never been skydiving, i presume to be familiar with the minutia of skydiving knowledge; more so than experienced skydivers who have done this more times than they can count.
it is disrespectful of them to use my lack of skydiving experience to counter my supposed knowledge about skydiving. just because they have been skydiving hundreds of times, and i haven't once, doesn't mean they know more about skydiving then me.
such disrespectful skydivers, not taking my hypothesis seriously..
:roll:
pechenek, be honest: have you read every word in this thread?
i get the strong feeling you have not.
it is disrespectful of them to use my lack of skydiving experience to counter my supposed knowledge about skydiving. just because they have been skydiving hundreds of times, and i haven't once, doesn't mean they know more about skydiving then me.
such disrespectful skydivers, not taking my hypothesis seriously..
:roll:
pechenek, be honest: have you read every word in this thread?
i get the strong feeling you have not.
pechenek said:
I really think your taking things to personally. No one was using it against you, they were just stating that it is strongly recommended by almost EVERYONE on this forum that if you have something to say about the experience you have atleast had an experience.
The reason being is this. Everytime someone comes on here with a theory about DMT, they either have yet to try it or are going to soon. Then shortly afterwards they post another "new" theory that is vastly different. Sometimes this occurs more than a couple times.
Once you have replied or at least read 15 threads or more about someones misguided theories, harmless as they may seem, you start to really get tired of it and just wish that people would dose before telling us what they think.
Is this kinda harsh? Ya well maybe it is. It's all in how YOU take it. I am sorry you feel that you have been treated like crap, I really am. Just try and turn a cheek, realize that the only reason it effects you is due to your creating a standard on how you feel you should have been addressed, and that standard not met it effects you negatively.
I do think we should move away from bringing up anymore "mistakes" in eachothers communication and turn this into a more constructive conversation. So, OP please ask more questions that you may have and if you ignore everything else eventually it may stop. Just clarify WELL what you are saying or how you feel so no one can get mixed up and assume.
Okay, I will be honest and admit that some of my age based comments could be taken as provocation or condescension... this is something I don't appreciate when it comes in the opposite direction, so I should be a bit more careful not to be guilty of it myself. I apologize Pechenek, if you feel I have insulted you. If it is any consolation, I get insulted all the time here... usually not with something that is innocent, like assumptions about my age and experience, but with out right name calling and attacks on my mental health... which is fine btw.
That said, much of the misunderstandings that we have here (or on any forum ftm) stem from the lack of visual and tonal cues we get when talking face to face. The words are not the only or major source of information in our daily communications, as we tend to go with the facial expressions and tone of voice when they seem to contradict the words. As such, playfulness and sarcasm tend to be misunderstood in this medium.
People who know me here, tend to remember that everything I write should be treated as coming from a calm and smiling man with a hard earned white beard and compassionate eyes. I have stated this on a number of threads, but as a new poster, you are not expected to know the "old straight talking mystic" persona that my other friends here already grok when they read what I write.
My point about experience still holds, though. It is not entirely age dependent, but it is very much correlated as anyone can see. We all look back on the mistakes we made when younger and realize that we were not wise enough then to have avoided them... often failing at things a number of times is the very best teacher.
Wisdom and knowledge are two different things. High school dropouts can be very wise while esteemed academics can be downright naive. Life experience is not easy to quantify, and I think people who have lived varied and intense lives will tend to accumulate it faster. A street urchin in Calcutta may have more practical life experience than an old professor who stayed put and never saw the world up close. But even still, that same urchin will be wiser when/if he makes it to 50. This is not really a controversial stance.
AND... even in terms of raw knowledge, age provides a nigh insurmountable edge. There are only so many books and experiences one can digest in a given day. Other factors being equal, a longer life = more data to work with.
I often get frustrated with my bright and intelligent young friends these days. They are gung ho and full of idealism, and often quite sharp and observant... but someone in their 20's has only been cultivating their knowledge base since their teens (generally speaking for most subjects), and as such a 36 year old will have 2x the working knowledge that a 26 year old has (20 as opposed to 10) and a 46 year old will have 3x... again, all other factors being equal.
Furthermore, many of the brightest kids I meet have far less practical experience than academic. Many of them have never even lived alone. Any adult who provides for themselves and has dealt with life head on without the filter and safety net of (parent's house, dorm life etc.) will tell you, that you don't know anything about how life works until you have lived alone in your own house, paying your own way.
Young people think they are well traveled when they have had a 2 week EurRail backpacking adventure where they visit 10 cities in 14 days. Kids are kept busy with stuff and haven't had the chance to see the world. The 20 somethings you meet who turn expat and live abroad tend to have more perspective, but I have been to nearly 50 countries and spent years and years living abroad in a variety of places. When a kid who was in Paris for 36 hours starts telling me about life for Parisians or someone who only saw a documentary about Israel wants to tell me their guesses about how the nightlife of Tel Aviv compares to their hometown... I don't give such opinions much weight. They are entitled to say and think what they want, but my direct experiences are literally orders of magnitude greater than theirs in this.
To wind this up, I will just say that for us at the Nexus a "Theory" is a loaded term. We tend to even like conjecture to be prefaced with disclaimers and links to studies. I realize that you were not really presenting a formal theory that we would continue to discuss as the Pechenek Theory. You have an opinion, and that (as I have said from the outset) is fine.
We at the Nexus tend to be pushing the envelope though, and many of us put out TEKs and publish on this topic... we have a few members who speak at conferences and thus, putting your name on something usually means having broken some new ground, added something very novel etc. etc. Even if I never read some other psychonaut's TEK before, if I publish a new TEK and take credit for it, people will tell me directly... your TEK is not new, here is a link to an older TEK that is exactly the same as yours (or nearly so), and I would retract my claim to having invented it. (I have made a number of TEKs so I know this)
All said and done, no hard feelings. The Nexus certainly has room for more inquiring minds... including virgins. Don't feel too put out. The reaction you got was just showing you that:
A) We get a LOT of people coming here and posting nearly identical posts to yours. The vast majority of them are college kids who have never actually tried DMT.
B) These kinds of "I am smart and have studied some science, so let me tell you how it is you delusional druggies that I am curiously interested in studying for some reason. Please don't hold my total inexperience against me, but rather take me as seriously as a veteran." tend to be perceived as arrogant and condescending... and they tend to belittle and poo poo the long and hard work many of us have put into the study of this oh-so-awesome alkaloid and its cousins.
So, there you go. I don't think there is really anything else for me to say on this.
Peace
HF
That said, much of the misunderstandings that we have here (or on any forum ftm) stem from the lack of visual and tonal cues we get when talking face to face. The words are not the only or major source of information in our daily communications, as we tend to go with the facial expressions and tone of voice when they seem to contradict the words. As such, playfulness and sarcasm tend to be misunderstood in this medium.
People who know me here, tend to remember that everything I write should be treated as coming from a calm and smiling man with a hard earned white beard and compassionate eyes. I have stated this on a number of threads, but as a new poster, you are not expected to know the "old straight talking mystic" persona that my other friends here already grok when they read what I write.
My point about experience still holds, though. It is not entirely age dependent, but it is very much correlated as anyone can see. We all look back on the mistakes we made when younger and realize that we were not wise enough then to have avoided them... often failing at things a number of times is the very best teacher.
Wisdom and knowledge are two different things. High school dropouts can be very wise while esteemed academics can be downright naive. Life experience is not easy to quantify, and I think people who have lived varied and intense lives will tend to accumulate it faster. A street urchin in Calcutta may have more practical life experience than an old professor who stayed put and never saw the world up close. But even still, that same urchin will be wiser when/if he makes it to 50. This is not really a controversial stance.
AND... even in terms of raw knowledge, age provides a nigh insurmountable edge. There are only so many books and experiences one can digest in a given day. Other factors being equal, a longer life = more data to work with.
I often get frustrated with my bright and intelligent young friends these days. They are gung ho and full of idealism, and often quite sharp and observant... but someone in their 20's has only been cultivating their knowledge base since their teens (generally speaking for most subjects), and as such a 36 year old will have 2x the working knowledge that a 26 year old has (20 as opposed to 10) and a 46 year old will have 3x... again, all other factors being equal.
Furthermore, many of the brightest kids I meet have far less practical experience than academic. Many of them have never even lived alone. Any adult who provides for themselves and has dealt with life head on without the filter and safety net of (parent's house, dorm life etc.) will tell you, that you don't know anything about how life works until you have lived alone in your own house, paying your own way.
Young people think they are well traveled when they have had a 2 week EurRail backpacking adventure where they visit 10 cities in 14 days. Kids are kept busy with stuff and haven't had the chance to see the world. The 20 somethings you meet who turn expat and live abroad tend to have more perspective, but I have been to nearly 50 countries and spent years and years living abroad in a variety of places. When a kid who was in Paris for 36 hours starts telling me about life for Parisians or someone who only saw a documentary about Israel wants to tell me their guesses about how the nightlife of Tel Aviv compares to their hometown... I don't give such opinions much weight. They are entitled to say and think what they want, but my direct experiences are literally orders of magnitude greater than theirs in this.
To wind this up, I will just say that for us at the Nexus a "Theory" is a loaded term. We tend to even like conjecture to be prefaced with disclaimers and links to studies. I realize that you were not really presenting a formal theory that we would continue to discuss as the Pechenek Theory. You have an opinion, and that (as I have said from the outset) is fine.
We at the Nexus tend to be pushing the envelope though, and many of us put out TEKs and publish on this topic... we have a few members who speak at conferences and thus, putting your name on something usually means having broken some new ground, added something very novel etc. etc. Even if I never read some other psychonaut's TEK before, if I publish a new TEK and take credit for it, people will tell me directly... your TEK is not new, here is a link to an older TEK that is exactly the same as yours (or nearly so), and I would retract my claim to having invented it. (I have made a number of TEKs so I know this)
All said and done, no hard feelings. The Nexus certainly has room for more inquiring minds... including virgins. Don't feel too put out. The reaction you got was just showing you that:
A) We get a LOT of people coming here and posting nearly identical posts to yours. The vast majority of them are college kids who have never actually tried DMT.
B) These kinds of "I am smart and have studied some science, so let me tell you how it is you delusional druggies that I am curiously interested in studying for some reason. Please don't hold my total inexperience against me, but rather take me as seriously as a veteran." tend to be perceived as arrogant and condescending... and they tend to belittle and poo poo the long and hard work many of us have put into the study of this oh-so-awesome alkaloid and its cousins.
So, there you go. I don't think there is really anything else for me to say on this.
Peace
HF
anrchy said:
Your analogy is a bit off. You can have your theories on the universe, but if someone comes along who has managed to somehow traverse the universe from "end to end" (as if that might be possible) then we would have a bit closer of an anology. Although HF kinda disagrees, there are some senior members who probably do relate a lot to pechenek's theory, but it's more of a conversation worth having with them because of their experience (which may or may not be debatable) or else it's comparing hyperspace with some poor imaginary model of hyperspace that will never size up, but this is like beating a dead horse, and I'm not looking to fuel this particular issue of this thread anymore.
Infectedstyle said:
Those phosphene entopic hallucinations have as far as I'm concerned relatively little to do with the upper eschalon of DMT's eidetic hallucinations. I don't see how cobweb patterns, and this and that have much to do with multidimensional pharoahs, ancient Hindu temples, hyperspace abodes with furniture and the like, the clockwork machinery, etc...Kent's solution to bridging the gap is in the form of neural feedback where the visual processes feedback on themselves over and over. I still think this would only account for having a few steps past the veil. "Light afterimages" can play a part in the DMT experience, but it's just a small part I think. If we think of the experience as more of a spectrum with multitudinous possibilities then it is more than expansive enough to account for both entopic and eidetic hallucinations, both internal and external, both "real and non-real".
What a substance said:
If you read through this thread, tat actually linked the ayahuasca one shortly after my post. In the past I've been unable to come across their dreaming study (the webpage might not be there anymore) but I can assure you that their findings were as I indicated.
Infectedstyle
I compulsively post from time to time
Tattvamasi said:
Can't believe i have missed that one. Apologies. Upon googling the author i found that Drug hallucinations look real in the brain goes a little more in-depth.
David Nichols has a pretty sound neurological presentation of how the psychedelic works. He also explain in full detail the difference between psychedelic experience and dreaming.
Answers OPs unasked question, right? A neurological basis for how DMT works. I think it also explains away Kent's argument that dmt is involved in "shock". A tiny portion of dmt's effect simply stimulated the LC that has to do with a fight-or-flight phenomenon. This part of the brain stem is the main source of adrenaline pumps in the brain if i remember correctly.
Again, i do not claim to understand any of this stuff. It just interests me greatly so i remember these things.
Global said:
To me, your analogy seems off. If I assume correctly your comparing "someone who has traversed the universe from end to end" to people who have extensively visited hyperspace. I see your point, but to assume we know anything about hyperspace just because a bunch of people have categorized a few things, however very impressive our work has been, this does not compare to journeying through the universe, which is a place we know more about than hyperspace even if we havent been there.
I don't quite understand what you mean by "but it's more of a conversation worth having with them because of their experience (which may or may not be debatable)". The OP was addressed to those that oppose the idea AND people who support it. Which, besides the comments back and forth off topic this thread has been successful. I don't see anywhere where pechenek stated that his theory held any solid proof, and I don't see how our theory about it being more than just mind hallucinations has any either. It's still just subjective experience IMO. Although I agree with your view of what hyperspace is, I don't see how OP can't have his own theory from where he stands, which is of limited knowledge of hyperspace I agree, and then inquire to why people agree or disagree here on this forum.
Truthfully I think its extremely possible that its BOTH
Just to reiterate what OP said to hopefully get everyone on track how he actually feels, if i am correct...
I see everyone addressing things like, "he said theory" "james kent" "no experience with DMT"
Again, like i have stated multiple times. If you go back a read the entire thread, stand on your head and bark 3 times, you will see that most of the problems are just misunderstandings. Yes it would have been nice to see OP word things more correctly in the beginning and elaborate in the first post that he isnt taking sides and is just here to ask questions for a better understanding of DMT and hyperspace. But we are still going ON AND ON about things that I don't see as being the situation and OP has clarified multiple times are not the situation.
I think gibran said it best.
I'm kind of disappointed in how a lot of members jumped on one thing and continually is trying to discredit the OP when he hasn't stated being an authority on the subject, he just had an idea, that is all.
pechenek said:
I see everyone addressing things like, "he said theory" "james kent" "no experience with DMT"
Again, like i have stated multiple times. If you go back a read the entire thread, stand on your head and bark 3 times, you will see that most of the problems are just misunderstandings. Yes it would have been nice to see OP word things more correctly in the beginning and elaborate in the first post that he isnt taking sides and is just here to ask questions for a better understanding of DMT and hyperspace. But we are still going ON AND ON about things that I don't see as being the situation and OP has clarified multiple times are not the situation.
I think gibran said it best.
gibran said:
I'm kind of disappointed in how a lot of members jumped on one thing and continually is trying to discredit the OP when he hasn't stated being an authority on the subject, he just had an idea, that is all.
Parshvik Chintan
Esteemed member
To be honest, I don't see how DMT experience helps to understand what really happens when we do DMT. Let me elaborate...
First off my personal standpoint is entirely undecided,
The thing is, like many here, I've had experiences that have been "realer than real" with entity contact, telepathy and whatnot. Some of them may have even seemed to provide evidence of their reality in a manifest way, while others seemed to go the other way entirely. I have come to the conclusion that I cannot come to any conclusion about the reality of my personal experiences with DMT, because I have no reference point for reality. My memory is the same way actually and I treat it as such - with caution, when it comes to stating something like: I REMEMBER EXACTLY THAT I PUT IT THERE...
Even if the things that occur to me during the DMT experience are of an external reality, the way they end up being processed by my brain may be misleading.
Thus, my experience does not help me come to any conclusion or any helpful knowledge concerning this question. So I don't understand why everyone is getting so upset about the OP not having any experience with DMT. This question IMO/IME is not answered by subjective experience.
My experiences however have been very helpful in many other respects concerning my wellbeing and life, which are much more important than answering this question.
To the OP, my wholehearted advice for you, should you ever endeavor a DMT experience: go into it open minded and try to learn something from the experience despite the fact that you may not know whether it is real or not. Suspend your doubts and look at the consequences of various ways you can interpret/take the experience and what this might mean to you and your life. If the consequences mean an improvement in your life, perhaps it is worth moving in this direction, regardless of theories, reality or initial belief.
cheers
First off my personal standpoint is entirely undecided,
The thing is, like many here, I've had experiences that have been "realer than real" with entity contact, telepathy and whatnot. Some of them may have even seemed to provide evidence of their reality in a manifest way, while others seemed to go the other way entirely. I have come to the conclusion that I cannot come to any conclusion about the reality of my personal experiences with DMT, because I have no reference point for reality. My memory is the same way actually and I treat it as such - with caution, when it comes to stating something like: I REMEMBER EXACTLY THAT I PUT IT THERE...
Even if the things that occur to me during the DMT experience are of an external reality, the way they end up being processed by my brain may be misleading.
Thus, my experience does not help me come to any conclusion or any helpful knowledge concerning this question. So I don't understand why everyone is getting so upset about the OP not having any experience with DMT. This question IMO/IME is not answered by subjective experience.
My experiences however have been very helpful in many other respects concerning my wellbeing and life, which are much more important than answering this question.
To the OP, my wholehearted advice for you, should you ever endeavor a DMT experience: go into it open minded and try to learn something from the experience despite the fact that you may not know whether it is real or not. Suspend your doubts and look at the consequences of various ways you can interpret/take the experience and what this might mean to you and your life. If the consequences mean an improvement in your life, perhaps it is worth moving in this direction, regardless of theories, reality or initial belief.
cheers
Parshvik Chintan
Esteemed member
i don't think this is what any body means.Enoon said:
only that the experiences shatters and previous theories/preconceptions.
it doesn't give any answers, only eliminate incorrect ones.
this is my point precisely.Enoon said:
What a substance
Rising Star
If I was weasel wise I apologise.
I read Nueral's question: "would any of you scientists out there be able to put it into laymans terms whats actualy happening to your brain when taking dmt?"
I think this will one day be answered, in a strictly materialistically scientific sense. Had Nueral asked about "consciousness", instead of "brain" that, for me, would have widened the scope of the question and the answer (if there is one) considerably.
For me, longstanding research into esoteric and high end occult literature has answered many of the questions that have arose pre and post DMT for me; and admittedly, as one should expect, I still have more questions than answers (many, many more).
I would, off the cuff, word it thusly: if the DMT experience is in my mind, I really do know NOTHING about my mind. And, if the DMT experience is external to my mind, then mankind knows NOTHING about the universe.
I hope that helps in your research. You have caused quite a storm on here and I think people are reflecting and appreciating just how much they learnt about the "experience" and what that might be, and attitudes to OPs and possible misunderstandings, and about follow Nexians...so thanks, I guess.
I doubt I will post again on this thread and so will take liberty to take say two things:
1. I hope you, in your own time, get to take DMT and I hope it hits you (safely) and with the same utterly stupendous staggering astonishment that it did and does with me and most others (on this forum)
2. "Weasel like behaviour". Has it happens, the weasel is my most favourite mammal, so I take your words as a HUGE compliment.
Be happy, ask questions, be safe
8)
Hiyo Quicksilver
just some guy
:roll:pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
pechenek said:
in one word " disrespectful " , i felt it from the first utter confusion comment directed towards hug , forcing a very stern and harsh reply yet looking back and realizing i was spoiling the atmosphere of the forum i apologised and kept away from this debate or whatever this is called ,
my apology is only directed towards the forum members and traveler , as i respect this place and my friends here , yet these insults have brought me to say a few things which i will in the most eloquent manner possible
i don't understand why is the OP continuing to prolong this debate , if the OP has made up his mind on his theory than why does he want more information , if he has learnt in a purely logical manner 2+2=4 then what more information is he looking for , why is he asking questions if he already knows the truth ,
one word comes to my mind when i try to think of the OP's purpose for starting this thread "antagonise"
i can be wrong as most of the time i am , yet i want to know what are the OP's intention to prolong this debate if he already knows the truth , does he want to enlighten us on the truths we don't know , if the OP has made up his mind as he does'nt seem to be listening to those who have experienced the molecule then perhaps he has learnt what he needs , if the OP has figured it out , why does and what does he keep inquiring about again and again if not trying to convince experienced psychonauts of his theory about DMT which he realized on his own ,
the OP has no respect for originality as he calls kent's theory his own , when anyone uses the word archetype , no-one says that they have come up with a word themselves and carl jung apparently came up with the same thing , yet the OP goes on to accuse us of accusing him , even if the OP came up with this theory after reading many trip reports the credit should go to the trip reports , whatever the OP knows about DMT even the name of the molecule is by reading other peoples work , even common everyday language is a shared phenomenon where credit goes to our ancestors for inventing sounds to formulate words and formulate a coherent system of communication , everything the OP knows including language , alphabets , name of countries , history or anything else the OP read anywhere is not original , whatever the OP is stating here is a weird soup of information he has read from many sources which here gladly calls his own and is clearly trying to convince experienced psychonauts to take his word over it rather than the direct experience
the OP clearly seems to be playing the victim here , where we are all pouncing on him yet these insults the OP have stated above prove quite otherwise ,
am i weasel for quoting all the disrespectful communication OP indulged in , well my response is this : :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
thank you
peace and love everyone ,
