gibran2 said:
There is no way to prove that anything is real.
I believe this sentence of yours is really the essence of your arguments, so let me sing along that song for a while.
What consequences does this have in everyday reality? None apart from metaphysical musings, unless you start using it to justify your actions.
When demonstrating that ghosts visited you, you have a gnome in the shed or that autonomous DMT entities visits you - does the quoted sentence have any impact whatsoever? No.
Does the quoted sentence really constitute a valid critique of the statement "DMT entities are most likely hallucinations and events in your own mind"? No, it doesn't.
Does the quoted sentence justify a personal belief in the reality of your DMT experiences? No, it doesn't: we can't prove that the universe wasn't created by a waffle either, but we don't use this as an argument to say that the universe actually was created by a waffle.
Have you also considered the fact that hallucinogens attack very important sites in the brain that are vital for many of the contents in our consciousness? Have you thought about the fact that they target sites that are responsible for how significant we perceive events to be, and that they stimulate these areas to go haywire making neurons buzz like a maniac on methamphetamines - which in turn creates the feeling of evidently realness, deep meaning and so on? That this again makes the experience feel more real than real? Hallucinogens really disturb the brains normal modus operandi, and it is not difficult at all to seriously consider the fact that the strange experiences is the brains attempt to sort out the ridiculous and obscure information flow it receives when the molecules have triggered a response in its neurons.
Furthermore you say that materialists require more proof than is fair, but this is not true, because psychedelic enthusiasts claim they meet autonomous entitites, visit autonomous realms of the universe and so on. The materialists doubt that this is even possible, considering the pharmacology of the hallucinogens and the absence of evidence of such events taking place in consensus reality and not only in the users own mind, and demand that the enthusiasts somehow can demonstrate or refer to evidence to back up that this is the case. Again, it is not difficult if you formulate a falsifiable hypothesis. There is no need in this process for any metaphysical rambling of the fact that we can't prove that everyday reality is not an illusion. I think, in fact, that this argument in discussions like this is a desperate, old and ridiculous one, and it is all more about semantics than it is a valid ciritique of the original statement. This metaphysical consideration we can say nothing about, and it is interesting on its own terms as a pure metaphysical discussion, but it does not prevent us from saying anything about the likelihood of events, nor does it prevent us from demanding evidence to back up claims.
Imagine how science would look if we went around saying to eachother "Prove to me that everyday reality is real! I am not going to provide evidence for my propositions because from a pure metaphysical perspective this can all be a massive collective hallucination." It is totally fruitless.
Philosophy is interesting, but it has the disadvantage that sometimes you may find an argument so intriguing that you swallow it completely just to spit it out where it seems relevant, while you at the same time readily forget to think yourself.
A proposition of the how universe works is either right or wrong. That DMT entities contact you on DMT is a proposition about how the universe works. This is either right or wrong..
