The epistemology of DMT: experience reports

[Ripheus23]

A common refrain is that extreme trips are ineffable, that no sorry human language can express their glory. This refrain echoes similar doctrine regarding transcendence of any kind as indicated by religion or philosophy. However, are we to declare in an essentially a priori way that we will never read a trip report that will completely authentically communicate, by words alone, the content of the DMT experience?

To bring up a favorite example of mine, John Ciardi in his translation of Dante's poetry says that Dante actually manages to express the infinite glory of the Catholic idea of God within the framework of human writing. Having read and obsessively analyzed the Paradiso for the last two years almost now, I strongly agree with Ciardi. (For one, the technique the author uses in fact is isomorphic to musical patterns that evoke transcendental euphoria when listened to.)

But there are many examples throughout literature of writing that conveys eternity, or so I feel. There was one night I remember reading a certain fantasy novel invested with a lot of personal meaning for me, and when I looked up from the end of Part 1 of the book, I felt like I was coming down off some kind of drug. (And this was before I ever did drugs besides caffeine or even heavily drank for the first time, so this description is retrospective: at the time it was in a class of its own, more or less.)

Sometimes people give each a look that says, "I know." People who have broken through on DMT might often share such a look. My question is, would I ever be able to read a trip report and then look with the same depth of sympathetic understanding at the person who wrote it?

 

[Global]

My question is, would I ever be able to read a trip report and then look with the same depth of sympathetic understanding at the person who wrote it?

Not likely. Even with my own personal experiences that I myself have had and written about, reading them and even remembering them pales so much in comparison to being present in the experience.

 

[Ripheus23]

Not likely. Even with my own personal experiences that I myself have had and written about, reading them and even remembering them pales so much in comparison to being present in the experience.

I guess my deeper question is: is that our fault as individual writers, or is it our language's fault? Do we say it's our language's fault because no exceptions to the pattern have been found to this day? But then maybe someday, DMT Jesus will come to Earth and write us some good old-time Gospel that will wow us by the Word into... Yeah, I'll stop while I'm at it. :twisted:

 

[jamie]

I think the fact that we refer to it as a "fault" is just another example of the trappings and limitations of our language.

Your trying to speak 5d in 3d, or something like that. It is not anythings fault..it is just the way it is.

Can a man in a coma get up and walk around? No. Because walking around implies you are in a different mode of consciousness.

This is why some people who come back from mystical experiences sound like fools to other people. A person might as well just sit there throat singing and they would hit closer to the mark.

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

the intrinsic properties of language (a notable one in this case would be the distinction of boundaries) render it unable to communicate certain thoughts/feelings/experiences.

this can happen on trips i wouldn't consider "extreme" (even light mushroom trips [1.5g] can be beyond words - at certain moments)

 

[Ripheus23]

So the standard argument against someone writing, let's call it a maximal account of a DMT trip, is based on the idea of language as limiting. Now here is where I'm not sure enough at all. Some novels (Mark Z. Danielewski's work comes to mind) don't seem (to me) limited as to their expressive capacity. They seem to have a depth of meaning, a structural range of layers or dimensions of meaning even, that mirrors the depths of existence itself.

Now you could argue: the content of the DMT experience is a self-tetrated infinity, and no finite book can reflect that magnitude of information. However, it still wouldn't be clear to me that there is no technique whereby one could write an absolutely infinitely (in Cantor's sense) meaningful text. And Dante's poetry sounds to me like a decent enough example of that scale being genuinely achieved.

Here's a different way to ask the entire question: could a piece of music ever adequately convey the DMT state to a listener, if designed to somehow correspond, part by part, with different parts of a DMT trip?

 

[Ripheus23]

the intrinsic properties of language (a notable one in this case would be the distinction of boundaries) render it unable to communicate certain thoughts/feelings/experiences.

There are ways to get past those boundaries. Ergodic literature is a good example. I think there's a book out there that can be read, literally, as nine billion different poems or something. With a möbius-strip kind of pattern encoded into the order a book's words are meant to be read in, wouldn't we be able to "unbind" a story?

 

[Michal_R]

I don´t fully "understand" my own DMT experience, and that´s why I find it so difficult to convey it to another person who didn´t have that experience before. It would be like trying to describe The Impossible.

...is that our fault as individual writers, or is it our language's fault?

I consider my inability to express my DMT experience as a part of the language problem. Any language which we use on this planet has been invented by people to express "earthly issues". DMT experience - at least in my experience - goes far BEYOND our earthly delights. It is an experience that makes our preconceptions and concepts (such as language) vain, it teaches us that "we don´t understand it". I think it is not possible to describe in language that which we don´t understand.

could a piece of music ever adequately convey the DMT state to a listener...?

I don´t know, but I don´t think so. Text and music are, at least for me, "one-dimensional" or "few-dimensional" forms of expression. DMT experience is, at least for me, a total experience embracing vision, sense of hearing, my body and mind, emotions etc..., all this blended together in a complete synesthesia. Plus I never get the whole picture, so I will never be able to convey it in language / music.

Ripheus23: are you (still) looking for the "Perfect language" ?

 

[Michal_R]

Ripheus23: Do you have a DMT experience? Have you tried to convey it via language / music yourself? What do you think was the problem in your case?

 

[Global]

So the standard argument against someone writing, let's call it a maximal account of a DMT trip, is based on the idea of language as limiting. Now here is where I'm not sure enough at all. Some novels (Mark Z. Danielewski's work comes to mind) don't seem (to me) limited as to their expressive capacity. They seem to have a depth of meaning, a structural range of layers or dimensions of meaning even, that mirrors the depths of existence itself.

Now you could argue: the content of the DMT experience is a self-tetrated infinity, and no finite book can reflect that magnitude of information. However, it still wouldn't be clear to me that there is no technique whereby one could write an absolutely infinitely (in Cantor's sense) meaningful text. And Dante's poetry sounds to me like a decent enough example of that scale being genuinely achieved.

Here's a different way to ask the entire question: could a piece of music ever adequately convey the DMT state to a listener, if designed to somehow correspond, part by part, with different parts of a DMT trip?

Here's the thing: even with those epic writers like Dante, you're making the assumption that they fully and accurately describe what was allegedly experienced. Because you didn't have the experience yourself, you can make no safe conclusion that their writings are merely crude representations of their actual experiences.

Not sure about the music. Having said that, here's a composition of mine that I feel conveys a deep aspect of the particular experience with which I was in touch, but it should be noted that that experience is pretty distinct from most other experiences I've had. Perhaps that's why psychedelic music that can be wacky and silly perhaps can feel so much like hyperspace because they constantly defy expectation, and can be in themselves wacky and silly at times. Anyway in my composition, I was having a full-blown audio hallucination of a music box/harp instrument playing the most beautiful yet haunting lullaby in perfect 4-part harmony. I decided to try and replicate that sound best I could (mine doesn't have the 4-part harmony).

Mayan Lullaby

I guess my deeper question is: is that our fault as individual writers, or is it our language's fault? Do we say it's our language's fault because no exceptions to the pattern have been found to this day? But then maybe someday, DMT Jesus will come to Earth and write us some good old-time Gospel that will wow us by the Word into... Yeah, I'll stop while I'm at it.

I had an experience a couple months ago with an elf. I practically never get the elves, but they seem somewhat distinct in nature and behavior from other entities in my experience. To me, they have spoken perfect English with good grammar, and most of all what they were saying was making sense (unlike a lot of the gibberish and alien languages that I most frequently perceive), and it's not the usual telepathy (possessed thoughts) but rather full blown audio hallucination that sounds like it's coming in my ears. If the elf is off to my left flank, I can hear him better in my left ear for example. Now the thing is that as the experience is rapidly unfolding before me, the elf is narrating step by step exactly what's going on. Now, even if you gave me a whole day, where I could somehow magically revist that trip as much as I wanted to write a detailed account for it, nothing could compare to the accuracy of the elf's on-the-spot narration. I didn't know what was going on in the scene, but he did. Now I said he spoke in perfect English, and he did, but then there would be some words that sound like they could be English, but just aren't. For example he was using this word to refer to "dimensional sets", and while we don't have a word for it, he did and I intuitively understood exactly what he meant. Now if you could somehow have a transcription of what that elf said, maybe that's the closest you could come, but even the elf had to tap outside of the human language here and there for some of the more outlandish concepts of the experience. Furthermore his narration would pale in comparison the very visions he was describing.

 

[Ripheus23]

Ripheus23: Do you have a DMT experience? Have you tried to convey it via language / music yourself? What do you think was the problem in your case?

I don't have a DMT experience to try to put to paper, but I did try salvia, and I don't know if that kind of trip is usually regarded as ineffable, but though very, very difficult to express in words, I don't think it would be impossible for me to do the job. Now DMT hyperspace sounds much more complex, but I think it's a real place, for all intents and purposes, accessible through extraordinary sober effort. There are concepts at play in that world that are transcendental all the way, but English does have the ability to map them, if one is able and willing to put in the effort.

Here's the thing: even with those epic writers like Dante, you're making the assumption that they fully and accurately describe what was allegedly experienced. Because you didn't have the experience yourself, you can make no safe conclusion that their writings are merely crude representations of their actual experiences.

Dante actually says that the poetry he uses to describe the direction vision of God is as weak as pure deception compared to the ideas in his head he's trying to write down, which ideas are themselves as proportionately weak compared to the vision that gave him those ideas in the first place.

I consider my inability to express my DMT experience as a part of the language problem. Any language which we use on this planet has been invented by people to express "earthly issues"... Ripheus23: are you (still) looking for the "Perfect language" ?

The special words used in philosophy and mathematics are not limited to earthy issues, are they? I'm not looking for a perfect language, not because I think that this perfection is unattainable, but because I don't know what it would be for a language to be perfect. "Capable of expressing all possible states of the author/speaker with complete precision of detail" might be one definition, but that's not what I'm saying can be done with a DMT trip report. I just wonder if a person could read one of those reports and, based solely on understanding the meanings of the words and their relations, simulate in the imagination the trip, at least to the extent of identifying emotionally with the reporter. With Dante, for instance, the final canto does little to express concretely what God is, but does an overwhelmingly good job of describing the emotional effect perceiving God can have, and that description far exceeds the standard use of language with respect to the way it was conceived.

Perhaps this is what I'm suggesting: not that a trip report of the Erowid variety could relate well enough the content of a DMT trip, but a full-length novel written in a simultaneous combination of Douglas Hofstadter's style in his eternal golden braid, and Mark Z. Danielewski's style in House of Leaves, say, might be able to start such a relationship with its reader.

EDIT: there have been times when I felt/was aware of something, and had no words at the time for it. For example, I'm sure many people would say, and at one point I would have, due to my own limitations, agreed in a way, that romantic love does not admit of rational explanation. However, by now, I am confident that I not only can describe romantic love to a T but that my description does more than justice to the feeling as well as accounting for the obstacles to such a description that attend reflection on this kind of passion. The description is fully in (American) English.

Likewise, eternal perception might be regarded as ineffable, but I'm very confident that it's possible, not just metaphorically but partly literally, to attain by a mental effort that can be expressed by words. At least, we can clearly say in words what it would be like, even if we don't do it ourselves. How do I know that I will never read a DMT trip report that will prove itself to me likewise?

There is a place I go in my dreams that presents itself, in the dream, as a place where everyone, including me, knows the ultimate truth of reality. This is as plain to me as is the objective reality of DMT hyperspace to those who believe in said objectivity. By now, I have an exhaustively worded insight into the nature of my dreamworld, though. If my dreamworld is equal or superior in metaphysical value to DMT (for me), then from my point of view, DMT would not be able to transcend my dreamworld, and I have no reason to expect learning something completely ineffable from DMT use. QED

EDIT 2: another way to think of it is like this. Either DMT hyperspace is morally significant for how we live in the normal world, or it isn't. If it is, then it can be understood by using moral concepts. Now value is, by definition, that which has priority over what is not of value. So if the DMT world is valuable, its value has priority over the aspects of its nature that are not of value. Moral value that we could not understand would be self-contradictory (it would be a source of importance for action that we could not make use of in deciding how to act, therefore not exactly important to us). But if the most important part of DMT hyperspace is its transcendental value for us, and if that value, to be used in decision-making, has to be presented to us in a way that we can understand, then the most important part of DMT hyperspace can be understood (if only for the sake of grace).

If DMT hyperspace is not morally significant, though, then it might just as well be ineffable, but this ineffability doesn't really matter.

 

[Global]

I just wonder if a person could read one of those reports and, based solely on understanding the meanings of the words and their relations, simulate in the imagination the trip, at least to the extent of identifying emotionally with the reporter.

We're trying to tell you we don't believe so.

How do I know that I will never read a DMT trip report that will prove itself to me likewise?

You won't, and can't.

 

[Ripheus23]

I feel like an obstinate student having difficulty understanding his professor... Please bear with me, though. Now James Kent's "The Case Against DMT Elves" seems to offer a comprehensive description of DMT hyperspace that tbh reminds me of my, uh, secular(?) interpretation of salvia-space. What is wrong with Kent's theory?

We can't explain what red is without showing the color directly to those we wish to explain it to. Some philosophers call this kind of nonverbal definability "sui generis" and it is a kind of ineffability. On the other hand, use of the word "red" allows this ineffable thing (an individual color) into the language. Should I think that most components of DMT hyperspace are sui generis?

 

[SnozzleBerry]

Now James Kent's "The Case Against DMT Elves" seems to offer a comprehensive description of DMT hyperspace...

Hardly.

Should I think that most components of DMT hyperspace are sui generis?

Yes.

Smoke some DMT, then pontificate about it. Until then, anything you could say is merely mental masturbation...without having any idea of what masturbation is.

 

[jamie]

I cant stand James Kent for too long.

 

[Global]

I feel like an obstinate student having difficulty understanding his professor... Please bear with me, though. Now James Kent's "The Case Against DMT Elves" seems to offer a comprehensive description of DMT hyperspace that tbh reminds me of my, uh, secular(?) interpretation of salvia-space. What is wrong with Kent's theory?

We can't explain what red is without showing the color directly to those we wish to explain it to. Some philosophers call this kind of nonverbal definability "sui generis" and it is a kind of ineffability. On the other hand, use of the word "red" allows this ineffable thing (an individual color) into the language. Should I think that most components of DMT hyperspace are sui generis?

Part of the problem here is that when James Kent wrote that, he didn't really have any DMT breakthrough to speak of. Did he have DMT experience? Sure did. But to base ontological conclusions on the lower side of the spectrum of the experience is incredibly misleading. At higher doses, one wouldn't even think it's the same drug, and sometimes this is true even when keeping the doses constant.

Secondly, just because you feel that you can put some of your salvia experiences to words isn't necessarily entirely convincing either. The same aforementioned idea applies. Many of those who I've seen smoke salvia do not smoke it properly and as a result, many would think that it doesn't do much more than imbue "funny feelings". Now I'm not trying to say that all you experienced were "funny feelings" because frankly, I don't know what you experienced because the experience didn't happen to me, but I'm fairly certain that you would be quite tongue-tied in trying to describe some of the salvia breakthroughs I've had.

Using the "red" example doesn't exactly seem like an appropriate analogy either. Because color exists in consensual reality and we can point to it, and label it, and everyone else can see what we're pointing at (even if it is misperceived because of color blindness or something of the like), but as a general consensus it's relatively easy to establish, test and verify what a certain color is (or at least that we can agree on a label). In the case of the DMT experience this inevitably cannot take place. Because we can not have others observe the very precise stimulus that we observe (that is often difficult to describe with the words we already have along with the fact that it seems to be pretty impossible to accurately convey the experience in art (yes there are plenty of stunning examples of well-inspired art, but I've yet to see anything that completely embodies the beauty of the direct DMT experience itself), we cannot just point to it and agree on a label. Now as an avid trip report writer, I can speak for myself that I'm constantly trying to convey the experience as accurately as possible, but I would like to re-stress that I don't think this is even solely a language issue. Language completely aside, when I try and remember an experience (even one I just had), the ability for me to recreate what happened in my imagination is no where near like what had actually happened to me in the experience...and it happened to me. This isn't exclusively an issue of poor language. The imagination just frankly isn't equipped with the proper dimensionality, recall and synthesis to do hyperspace any justice. If it did, I wouldn't go back so much.

 

[Ripheus23]

Now James Kent's "The Case Against DMT Elves" seems to offer a comprehensive description of DMT hyperspace...

Hardly.

Should I think that most components of DMT hyperspace are sui generis?

Yes.

Smoke some DMT, then pontificate about it. Until then, anything you could say is merely mental masturbation...without having any idea of what masturbation is.

I'm not in a position to try the stuff so I have to indirectly evaluate what I read about it. However, I've had transcendent episodes of awareness before, involving another, infinitely layered world and a chrysanthemum-like crystal and music that creates objects, etc.

 

[Global]

Now James Kent's "The Case Against DMT Elves" seems to offer a comprehensive description of DMT hyperspace...

Hardly.

Should I think that most components of DMT hyperspace are sui generis?

Yes.

Smoke some DMT, then pontificate about it. Until then, anything you could say is merely mental masturbation...without having any idea of what masturbation is.

I'm not in a position to try the stuff so I have to indirectly evaluate what I read about it. However, I've had transcendent episodes of awareness before, involving another, infinitely layered world and a chrysanthemum-like crystal and music that creates objects, etc.

As I believe someone else mentioned, even the beautiful chrysanthemum is only the very tip of the iceberg no matter how layered, complex and beautiful. The DMT breakthrough goes so far beyond what one would experience in a sub-breakthrough, and just to be clear, sub-breakthroughs can be incredibly vivid, detailed and complex in their own right complete with entity encounters, beautiful audio hallucinations, visions of different landscapes, technologies, visions of ancient cultures and mythological scenes, etc...These hold no candle to the DMT breakthrough.

 

[Ripheus23]

As I believe someone else mentioned, even the beautiful chrysanthemum is only the very tip of the iceberg no matter how layered, complex and beautiful. The DMT breakthrough goes so far beyond what one would experience in a sub-breakthrough, and just to be clear, sub-breakthroughs can be incredibly vivid, detailed and complex in their own right complete with entity encounters, beautiful audio hallucinations, visions of different landscapes, technologies, visions of ancient cultures and mythological scenes, etc...These hold no candle to the DMT breakthrough.

Now I'm making progress! I thought people were saying that the entity encounters, etc. were unable to be described using even advanced mathematical vocabulary, which struck me as implausible. But if the ineffability is referred to some next step aside from those I've read about, then I am much less confident in what I'm saying.

Is this a better analogy? Pre-breakthrough experiences are like aleph numbers, but the breakthrough itself is like the Absolute Infinite Cantor suggested outside of all normal infinity. I still believe it's possible to put that reality to words, but I would have to write an entire book to prove what I believe, if I even could. (And I am not really in a position to ask others to believe that this book is possible.)

 

[SnozzleBerry]

I'm not in a position to try the stuff so I have to indirectly evaluate what I read about it.

Why?

I don't think you have to do anything with regards to DMT.

I'm not really sure what you are looking to accomplish here.

Until you try it, this is all pointless...