Program Notes

Guest speaker: Terence McKenna

[NOTE: All quotations are by Terence McKenna.]
“Boundary-dissolving internal hierophany does in fact reliably occur in the presence of these [psychedelic] plants and compounds.”
“We have become so accustomed to seeking the answer that even as a community we have a lot of trouble figuring out how you just fact the answer, how you come to terms with the options that are actually available.”
“It is not only possible, but millions and millions of people do go from the cradle to the grave without ever having a psychedelic experience. To my mind this is just an instance of an appalling infantilism that is culturally sanctioned.”
“[Psychedelics are] part of the birthright. This is what religion WAS for the first million years before it fell into the hands of men who insist on wearing dresses. It was the celebration of an ecstatic reality that could be coaxed out of a magical relationship with nature. And it’s still there. The portals are still there.”
“I’m not an advocate for everything that rolls out of the laboratory. I’m an advocate for things sanctioned by millennia of usage. And to have a profane government interpose itself between you and that reality, why it’s ludicrous.”
“The government has never been a major factor in the decisions I made about my program of ingestion.”

Previous Episode

478 - Breaking The Spell On You

Next Episode

480 - Coming Down from a Psychedelic Power Trip

Similar Episodes

Transcript

00:00:00

Greetings from cyberdelic space.

00:00:20

This is Lorenzo and I’m your host here in the psychedelic salon.

00:00:23

This is Lorenzo and I’m your host here in the Psychedelic Salon.

00:00:31

And today we’re going to continue with a series of Terrence McKenna talks that I left off with a while back.

00:00:33

Quite a while back, actually.

00:00:46

It was in September of 2013 that I played the first three parts of this month-long scholar-in-residence gig that Terrence McKenna did at Esalen.

00:00:56

And you can go find those talks in podcasts 367, 368, and 369, which are over 100 podcasts ago.

00:01:02

And why, you may ask, have I waited so long to continue with this series?

00:01:05

Well, to be honest, I don’t remember.

00:01:09

But in any event, we’re going to pick up on that series today with an afternoon talk that Terrence gave outside, as you’ll be able to tell.

00:01:15

And after we listen to what Terrence has to say here,

00:01:18

I’ll be back with a, well, somewhat embarrassing story about myself.

00:01:22

But for all of you Terrence McKenna fans who tell me that they have now heard it all,

00:01:28

well, before you skip over this talk, you may want to listen to what he calls his performance

00:01:32

that begins in just about a minute from now.

00:01:36

And I think that you’ll be happy that you did.

00:01:39

Now, here’s Terrence.

00:01:41

Now, here’s Terrence.

00:01:47

Well, we have such a beautiful day today that I thought we would leave the computer inside.

00:01:51

There’s only so much of that kind of thing that you can put up with

00:01:54

and sort of examine our tools, if not our premise, today, rather than go forward with looking at the time wave in the way we have been.

00:02:13

So since this is a fairly small group and I’m feeling fairly confident,

00:02:24

I’d like to talk about language today,

00:02:30

and I will attempt to open this with a performance,

00:02:34

which is something I rarely, like never, do.

00:02:40

“‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves

00:02:44

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

00:02:48

All mimsy were the borogoves,

00:02:52

And the mawny wraths outgrabe.

00:02:56

Beware the jabberwock, my son, The jaws that bite, the claws that catch.

00:03:00

Beware the jub-jub bird,

00:03:02

And shun the fermious Bandersnatch

00:03:06

He took his Vorpal Sword in hand

00:03:10

Long time the Maxim foe he sought

00:03:14

So rested he by the Tum-Tum Tree

00:03:18

And stood a while in thought

00:03:21

And as in oofish thought he stood,

00:03:26

The jabberwock with eyes of flame came woofing through the tulgy wood

00:03:34

And burbled as it came.

00:03:40

One, two, one, two, and through and through,

00:03:43

His vorpal blade went snicker-snack.

00:03:47

He left it dead, and with its head he went galumphing back.

00:03:55

And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?

00:03:58

Come to my arms, my beamish boy.

00:04:02

Oh, frabjous day Caloo, calay

00:04:05

He chortled in his joy

00:04:07

T’was brillig

00:04:10

And the slithy toes

00:04:13

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe

00:04:16

All mimsy were the borogos

00:04:20

And the mawny wraths out grave applause

00:04:27

applause

00:04:28

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:29

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:30

applause

00:04:31

applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause Applause I hope, I assume most of you recognize that as Lewis Carroll’s Jabberwocky,

00:04:46

which was an example of verbal intentionality and syntax overcoming absence of ascribed meaning.

00:05:02

This is what’s happening here.

00:05:14

meaning. This is what’s happening here, that the intentionality of meaning is so great that it overcomes the origin of language.

00:05:25

And we’ve also been using language in a fairly free

00:05:35

and in some cases unusual and in some cases outrageous manner.

00:05:41

So that’s what I meant when I said it made sense to examine the tools

00:05:47

we are particularly neurologically outfitted for the production of small mouth noises we can do this

00:06:06

I’ve proved it myself

00:06:09

for hours at a time

00:06:11

without exhaustion

00:06:13

and what is going on there

00:06:16

is that rather than

00:06:18

the rippling of plumage

00:06:21

or the rubbing of hard body parts against each other, since we don’t have any

00:06:29

hard body parts to rub against each other most of the time, communication in our species

00:06:37

has taken the form of neuromodulation of small mouth noises. Now these small mouth noises

00:06:45

are transduced into acoustical waves,

00:06:50

a physical phenomenon

00:06:51

which moves from point to point

00:06:53

in ordinary Newtonian space.

00:06:56

The acoustical pressure wave strikes the ear.

00:07:01

The ear conveys the particular unique signature of that arriving acoustical wave into, for lack of a better term, we have to call the mind.

00:07:17

And the mind takes this acoustical signal and compares it with an imprinted dictionary built up out of experience.

00:07:26

It does this very, very quickly. The speed with which the dictionary is consulted and each

00:07:33

arriving word is identified, its syntactical class understood, and its intentionality in the domain of meaning recognized is very, very rapid.

00:07:48

It represents the most rapid sort of intellectual activity that we undertake as human beings.

00:07:58

Thought is a similar phenomenon, but it is an interior dialogue.

00:08:03

And God help us, let’s hope we understand our

00:08:06

thoughts better than what people say to us, because in the case of our thoughts, we are both

00:08:12

the one communicating and the one communicated to. Language is this double-edged adaptation of the human animal.

00:08:26

It is obviously a multifaceted, multipurpose, adaptive advantage in all environmental situations

00:08:39

because if you can image and linguistically process evolving situations,

00:08:45

you have a leg up over an organism which is hardwired for reaction along the line of instincts.

00:08:54

Yet, in the domain of cognition, it’s almost as though language has exceeded its usefulness,

00:09:03

because someone said language was invented

00:09:07

to lie. Well, perhaps that is too cynical, but certainly language obfuscates reality.

00:09:16

It cannot help but do this. It does it in the following manner. A child born into what the psychologist William James

00:09:29

called a blooming, buzzing confusion, a child born into the blooming, buzzing confusion

00:09:38

attempts to isolate complexes of activity, complexes of color, sound, and tactility. And the nurturing parent provides names. This is a kitty. This is a bird. This is a blanket. What is happening here is that the blooming, buzzing confusion

00:10:06

is slowly being tiled over by an interlocking and seamless set of names and syntactical structures

00:10:16

which literally then stand for reality.

00:10:23

They stand for reality. They stand for reality.

00:10:27

So unless you’re the kind of

00:10:30

very fortunate person

00:10:32

who speaks many, many languages fluently

00:10:35

and has a sense of this relativity

00:10:40

of the intent to communicate,

00:10:43

you are barred from realizing

00:10:47

the context dependency of your own language.

00:10:52

And we all are like this.

00:10:54

This impressed me very much in the Amazon

00:10:57

because the first time I went to the Amazon,

00:11:01

I knew nothing about botany.

00:11:04

And it appeared to me largely to be green.

00:11:08

And when I returned some years later, having made a fairly thorough study of the taxonomic

00:11:15

families of tropical plants, it was a vast, intricate, fascinating domain because I had terms for all these exotic floral forms, leaf forms, seed expressions, morphology, you see.

00:11:40

Nature’s expression in the world of form is called its morphology.

00:11:45

Morphology is the science of form.

00:11:47

Well, form, we tend to think of it as a platonic concern.

00:11:56

After all, aren’t the forms somewhere in a platonic hyperspace?

00:12:03

Aren’t they somehow above and beyond the machinations of language

00:12:08

and perception? Well, they are if you’re a Platonist. But when we look at natural form,

00:12:16

the enterprise of science has been to attempt to describe natural form. This is essentially a program to be carried out within the domain

00:12:28

of language. And this has been entirely overlooked by the philosophy of science so far as I can

00:12:36

tell. I mean, the world is not made of anti-mumasons and quarks and photons and electromagnetic fields.

00:12:48

Reality is made of words.

00:12:51

Reality is made of symbolic interlocking linguisto-mathematical constructs.

00:12:59

Everything beyond that is pure conjecture.

00:13:04

I mean, this is what you learn in philosophy one, the relativity

00:13:08

of knowing, the impossibility of actually nailing down the ontos of what is presented in the theater

00:13:19

of perception through an exercise of epistemic knowing. It cannot be done. Brain cannot fully elucidate brain.

00:13:31

There’s a tautology there.

00:13:33

So language is something that springs

00:13:37

from the biological matrix

00:13:39

and the neurological matrix within us and its major um the major theme of its siren song to us is that it allows us to

00:13:53

know the world and to communicate it well the truth is it does allow us to uh know the world to some degree, and it does allow us to communicate about it.

00:14:07

But a price is paid at every step of the way.

00:14:11

First of all, because we are

00:14:13

concrescent entities of feeling.

00:14:18

This is Alfred North Whitehead.

00:14:20

We are concrescent entities of feeling,

00:14:24

yet our language prepares us to describe a world of three-dimensional spatial relationships between solid objects.

00:14:34

So it is not true to the perceiver, you see.

00:14:41

There is a kind of break of faith with the world.

00:14:48

Language betrays.

00:14:50

Language betrays in order to mean.

00:14:54

You know, Archibald MacLeish said,

00:14:56

A poem should not mean but be.

00:15:01

And this is a reasonable statement of a poetic, but it is not a basis for a theory of communication.

00:15:10

A theory of communication depends on correct mirroring of the meme that is being transmitted,

00:15:18

no matter how far down the line it has come? suggesting that the catalysis of neurological development that has gone on over the last million years in the human species

00:15:50

was catalyzed by what was at first a random exposure to these things,

00:15:58

then a deepening exposure brought on by the consequent synergy of increased visual acuity.

00:16:06

In other words, some of these biogenic amines were conferring increased visual acuity,

00:16:12

and this was shifting the reproductive mathematics in the direction of those individuals

00:16:20

that were allowing this psychoactive substance,

00:16:28

I mean, let’s be frank about it, into the diet. Then later we saw that sexual arousal was also a concomitant

00:16:35

to admitting this item into the diet,

00:16:38

and at higher doses and deeper exposures,

00:16:41

a deepening sense of what we can call without defining the other, the other.

00:16:50

I read recently an interesting paper called The Felt Presence of the Other in Unusual Environments.

00:17:01

And it was an article about the kind of hysteria which overtakes people lost in

00:17:07

the wilderness, the sense that they are being stalked or followed or observed. And in its

00:17:17

mildest form, I’m sure we all have experienced this, it’s the sense of being observed when you know you’re alone in the wilderness. We seem to be,

00:17:27

you know, we have very strong fight or flight hard wiring in the organism. And we also,

00:17:37

when we admit, when we admitted these biogenically active amines into the diet,

00:17:43

these biogenically active amines into the diet, we set ourselves up for a kind of undefined frontier

00:17:49

between ourselves and the other.

00:17:53

Language took its place in that fissure

00:17:58

and began to create the earliest images of the other.

00:18:03

But antecedent to the image is the feeling.

00:18:08

And that was the point that I wanted to make,

00:18:10

that in all cases, antecedent to the image is the feeling,

00:18:15

the felt presence of immediate reality,

00:18:20

which is the unique province of the individual.

00:18:29

It is not, we choose to attempt to communicate it,

00:18:34

but it is always and forever, by the nature of the situation, ours and ours alone.

00:18:41

Ours and ours alone.

00:19:15

Well, the idea then that language is a double-edged adaptation that has both served us and betrayed us on different levels, needs now to be looked at in the light of the fact that culture is more and more consciously becoming a project carried out in the domain of language. By, for instance, propagandists, both governmental and commercial.

00:19:22

Reality is more and more in the image. And when we talked about virtual realities

00:19:30

and the tendency of technology to create the dream utopias of the unconscious prehistory

00:19:37

and shamanism, you see that what is happening is we are, as a global culture,

00:19:44

What is happening is we are, as a global culture,

00:19:50

abandoning ourselves in a way to the image because nothing else can be done.

00:19:53

There aren’t enough resources, there aren’t enough metals in the planet

00:19:57

to give everyone the kind of standard of living

00:20:00

that is enjoyed by the technocratic elites in the West.

00:20:05

So instead, there has to be this trade-off in image.

00:20:08

Now, this is not something new.

00:20:10

We see it reflected in American life over the whole post-war era.

00:20:17

Because, I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but in order to make good on the grand promise that was to accrue to the American middle class consequent upon the defeat of fascism, this utopia that was to come to be, for it to happen, it was done tackily.

00:20:41

That was the price that was paid you know

00:20:45

Eric Jansch said

00:20:47

the question regarding space colonies

00:20:50

is not is it possible

00:20:52

but how will we keep it in good taste

00:20:55

and this was a question that was not answered

00:20:59

by American culture in the 50s

00:21:01

it was essentially a suburban

00:21:04

modular housing, modular products, modular values,

00:21:13

modular lifestyle paradise that was sold as the consequences of the completion of the American dream. Part of what we have been living through this period

00:21:28

is a hallucination of improper language.

00:21:36

I mean, now, because of the changes going on in the Soviet Union, the fiction of our, this implacable enemy bent on putting a tank on every street

00:21:51

corner in the world is now exposed as a cultural illusion, a fiction. And I’m not entirely

00:22:00

persuaded that it is, was simply all a horrible misunderstanding. It seems to me these

00:22:08

illusions played very strongly into the hands of different factions on both sides. Political

00:22:20

realism is also a coming to grips with language. You know, the French sociologist Jacques Ellul

00:22:28

said, there are no political solutions. There are only technological ones. The rest is propaganda.

00:22:39

Well, this, you know, people howl to the high heavens. But in fact, ideology, which is a kind of street corner form of metaphysics, ideology has been just a pervasive cancer on the Western mind ever since the burning of Eleusis. I mean, we just can’t get enough of it. And, you know, we may look with

00:23:06

horror on the funeral of the imam, but believe me, in the history of Western civilization,

00:23:12

there have been scenes go down that make that look like child’s play. Recall to you, just

00:23:19

as an example, the Albigensian Crusade, when in order to stamp out a heresy, the Inquisition was turned loose in southern France.

00:23:32

And the professional killer who was put in charge of this operation was a career man named Simon de Montfort. And his lieutenants came to him at one point in this campaign and said,

00:23:49

we have the city surrounded, we are laying siege to, I believe it was Carcassonne.

00:23:55

And they said, but there are 7,000 Catholics within the walls.

00:24:00

He said, kill everybody, God will recognize his own.

00:24:03

He said, kill everybody, God will recognize his own.

00:24:11

So, you know, the 20th century has not cornered the market on the ways in which language can distort

00:24:17

and is used for political purposes to distort reality.

00:24:20

A very poignant example of that that I’ve personally had to deal with is a lot of my work in

00:24:30

the Amazon has been in an area of the Colombian Amazon called the Lower Putumayo. And I venture

00:24:39

very few people here this afternoon have any association to the lower Putumayo, but in fact, British

00:24:47

banks, with the collusion of Peruvian ruling families in the early years of this century,

00:24:56

created a mini-Holocaust in the Peruvian, it was then Peru, in the Peruvian Amazon,

00:25:04

in the Peruvian, it was then Peru, in the Peruvian Amazon,

00:25:07

in the pursuit of rubber.

00:25:12

And what this was about was going into these tribal areas and showing these people how to collect wild rubber

00:25:16

and then telling them, you know, you bring in this much,

00:25:20

the first time you don’t bring in this much,

00:25:22

we remove the soles of your feet with a machete. The second time you don’t bring in this much we remove the soles of your feet with a machete

00:25:26

the second time you don’t bring in this much

00:25:29

we kill you

00:25:30

and 45,000 Indians were exterminated

00:25:34

in the Colombian Putumayo

00:25:35

going there years after

00:25:39

this atrocity

00:25:41

I was amazed to see the lingering effects of the misuse of language.

00:25:50

The Colombians, who were not politically associated with this,

00:25:54

later in the 30s, it was ceded to Peru,

00:25:57

refer to it as the devil’s paradise.

00:26:01

And the idea is that savages

00:26:05

note this word, savages

00:26:08

are savage

00:26:11

and therefore we must be more savage

00:26:15

in other words, preliterate culture

00:26:19

is taken as an excuse for

00:26:22

the rise of the beast in the colonizer.

00:26:30

And this is entirely done, how this trick is done,

00:26:34

is through the misuse and abuse of language,

00:26:38

where civilization is what is being brought to these people,

00:26:44

even though what appears to be being brought to them

00:26:47

is the institution of prostitution,

00:26:51

social diseases, slavery, madness, and death.

00:26:55

But in fact, no, that isn’t it.

00:26:58

It’s civilization.

00:26:59

It’s a set of reasonable values.

00:27:04

Well, the consequences of working out the reasonable values

00:27:08

that were exported into the colonial world throughout the 18th and 19th century,

00:27:14

the consequence of that is the appalling contradiction presented by modernity,

00:27:21

where the major portion of real wealth of great nations is shoveled into a

00:27:30

standing crop of weaponry which had better never be used, because if it is used, it spells

00:27:37

Armageddon. If it’s not used, it’s simply the worst investment anybody ever dreamed up. So this kind of betrayal of

00:27:51

language and use of scapegoats, see, that’s what was happening with the United States vis-a-vis

00:27:57

the Soviet Union. The scapegoat, the godless communist, it’s what was happening in the

00:28:03

Putumayo between the rubber barons and the Indians

00:28:06

they were exploiting

00:28:07

they thought they were civilizing them

00:28:09

so the imaging

00:28:12

of the world

00:28:14

gives permission for various

00:28:16

kinds of relationships to it

00:28:18

and people never question

00:28:21

you know

00:28:22

once they pledge

00:28:24

allegiance to a given linguistic model of

00:28:28

reality, then that absolves all necessity for further thought. This is what Goebbels

00:28:35

understood so perfectly. You repeat and you repeat and you repeat and then when people

00:28:41

ask themselves in the privacy of their own mind the moral question your answer is on the surface waiting to be heard goebbels was the first person

00:28:52

to create a system where sitting in an office in berlin he could throw a switch and speak

00:29:00

to the german people and this this m McLuhan talked a lot about this

00:29:06

the notion of the creation

00:29:08

of the public

00:29:09

what is the public

00:29:11

it’s something that comes out

00:29:14

of print culture, it’s post

00:29:16

medieval, it’s a phenomenon

00:29:17

that can only exist in the presence

00:29:19

of newspapers essentially

00:29:21

that’s what gave it it’s boost

00:29:23

and the public

00:29:26

is a very different thing

00:29:29

from the democratic notion

00:29:32

of the people.

00:29:35

Because the public is this body

00:29:37

of quote-unquote informed opinion.

00:29:41

But this informed opinion

00:29:43

is tremendously subject to whim, pressure, located,

00:30:09

dragged forward, forced to recant whatever accounts they gave of the violence. These film

00:30:17

clips are being shown side by side on the evening news where three weeks ago we were hearing that the army would never attack the

00:30:27

beloved students now the army is patriotically rounding up dissidents hooligans bandit elements

00:30:36

and those who would destroy the compact between the party and the people this is just a shift in language. Remember the scene in 1984 where the party hack is giving the speech and midway through the speech he’s handed a telegram on the podium that tells him that the enemy has changed, it’s no with Oceania and have begun bombing Eurasia

00:31:06

the other state

00:31:07

and in mid stride

00:31:10

he doesn’t even have to end a paragraph

00:31:13

he can just turn the language

00:31:15

and plow off in another direction

00:31:19

well, is there any cure for this

00:31:23

or are we simply the prisoners each of us in our own way, of people smarter than ourselves?

00:31:31

Well, not really, I think, because outside the domain of language is some kind of domain of authentic feeling. We have thousands of words for technological

00:31:51

processes, widgets, and what have you. Our vocabulary of feeling comprises about ten

00:31:59

words. You know, love, hate, disgust, revulsion, obsession, like that. we need to be aware of an internal horizon of self-perception that is extremely rich and complicated and shifting all the time. the top-down values of the culture that we wear like clothing,

00:32:46

that’s who we are.

00:32:47

This is what McLuhan said

00:32:49

when he said we wear culture

00:32:52

like an overcoat.

00:32:54

It’s something sold to us.

00:32:56

You go out and buy it

00:32:57

and you try it on.

00:32:59

If Time magazine doesn’t fit you,

00:33:01

maybe The Economist will.

00:33:03

If neither fits,

00:33:04

well, try the Journal of Foreign Affairs.

00:33:06

You’ll find an overcoat that fits

00:33:09

and then that will become part of your culture.

00:33:12

I saw the cartoon in the New Yorker last night,

00:33:15

the well-dressed man and his wife leaving a party

00:33:19

and he’s saying to her,

00:33:20

how can we relate to people who belong to the Book of the Month Club?

00:33:26

You know, these are strong cultural disparities.

00:33:33

So to overcome culture, really, which I view as provisional and semi-toxic,

00:33:56

and semi-toxic, there has to be a way back to bedrock, to something that is satisfyingly transcendental in an immediate sense.

00:34:05

In an immediate sense. So it cannot be a philosophy, as far as I’m concerned maybe philosophies work for the more rarefied among

00:34:08

us and they have the

00:34:09

consolation of

00:34:11

I don’t know, Episcopalianism

00:34:13

Orthodox Judaism, Logical

00:34:15

Positivism, whatever trip

00:34:17

they’ve got running, but I’ve

00:34:19

always found philosophy to be

00:34:22

recreational

00:34:22

and won’t really serve

00:34:25

well so then what is there

00:34:27

first of all there is nature

00:34:31

nature silently attended

00:34:35

is still

00:34:37

a modality

00:34:40

that is beyond the reach of the language

00:34:44

of most of us

00:34:45

and of those of us who need it most fortuitously

00:34:50

because we have the smallest vocabulary for its description.

00:34:55

So when we go into nature,

00:34:58

it’s a flirtation with a kind of iridescence.

00:35:03

It’s a search for, I mean I blush to use such a

00:35:10

word, but a lost innocence, which most of us associate with childhood. Some of us had

00:35:16

terrible childhood, so we just associate it with the lost paradise of Eden or a utopia.

00:35:24

the lost paradise of Eden or a utopia.

00:35:32

But in nature, there is an implicate order.

00:35:40

There is the bedrock out of which the human iridescence springs. And human culture is an extremely evanescent transitory and uh non-equilibrium

00:35:52

kind of condition i mean the the pulse beat of this planet is measured in millions of years

00:35:59

culture is a phenomenon of the last 40,000 years

00:36:05

and that’s generous.

00:36:07

So culture has about it

00:36:10

this miraculous, instantaneous

00:36:13

and almost intrusive quality

00:36:17

against the background of the rest of the body of nature.

00:36:22

But going into nature is not simply a prescription for joining the Sierra Club.

00:36:28

What going into nature means is taking seriously the alchemical faith

00:36:36

that preceded the positivist flowering of science

00:36:41

and looking into the heart of matter with the expectation of encountering

00:36:48

a mystery. Now, in the most practical sense, what this has to mean is the psychedelic experience,

00:37:00

hallucinogenic plants. It cannot mean anything else.

00:37:05

Now, of course, we’re in the slightly uncomfortable position

00:37:09

of having that be illegal.

00:37:13

But that in itself should be a sufficient indication

00:37:18

for most people that something is going on.

00:37:20

I mean, my take on legality is essentially that of Charles Dickens, who was

00:37:26

sort of an Edwardian anarchist. And his famous throwaway line on that was, the law is an ass.

00:37:37

And, you know, it’s sadly true in this case. But I’m not really interested in it as a legal issue. I’m interested in it as a

00:37:47

human rights issue, if you want to put it that way. In other words, my assumption is that

00:37:55

in the same way that the Western mind reached a certain place where it recognized that slavery,

00:38:08

place where it recognized that slavery, whether it made economic sense or not, was morally insupportable. And in the same way then that a universal right to own property, if you’ve got

00:38:17

the money, has been more or less institutionalized and the oppression of women is now recognized as a kind of self-defeating strategy of male dominance.

00:38:28

In the same way that these things have been signposts in the continuing history of human self-definition,

00:38:38

so shall be the understanding that life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness in the age of modern pharmacology has to mean the right to control your own state of mind in the appropriate, you know, subject to the constraints of time, place, and manner, so forth and so on. So that’s enough about the socio-political end of it.

00:39:05

What is more interesting is

00:39:07

the thing in itself,

00:39:11

what it is.

00:39:12

That it is something

00:39:14

which our cultural

00:39:16

biases, reaching clear

00:39:18

back to the phonetic alphabet

00:39:19

and to

00:39:21

the male dominance,

00:39:24

the fear that societies run along the lines of male dominance

00:39:28

have of boundary dissolution.

00:39:31

I mean, for a thousand years in Western civilization,

00:39:34

the only boundary dissolution that was socially sanctioned

00:39:39

was getting plastered.

00:39:41

And that appears to have been specifically for the purpose of getting laid

00:39:45

i mean as far as uh research can tell us for a thousand years nobody got laid who wasn’t stone

00:39:53

drunk because everyone was such a paragon of social rectitude well um i mean it’s truer than you think. Alcohol is clearly a medium for permission in a Calvinist milieu.

00:40:11

Well, I could talk about this in all kinds of different ways.

00:40:14

It’s very interesting.

00:40:15

I talked about scapegoats, and I talked about the misuse of language.

00:40:20

I suppose since I got that deep into it, I might as well say what I’m thinking, which is that the drug issue now looms as an obvious new horror. I mean, it has will be made that this is a godless drug.

00:40:47

The problem here is, again, a problem of language.

00:40:54

We have one concept, drug.

00:40:56

It moves from aspirin to heroin through LSD and on into television.

00:41:04

These things can all be spoken of

00:41:06

as drugs

00:41:07

so then what this means immediately

00:41:10

is somebody has stacked the

00:41:12

rhetorical deck

00:41:13

against a reasonable discussion

00:41:15

of the matter because our

00:41:18

vocabulary is so

00:41:19

impoverished, I mean are we to believe

00:41:22

that we need the same

00:41:24

policy for television as we need for, are we to believe that we need the same policy for television as we need

00:41:26

for heroin? Are we to believe that psychedelic psychotherapy is to be treated with the same

00:41:35

hand that resolves the crack cocaine issue? So while the government squawks education, no education is taking place. Rather, what is

00:41:48

taking place is a poisoning of the linguistic domain in which we will then be expected to forge

00:41:56

a solution. So what I’ve tried to say on this issue, and some of you who saw this month’s Mother Jones may

00:42:05

have noticed that they

00:42:07

put me in there.

00:42:09

More picture than text,

00:42:11

which tells you something about an age of

00:42:13

symbols. But

00:42:15

what I’ve tried to say is

00:42:17

that we need to define

00:42:19

drugs operationally.

00:42:22

We need to say

00:42:23

what it is we don’t like, and then we need to find out

00:42:28

what it is that does what we don’t like. Okay, what is it we don’t like? I submit to you that

00:42:37

what we don’t like about drugs is unexamined, obsessive, and habitual behavior. Unexamined, obsessive, and habitual behavior.

00:42:46

Unexamined, obsessive, habitual behavior.

00:42:50

Meaning, you know, somebody’s into something,

00:42:52

and by God, if you get in their way,

00:42:54

when they’re on their way to it,

00:42:57

you’re in trouble.

00:42:58

They do not question their obsession.

00:43:03

They indulge their obsession.

00:43:06

And they will tolerate no discussion of it.

00:43:09

So unexamined, habitual, obsessive behavior is extremely objectionable to all of us, I think.

00:43:16

I mean, we call anything that we don’t like, we call it robot-like, automaton, unthinking, zombie, so forth and so on. Well,

00:43:30

imagine if our partners in the new global materialism, the Japanese, had introduced

00:43:40

into this country at the end of World War II a drug which, within a few years,

00:43:47

made such deep inroads into the American population

00:43:51

that people were spending an average of five hours a day loaded on this drug.

00:43:58

What would we think?

00:43:59

We would think that it was a crime against a culture on the scale of Auschwitz.

00:44:06

But as a matter of fact, we did this to ourselves.

00:44:10

Television, introduced at the close of World War II,

00:44:14

has become a form of electronic heroin.

00:44:19

And it isn’t even your trip.

00:44:21

They don’t even let you go on your own trip.

00:44:24

You get a trip designed on Madison

00:44:27

Avenue to sell, you know, this year’s model of the crap mobile or whatever else is being pushed.

00:44:37

So unquestioningly, and even as I speak, I’m sure there are people in this audience who are

00:44:43

revolted at my lack of patriotism and love for an American institution of such nobility and depth as TV.

00:44:52

Well, you know where I pulled back from TV? Really pulled back from it?

00:44:57

It was when I made a mild knock on TV and someone in the audience said,

00:45:01

knock on TV and someone in the audience said

00:45:03

well you can say anything you want

00:45:05

about television but you must

00:45:08

admit that it’s given our children

00:45:10

a wonderful education

00:45:11

concerning nature

00:45:13

anyway

00:45:14

pursuing the theme of

00:45:18

operationally defining

00:45:19

drugs

00:45:21

to give us a little more linguistic scope

00:45:24

psychedelics

00:45:28

in contrast to television

00:45:32

and heroin dissolve

00:45:35

habitual patterns of activity

00:45:39

and promote examination

00:45:43

of motives and allow a restructuring of habit. psychologists such as Humphrey Osmond and Hoffer were obtaining 40% cure rate of chronic alcoholism

00:46:15

with one high dose exposure. Well now understand, this doesn’t mean that Ld is a cure for alcoholism i mean if you think that you don’t

00:46:27

know anything about how drugs work that 40 cure on one high dose exposure to lsd of alcoholism

00:46:35

means that this person took this psychedelic it dissolved their boundaries it dissolved their

00:46:41

defenses they came face to face with the fact that they were killing

00:46:45

themselves. And when they came down, they reached into their bowels and found enough intestinal

00:46:52

fortitude to chop it off. Well, this is real. This is the dream of all other therapies. Now, AA achieves this, but at the cost of closing the mind.

00:47:08

You know, a truly devoted graduate of AA

00:47:13

does not have an open mind on the drug issue

00:47:17

because they have been taught that opening your mind

00:47:20

even a little bit may lead you back to the bottle.

00:47:24

Well, they’re trying to solve a

00:47:26

personal dilemma in the context of neurosis. I’m sympathetic to that. But in the meantime,

00:47:32

the rest of this forbidden domain.

00:47:59

What are we going to do about it. In other words, authentic boundary dissolving internal hierophany does

00:48:10

in fact reliably occur in the presence of these plants and compounds. But nobody knows

00:48:18

what to do about it. We have become so accustomed to seeking the answer that even as a community

00:48:25

we have a lot of trouble figuring out

00:48:28

how you just face the answer,

00:48:31

how you come to terms with the options

00:48:34

that are actually available.

00:48:38

Well, I’ve talked about it today

00:48:40

in a slightly more political context

00:48:42

because when you hang out in the baths

00:48:44

with these State Department people,

00:48:46

it’s like a virus in the water.

00:48:48

I mean, you find yourself raving about triage,

00:48:53

Saudi uprisings, infrastructures.

00:48:57

There’s just no cure for it.

00:49:01

Are there questions?

00:49:04

So the question is about sexuality

00:49:07

and the relationship of sex to drugs.

00:49:10

Well, it’s kind of a shifting crowd here.

00:49:12

I mean, we’ve been into some of this in other sessions.

00:49:18

My origin scenario for consciousness,

00:49:21

which I just brushed on today,

00:49:23

is this idea that these bioactive amines

00:49:27

triggered increases in visual acuity, which made them important to be kept in the diet.

00:49:32

At slightly higher doses, all psychoactive drugs of the indole type are CNS activators. In other words, they cause arousal,

00:49:45

generalized arousal,

00:49:47

which is a restlessness,

00:49:50

an alertness,

00:49:51

an attention to incoming sensory detail.

00:49:54

But this can also be channeled

00:49:56

almost by decision

00:49:58

into sexual arousal

00:50:00

and sexual activity.

00:50:02

And I think it’s quite a smooth spectrum

00:50:05

from arousal to sexual arousal

00:50:10

through preceded and followed by perhaps chanting,

00:50:17

preceded and followed by perhaps dancing,

00:50:20

and then higher doses of these things usher into the mystical, for want of a better word, this transcendent other.

00:50:41

sex and psychedelics.

00:50:45

Every time they would say that LSD breaks chromosomes,

00:50:48

he would say that it causes orgasms that last,

00:50:52

and then he would add a greater increment of time as the propaganda war required

00:50:55

to hold the numbers steady on both sides.

00:51:00

Certainly sex under psychedelics is quite astonishing, although psychedelics without sex are so astonishing itgent one is very few people go through life without ever brushing up against sexuality.

00:51:36

I mean, you have to have a truly bizarre biography for it to never come and get you.

00:51:41

to never come and get you.

00:51:43

On the other hand,

00:51:45

it is not only possible,

00:51:47

but millions and millions of people do go from the cradle to the grave

00:51:52

without ever having a psychedelic experience.

00:51:56

Well, to my mind,

00:51:57

this is just an instance

00:52:01

of an appalling infantilism

00:52:05

that is culturally sanctioned.

00:52:08

I mean, the culture not only doesn’t care

00:52:11

if you never find out about this

00:52:13

and remain forever immature, virgin, good word.

00:52:23

The society, not only does it not care

00:52:25

it’s specifically interested in seeing that you don’t have

00:52:29

this experience

00:52:30

well, it’s part of the birthright

00:52:34

this is what religion was

00:52:37

for the first million years

00:52:39

before it fell into the hands of men who

00:52:43

insist on wearing dresses

00:52:44

you know, it was the celebration before it fell into the hands of men who insist on wearing dresses,

00:52:51

you know, it was the celebration of an ecstatic reality that could be coaxed out of a magical relationship with nature.

00:52:58

I mean, and it’s still there.

00:53:00

The portals are still there.

00:53:10

there. The portals are still there. Your RS-232 outlet into hyperspace is still in place,

00:53:17

even though, you know, nobody’s may have plugged in in your family line since Alaric burned Eleusis. Nevertheless, the hard wiring is there, the self-recognition. We are children without this, and not in the

00:53:30

sense of innocent, but in the sense of infantile, because this is part of the birthright. How

00:53:38

can anyone else decide for someone else that access to the transcendental reality shall be barred?

00:53:49

I mean, if somebody somewhere in the world puts a lien on a religion,

00:53:54

people are waving their arms in outrage.

00:53:57

This is deemed to be one of the most fundamental kinds of interference

00:54:01

with the dignity of the individual.

00:54:04

Well, but if your religion involves the practical accessing

00:54:08

of the transmundane through means sanctioned by millennia of usage.

00:54:16

I mean, I’m not an advocate for everything that rolls out of the laboratory.

00:54:21

I’m an advocate for things sanctioned by millennia of usage.

00:54:26

And to have a profane government interpose itself between you and that reality,

00:54:33

why, it’s ludicrous.

00:54:34

You just have to read your Thoreau to know what you do in that case.

00:54:38

And if you don’t have time for Thoreau, I’ll tell you.

00:54:41

You just ignore it. It’s a bunch of baloney. That’s a completely

00:54:45

out of hand move on the part of the oppressor dominator mentality. So sex took me on a trip

00:54:57

there, but I hope you liked the first part of the answer. Yeah. We can’t all be Stanley.

00:55:18

Yeah. We can’t all be Stanley. We can’t all be Alfred Russell Wallace. We can’t all be Bjorn Borg. So people opt for vicarious sensation. is going because the technologies to carry it a great distance are far advanced.

00:55:28

This comes to a very interesting question which boils down to, in its most press, in

00:55:35

its most cogent form, the question, is man good?

00:55:41

Or what is man?

00:55:43

Because what we appear to be moving toward

00:55:45

is a technological domain

00:55:48

where we will be able to be

00:55:50

whatever we want to be.

00:55:53

And, you know, it’s a litmus test

00:55:56

for what we want to be.

00:55:58

I mean, if you could be whatever you wanted to be,

00:56:01

would you watch triple X rated movies

00:56:04

every waking moment?

00:56:06

How many people would?

00:56:08

This is the great fear

00:56:10

that the dominators have about the drugs.

00:56:13

Their position is,

00:56:15

if drugs were legal,

00:56:16

everybody would be a junkie.

00:56:19

A cheerful view of human nature.

00:56:22

You know?

00:56:23

They’re saying, you know,

00:56:23

you want to legalize these things? Don’t you

00:56:25

understand what it would be like?

00:56:28

Well, I, as

00:56:29

a user of drugs,

00:56:32

am insulted by

00:56:33

the implication.

00:56:36

The government has never

00:56:38

been a major factor

00:56:40

in the decisions

00:56:41

I made about my program

00:56:44

of ingestion.

00:56:45

And I think that it’s preposterous to suggest

00:56:50

that the moral rectitude of the government

00:56:52

stands between a dope-crazed population

00:56:56

and the object of its fondest desires.

00:56:59

I think it’s all in language.

00:57:02

it’s all in language.

00:57:09

If a gram of cocaine costs what a tube of airplane glue costs,

00:57:12

you know, you don’t see a lot of gentlemen

00:57:14

with neatly trimmed gray beards

00:57:16

driving Porsches with airplane glue in their fur.

00:57:20

It just doesn’t happen.

00:57:22

Because it’s tacky.

00:57:24

It’s tasteless

00:57:25

drugs are very subject

00:57:29

to the images in language

00:57:31

one of the funny things that goes on

00:57:33

it may have changed now

00:57:35

but the last time I was in the Amazon

00:57:37

in the lowland Amazon

00:57:39

they grow coca

00:57:41

but it’s not part of the huge criminal syndicates

00:57:44

that grow the highland coca, which is much stronger.

00:57:49

So we go up these rivers, hundreds of miles up these jungle rivers, and people are growing coca, and they invite you to chew coca with them. that there is any rapport established, they want to go on this rap about how

00:58:07

this is not a drug.

00:58:10

I know you think this is a drug.

00:58:12

This is not a drug.

00:58:13

This is a food.

00:58:14

This is making us strong.

00:58:16

This allows us to work.

00:58:19

Without this, we would be nothing.

00:58:21

Well, what he’s saying is, you know,

00:58:24

adopt my language so that you can see this

00:58:28

reality as we see it. And in fact, they’re quite right. I mean, you can chew coca for weeks on end

00:58:36

and when you leave the Amazon and fly home, it’s no big deal. All this, you know, the most virulent family of addicting drugs is always presented.

00:58:48

I mean, crack has changed it a little bit.

00:58:50

The classic virulent addicting drugs are the opiates.

00:58:56

Well, opium was known for 3,000 years before anyone noticed that it was addicting.

00:59:08

and years before anyone noticed that it was addicting. The earliest known account of addiction is in 1603. William Playfair, a name freak. So for thousands of years, opium had been used and not

00:59:18

been recognized as addictive. Now, you know, you have millions of people running around thinking

00:59:23

that if they get within several feet of it, Satan will sink his claws into them.

00:59:28

This is all a grand silliness.

00:59:31

And not that heroin addiction is not a problem.

00:59:35

I don’t want to imply that.

00:59:37

But what I’m trying to say is the way we see these things, the way we image them, is what gives them their power. Does

00:59:49

that do it for you? Other comments?

00:59:54

Why hadn’t it been seen that it was addictive? Because it was part of the culture?

00:59:59

No, because opium really isn’t terribly addictive. I mean, the only time in history that opium was turned into a social problem

01:00:11

was in the 19th century.

01:00:15

Yes, just to review your history for you for a moment,

01:00:19

in the 1840s a series of international incidents went on in the Far East

01:00:24

that have come to be called the Opium War.

01:00:28

Well, what was the Opium War about?

01:01:07

imperialism, the British East India Company had created a huge distribution system for tea. Tea was grown in Ceylon and they had very advanced ships for that time, over 200 of them, and they had coal, they had facilities from Aden and Port Said,

01:01:12

and all of this was maintained at great expense for the tea trade. Well, they were so efficient at producing tea

01:01:15

that they created an economic collapse of tea around 1840.

01:01:20

So the board of directors of the British India Company got together

01:01:24

and they said, we have all these ships, tea is worth nothing, what are we going to do? And then someone said, well, why don’t we grow opium in Goa, which is in India, south of Bombay on the west coast of India, why don’t we grow opium in Bombay and we’ll sell it in China?

01:01:47

And they said, well, that’s a good idea.

01:01:49

What does the Chinese government think about this?

01:01:52

So they inquired,

01:01:53

and the Chinese government told them to get lost,

01:01:56

that they weren’t interested in having raw opium

01:01:59

sold at dockside by British traders in Chinese cities.

01:02:04

Well, they went back to the foreign office

01:02:07

and the wheels turned

01:02:10

and gunboat diplomacy was used

01:02:15

to force the Chinese to open their doors to opium.

01:02:21

Opium had been known in China for thousands of years

01:02:24

as an obscure item in the

01:02:27

materia medica, but it had never been a social vice. From 1840 on, tens of thousands of tons

01:02:35

of opium at rock-bottom prices were unloaded, produced by Indian cheap labor at immense profit to the East India Company and unloaded in China.

01:02:49

So, you know, we think that governments, this stance of being the keeper of moral values

01:02:57

that is affected by government in the so-called drug war is just another convenient foil because when it suits government’s purpose,

01:03:08

it deals dope. Certainly, you know, the cocaine trade could only exist with the connivance of

01:03:19

the Central Intelligence Agency. I mean, if you don’t believe that, you don’t understand how it works out there

01:03:25

because it’s just as plain as the nose on your face. I mean, where do you get a half a billion

01:03:31

dollars in a hurry if you’ve got to outfit a rebel army and topple a socialist, democratic socialist

01:03:40

government somewhere? Well, the only place you get a half a billion dollars or a hundred million even in a hurry

01:03:46

is you take a flyer on drugs.

01:03:50

The original cocaine epidemic

01:03:53

was practically promoted by the media

01:03:57

because coke was thought to be

01:03:59

this rather fashionable little upper.

01:04:03

It wasn’t until people had been doing it for five or six years

01:04:06

and exhibiting signs of madness, breakdown,

01:04:10

and physical dissolution of the middle of their face

01:04:13

that people began to catch on that it’s not such a good thing.

01:04:19

And then, of course, crack cocaine,

01:04:21

that was not hatched by the agency.

01:04:23

That was just the perverseness of human ingenuity

01:04:27

that could take a problem and turn it into a real problem.

01:04:31

Remember the great heroin epidemics of the past after the Vietnam War?

01:04:36

Well, you should look at the police statistics on crack.

01:04:41

Looking at the statistics as they now stand,

01:04:44

it’s like there were no drugs before crack. Looking at the statistics as they now stand, it’s like there were no drugs before

01:04:47

crack. Crime levels were so low relative to what they are now. Burglaries, assaults were

01:04:55

so rare. And yet when those events were going on, the great heroin epidemic of the 1970s

01:05:01

and so forth, we were asked to believe, you know, that society was being ripped apart at the seams.

01:05:07

So it’s all very relative

01:05:09

and it’s all according to who it serves.

01:05:14

Does it have an affinity to ordinary brain chemistry?

01:05:19

In other words, drugs, you don’t want it to be invasive.

01:05:23

You don’t want it to insult the brain you don’t want it to insult the brain

01:05:25

you don’t want to insult the brain

01:05:27

physically with a toxin

01:05:30

well how do you tell?

01:05:32

well a very good

01:05:34

way to tell is

01:05:36

to ask the question how long

01:05:37

does a drug last?

01:05:40

a drug that lasts 14 hours

01:05:42

is clearly

01:05:43

more invasive and more toxic than a drug that lasts 14 hours is clearly more invasive and more toxic than a drug that lasts 2 hours

01:05:49

because what this turnaround time to get back to the baseline of consciousness is an indicator of is how much affinity enzyme systems already present in the brain

01:06:08

have for the incoming substance

01:06:10

and to what degree they recognize it,

01:06:14

can de-animate it, de-alkalate it,

01:06:16

and turn it into harmless and excretable byproducts.

01:06:21

So you want a drug that very quickly returns you to the baseline of consciousness and there should be no hangover, no residuum. This is why alcohol is obviously, you know, people feel like danced on something or other the next day because this is a systemic poison you know and so that’s the first criteria

01:06:46

how close an affinity to

01:06:48

neurotransmitters and

01:06:50

neuroregulators does it have

01:06:52

another

01:06:54

consideration is

01:06:56

is it

01:06:58

synthetic or natural

01:06:59

now people argue

01:07:02

with this one because people

01:07:04

are in my humble opinion, quite lumpen about granting a distinction between the synthetic and the natural.

01:07:14

I mean, they just say, well, we’re natural.

01:07:19

That’s what people say.

01:07:19

We’re natural, so anything that comes out of the lab, that ought to be natural, too.

01:07:24

Well, would you mainline plutonium? I don’t think so.

01:07:28

So I’ll make the argument for natural substances on two levels.

01:07:34

One, fairly rational, which is that a substance that occurs in plants

01:07:42

has been use-tested in living systems for millions and millions of years.

01:07:47

It is a constituent of organic life.

01:07:51

The proof of that is that it is present there.

01:07:55

So that alone argues that it has a certain affinity that places it above a synthetic

01:08:06

the more airy fairy

01:08:08

of my metaphors on this issue

01:08:12

is that I think

01:08:14

I really especially in this area

01:08:18

give great credit to Rupert Sheldrake

01:08:21

and his idea of the morphogenetic field

01:08:24

I really think that, let’s contrast two drugs,

01:08:32

a synthetic drug like ketamine, a pseudo-halocenogen,

01:08:38

and a indole-halocenogen, a true halocenogen like psilocybin.

01:08:44

Well, psilocybin has been taken for thousands and thousands of years

01:08:48

by tens of thousands, perhaps millions of people.

01:08:52

It has a morphogenetic field.

01:08:55

And in a way, when you take a drug, the drug takes you.

01:09:00

I mean, the drug is opening and you are opening

01:09:04

and there is a dimension of human usage?

01:09:30

Does it have a long history of human usage?

01:09:33

That’s, in a way, the most important of all.

01:09:37

No synthetic has a long history of human usage

01:09:42

and most things with a long history of human usage

01:09:45

will turn out to come from a plant.

01:09:47

So what you need is, you know,

01:09:49

all these people who went before,

01:09:52

they proved that substances like psilocybin,

01:09:58

ibogaine, harmaline, mescaline,

01:10:03

the experience of the human community over time proves that these things do not cause birth defects, miscarriages, tumors, blindness, madness, ulcers, so forth and so on in other words uh in since we are not allowed to legally

01:10:26

investigate anything since we are not allowed protocols for human investigation of anything

01:10:33

old or new then really the only human data available is ethnographic data, data on obscure Amazonian tribes and rituals conducted in the Mexican highlands.

01:10:52

Well, to my mind, I’m not an advocate of drugs. I’m an advocate of psychedelics.

01:11:00

Drugs that are not psychedelic interest me approximately as much as I assume they interest everybody else.

01:11:08

I mean, I sometimes do them.

01:11:11

Certain ones I abuse.

01:11:13

Caffeine, most notably.

01:11:15

I can’t abuse alcohol because I’m a migraineur.

01:11:19

But the psychedelic thing is a special category and a special political issue.

01:11:26

I read a book recently, I mentioned this to some of you, by Arnold Trebek, who’s one of these think tank, East Coast type policy formulating consultant to the government type characters. And clearly a good guy on our side

01:11:46

advocating legalization

01:11:48

and meeting the objections to the legalization

01:11:52

of hard narcotics with a number of interesting arguments.

01:11:55

The book is like over 600 pages long.

01:11:59

Well, when you look in the index,

01:12:02

there’s nothing about LSD,

01:12:04

nothing about psychedelics

01:12:06

nothing about MDMA, psilocybin

01:12:08

DMT, DPT, abogaine

01:12:11

STP, none of this

01:12:13

apparently

01:12:15

they’re choosing

01:12:16

to pretend that the issue

01:12:18

of psychedelic therapy

01:12:20

and the issue of the spiritual

01:12:22

dimension that is accessible

01:12:24

through plant chemistry,

01:12:26

it’s too much even for the liberals to handle.

01:12:31

They don’t even want to talk about it.

01:12:34

They want to reluctantly announce that they have lost the war on drugs

01:12:40

and then with great hand-wringing legalize these things with the sense that now this surely

01:12:48

will trigger the end of western civilization as we know it there is no sense of a dimension of hope

01:12:57

opportunity clinical breakthrough nothing like that Yes, the question is language and the fact that

01:13:08

how does what I said about language relate to what I’ve said previously

01:13:13

about the DMT state,

01:13:16

and why is it that some people come back speechless from these dimensions?

01:13:22

I’m glad you asked this question,

01:13:24

probably not because I’m going to answer it,

01:13:27

but because it reminds me of something.

01:13:29

In a way, it’s answering.

01:13:31

I see language as an uncompleted program.

01:13:35

Language is something which wants to be beheld,

01:13:39

but is only heard.

01:13:42

And so there is this tension.

01:13:44

You recall I said a few days ago that after many grapplings with the DMT ecstasis,

01:13:57

that I had the feeling that the place you break into there is a playpen.

01:14:08

It’s an environment created

01:14:10

by someone very strange

01:14:13

who has a very curious notion

01:14:15

of human psychology

01:14:17

and it is an environment

01:14:19

that they imagine

01:14:20

would be reassuring to human beings.

01:14:24

And I’ve stuck with this model for many, many years,

01:14:28

the model of the playpen

01:14:30

and that the self-transforming elf machine entities

01:14:35

were like toys.

01:14:37

They were like attention-grabbing,

01:14:41

colorful teaching devices

01:14:43

to engage the attention of the human being that has just come across.

01:14:49

Well, strange to say, the other night I was thinking about all of this, and a little piece was added.

01:14:58

And I’ll try it out on you.

01:15:00

I tried it out on somebody who’s quite sophisticated about DMT, and they said, that’s

01:15:06

absolutely wrong. That is not what it is. But undaunted, I’ll try it out on you. As you go into

01:15:18

the DMT state, there is this question about the intent of these machine elves.

01:15:26

They’re funny.

01:15:27

They’re zany.

01:15:30

But you know how the Three Stooges cartoons operate,

01:15:36

where there’s a lot of finger in the eye and mallet on the head stuff?

01:15:41

So in this DMT place,

01:15:47

there is this mad zaniness,

01:15:50

this sense of a Bugs Bunny cartoon run amok kind of thing.

01:15:53

And everybody,

01:15:55

people who’ve had this experience say,

01:15:57

well, you can’t trust these little guys.

01:16:00

Or you have to be on your toes.

01:16:03

These are magical entities.

01:16:05

These are not love bunnies.

01:16:07

They’re little, you know,

01:16:10

gnome tending toward demon

01:16:14

and you don’t know where to draw the line.

01:16:17

So thinking about this the other night,

01:16:19

I tried to construct emotionally for myself

01:16:23

a picture of a human

01:16:26

situation that

01:16:28

would give me the same

01:16:30

feeling

01:16:31

about what was going on

01:16:33

as I have when I deal with the entities

01:16:36

in the DMT thing.

01:16:38

And it came to me instantly

01:16:40

what it was and what the

01:16:42

missing

01:16:43

ambiance of it is

01:16:46

that I’ve never included in a lecture.

01:16:49

What’s going on, I’m sure, is that the aura of these little guys is

01:16:58

that they’re sharp.

01:17:00

They’re sharp.

01:17:02

They’re funny.

01:17:03

They’re zany.

01:17:25

But they’re sharp. They’re funny. They’re zany. But they’re sharp. And I think what they are is they’re traitors. And the whole funny emotion that invades the DMT exchange has to do with the possibility of getting screwed.

01:17:30

Not getting killed, not being driven mad,

01:17:32

but being taken.

01:17:35

Being taken, quite literally.

01:17:43

And these toys which they offer are trade goods, in effect.

01:17:47

And what they are saying in that place is,

01:17:49

what have you got?

01:17:51

What have you got?

01:17:52

Look at this.

01:17:53

Look at this.

01:17:55

What did you bring?

01:17:57

What do you have to trade?

01:18:00

Well, the opening lasts only a few minutes and as the dialogue is getting started,

01:18:03

the dimension closes upon itself but this is uh

01:18:08

i think the the lost piece of the puzzle

01:18:14

that’s all folks

01:18:18

you’re listening to the Psychedelic Salon,

01:18:26

where people are changing their lives one thought at a time.

01:18:30

Well, one positive change since Terence gave this talk back in June of 1989

01:18:36

is that while he was lamenting the fact that there was no formalized scientific psychedelic research then taking place,

01:18:44

that there was no formalized scientific psychedelic research then taking place,

01:18:50

well, today we have quite a lot of such scientific inquiry going on around the world.

01:18:55

There needs to be significantly more, of course, but a good start has now been made.

01:18:59

So, are you ready for my embarrassing story?

01:19:03

This past weekend, when I began working on today’s program, I previewed a McKenna tape that had been sent to me, and to be honest, it really blew me away.

01:19:10

In fact, I was planning on telling you that, in my opinion, it’s the most succinct condensation of Terrence’s thought that I’d ever heard, and I was really excited about passing it along to you.

01:19:27

to you. However, something in the background of my mind caused me, after first editing the tape for sound quality, to double-check some of my old podcasts just to be sure that I hadn’t used it

01:19:32

before. Well, as much as I hate to admit it, my memory isn’t as good as I once thought it to be.

01:19:40

Of course, it may never have been as good as I remember. Did you get that?

01:19:45

You’ll have to think about that one for a moment.

01:19:48

Well, guess what?

01:19:49

If you’ve been with us here in the salon for a while,

01:19:51

then you have already heard that particular tape

01:19:54

because I published it in my podcast number 318.

01:19:58

And just to give you a little taste of what’s in that talk,

01:20:01

I’m going to play several short sound bites from it right now.

01:20:05

But I think the work we do with these drugs, we are the earliest pioneers in what over the next

01:20:12

hundred years will lead to an understanding of consciousness almost as a thing apart from the monkey body and brain. We are consciousness. We may not always be monkeys.

01:20:30

There can be no turning back. We are either going to change into this cybernetic, hyperdimensional,

01:20:37

hallucinogenic angel, or we are going to destroy ourselves. The opportunity for us to be happy hunters and gatherers integrated into

01:20:46

the balance of nature, that fell away 15,000 years ago and cannot be recaptured. And psilocybin is

01:20:57

central to this because psilocybin casts a spotlight into the darkness into which we are moving and shows that this is what lies there.

01:21:08

It is the human soul, essentially, the over-soul of mankind

01:21:15

calling history toward itself across the dimensions.

01:21:21

And it’s taking only a moment, but on the other hand it’s taking 20,000 years and it

01:21:25

is the great great adventure of becoming and we are very very privileged to be in this

01:21:33

final ticking out of the last seconds of the third act. And in case you have been wondering for some

01:21:42

time exactly what Terence means when he speaks of the other,

01:21:46

in addition to the little bits that I just now played,

01:21:50

you’ll also hear him very directly defining the other as he then understands it.

01:21:55

Actually, I don’t know how I missed that before, because it really pins some things down for me.

01:22:01

And hopefully it’ll do the same for you if you take the time to re-listen

01:22:05

to that wonderful talk.

01:22:07

And for now, this is Lorenzo

01:22:09

signing off from Cyberdelic Space.

01:22:12

Be careful out there, my friends.