social stigma: what do you say to this?

I'm well aware of what a non sequitur is, burnabowl, there is no need to elementarily provide definitions.

As far as I'm concerned, when you chose to submit that post, it was with the understanding that others would assume that they were your thoughts and feelings regarding the matter. If that's the case, I found what you vocalized to be alarming, and I also found it a good platform to stand upon to convey my own opinions. I would have said the same thing regardless of who the poster was; it had nothing to do with the fact that it was you that posted it. If that isn't the case, then I can hardly be blamed for "misunderstanding" you. They way I interpreted your comments seems and stills seems upon re-reading to be entirely appropriate.

As far as the assertion that "your cumulative impressions as me as a person affected your post", they actually didn't. I meant I was tired of the concepts in your posts, not your posts or you in general. So perhaps you misunderstood me, and from your subsequent description of my posts as "emotionally charged", perhaps you just misunderstood the entire context and underlying assumptions of our conversation.

And as for what is allowed and what is not, I don't know what to say, burnabowl. The outcome of this little discussion, as I see it, was that you seemed to be offended by what I had to say about your initial post. And the only reason I can see why you would be offended is if you were identified with the concepts displayed by that post in some way.
I didn't have any intention of that, perhaps what I said was harsh, but that's just because it's something I feel strongly about. None of what I said was directed towards you as a person, it was directed towards the ideas in your words.

 

haha I was just messin around posting the definition. I knew u knew what it was.

yes, I did misunderstand that part, thanx for the clarity. But the only post I thought was emotionally charged was your first one to me. It seemed to be tainted with a pre-existing attitude you have about people on the forums. If you don't think so, fine I take your word.

I'm not allowed to be offended at having implied I'm an elitist? A person doesn't have to be projecting their latent self to react to that. This isn't the first time you've done that tactic: "whoa, struck a nerve huh? wonder what that says about you..." this from someone pointing out all the ego games he sees others doing.

You reacted strongly to my first post because I described the veil over people's minds and how they don't understand their reality, I know this because I'm also human and as such don't understand reality. It was relevant because it is their attachment to reality that obstructs how they see a psychedelic drug, and it's counterproductive to get into it about reality with them just to explain lsd. But I wasn't saying I was the one that knew about reality, just that I know it's a common subject matter when lsd comes up. My mind is just as insignificant and I tried to include myself in those epithets, maybe I could've done a better job. One ego talking to another ego doesn't bear fruit, because we all have no idea how much the mind deceives us. It's better to let the human energy flow.

The way you interpreted my post was not the way it was intended. SO if you sense elitist sentiments in it, I apologize for framing it that way. If you think I'm elitist from other posts of mine, then feel free to add me to your ignore list so you won't be so horrified in the future.

edit: as long as we're setting the record straight, I don't know why I wrote "a bad investment is hard to walk away from." I know I was trying to describe something but it makes no sense now that I read it. I don't think people's choices are bad and they're doomed or anything.

 

i beleave in free will, trips are great for sole seeking, but i dont belive in just tripping on them, other ppl have difren ways on getting to there place of inner peace, all we can do is respect there wishes, and evan learn there ways after all we are all the same, peace brothers and sisters

 

Actually, it is still an ego game, and it is still you identified with it. You were either offended by it because it was revealed that you actually harbor an elitist mentality, or you were offended by it because someone misunderstood you, resulting in a situation where you weren't perceived in the way that you wanted to be perceived. It's all still ego, either way.

I actually believe that we truly grow through conflict and when we are challenged. :biggrin: One needs to question why on earth the ego exists in the first place.

haha, I almost wrote something about how you were "free to add me to your ignore list" in the post I submitted before this one, but I figured it was too over the top. Perhaps we aren't so different after all, burn.

 

sorta like the deep offense you took from my first post? yes we are similar. I find it irrelevant to define that the ego is influencing what we are doing at any given time. The definition of "ego" in this sense is too broad and it's beating a dead horse to say it again and again. It's the "word too easily thrown around" du jour. Hamfisting each other with the word ego would last as long as we do. We'd be right, but we could also be right by saying that we couldn't say anything without breathing air into our lungs. But why would we spend effort on something so obvious?

1. ego=sense of indentity and separateness

2. ego=stubborn pride

when we speak of the ego on these forums it's generally the first definition, and obviously the ego is involved in interpreting and responding to each other's posts. I only recognized a tendency that you've shown before to say something provocative or incendiary to a specific poster and when that poster responds you say it was only their egoic interpretation. Dropping the buzzword "ego" becomes a defense mechanism. That's just too convenient and sets off my BS detector. Yes what you're saying is true, and your example is as good a proof as any.

 

Maybe what you find irrelevant I find interesting to point out to others. It seems like with every post though, you become more and more offended and, "emotionally charged".
The point being, is that I believe it isn't so obvious a thing that we all like to think it is, and it runs deeper than the mind can imagine.

Again, you keep trying to place yourself into my scope and paint me as someone who runs around the forums trying to provoke "specific" posters. I've made it very clear to you that it wasn't anything personal, and that the same would have been said regardless of who originally posted it. I've also made it clear to you that I was addressing the themes and concepts displayed in your post, and not you as an individual.
This also isn't the first time I've seen you attribute words like "tactics" to me, or that I have a need for defense mechanisms. These are all words implying some kind of strategy, and would be concerned with those who are seeking to come out on top. I've tried to let you know that this hasn't been a personal thing, but you seem on a vendetta of the nature that you originally accused me of. As for what is provocative and what isn't, a lot of your posts to me could be seen as provocative, only to have you tossing the hot potato the next time I respond. If anyone finds me provocative, it isn't because of ill intentions on my part. I'm not here to be perceived as a winner or a loser, burn, I'm simply having conversations because perhaps something will come up that will further my understandings. Why are you here?

 

I can't imagine what strategy or ego games you need to use, but they are there and I wouldnt notice it if this was the first time. I'm not saying I don't play them either but you're awfully quick to point out ego, and slow to concede your own, which is your own game whatever it is.

I'm not about to post links to your posts where you try to derail threads by pointing out the game-ness of the environment, but you seem to consistently have something to prove, to try to humble others. Maybe not a bad desire, but you go about it in a provocative and sometimes mildly hypocritical way.

I really doubt you're just a window to my own soul and what I perceive from you is my own making. I haven't had this particular conflict with any other poster, and this is the only time a conflict's been repeated. Maybe just a personality clash, but you have just as much to do with it as I do.

 

I'm well aware of the fact that I have an ego.
The only reason I point anything of this nature out to others is if I think it can benefit them.
You seem to think that I need to be on a pedastle to do this. My guess is that you simply don't like me, perhaps it's just a personality clash, but my how easy would that explanation be. More than likely that dislike comes from you not wanting to be exposed in the manner that you did not intend, so as not to be misperceived. Maybe some people feel threatened because I do this, and they need to shift the focus to me by trying to demean me.

If you really believe that, then why are we still going around in circles?

 

you can entertain whatever theories you want about me. a personality clash is not the most convenient explanation, but it's the most fair since we really don't know each other.

the reason we keep going in circles is because I bowed out the last time we argued and wanted to give you the chance to let it die this time. Guess I'll need to do it again. this is my last post on the matter, so say what you will it won't be contested.

 

I have always believed that psychedelics aren't substances of abuse, that most people have some trigger in them that once they reach thier personal level of effect, that's good, they dont keep taking more and more and end up hurting themselves.

Fortunately even when something does go wrong and someone gets their hands on wayyy too much and stupidly does it all... it's not like a death sentance. They'll wierd themselves out real good and maybe loose their taste for tripping ever again, but the chances of someone coming to real harm... Well it doesn't happen a lot.

Psychedelics have a lot of power, and should be respected wether or not you take them. It's also important to have respect for your elders, your family. Im sure they are just trying to protect ya.

 

oops double post

 

indeed they are. but it's getting to the point that they might be the ones that need protecting.

yes, but what are our decisions? they are made by our ego.

haha. the world? maybe oneday... but first, my family

yea obviously this a cultural bias. alot more of the members of the younger generation are less biased, and the ones that are were taught so by members of the older generation who do have a bias.

yes, but i think that everyone should be accepting of the other degrees on the pie chart as well. the problem i have with them is not their views, but their inacceptance of mine. perhaps i react a little defensively and attack their views instead of defend mine.

i agree.

it is a very power tool for self-realisation.

you see guys, you were both originally against using your egos to enact ourselves, but yet you both have gotten into an arguement based on your conflicting issues and ego constructs. why? because your views are a threat to eachother, so you defend yourselves. this is no different than anything else in the world. our egos are like a pen, and reality is like a piece of paper we are free to put down the pen, but the piece of paper will then remain unchanged. aka. reality. during some of my trips i have distinctly lived a 'seperate wholeness' from my body and my life here. well, i think that the piece of paper is important, so i am not going to leave it behind. this is essentially the concept behind buddhism, is it not? or atleast i will learn from the piece of paper what might be important.

 

The paper is your ego too

Reality is the guy looking at the pen AND the paper

 

I disagree. I believe our decisions are made beyond the ego, and often without our conscious aknowledgement. The ego sure would love to believe that it makes decisions though.

yes, almost always anything put forth is ego, just no one wants to admit it. Take this paragraph you have just written for example, an ego playing as a mediator and objective witness standingby with good will. It's all one grand act.

 

wonderful

 

What is this mind?
Who is hearing these sounds?
Do not mistake any state for
Self-realization, but continue
To ask yourself even more intensely,
What is it that hears?
Bassui

 

This is an old thread, but hey, here's my suggestion.

If you want to change the stigma of psychedelics, no matter what your motivations... instead of trying to convince people that the psychedelics themselves are not "bad", try to explain, or show by example, the ideas that came from the psychedelic experience. If psychedelic ideas are integrated into culture, the culture becomes more psychedelic (and more open to things, including psychedelics) naturally.

Just about everyone in America has some idea of what karma is. That happened when it did largely because of people who took psychedelics and became interested in Indian culture and Hinduism. And instead of just telling other people "you need to take acid, you need to go to India, you need to read these books, and then you will naturally come to understand karma, because that's how it happened for me", they made the concept of karma a part of their lives. They normalized it. They recognized it and lived with it.

If you started out with a really abstract concept of what exercise was, (a vague notion of sweat, heat, metal machines, and pain) and someone told you that you had to start working out for hours every single day, even if they promised that at the end of it all you'd be stronger and thank them, you'd probably react by getting pissed and telling them to fuck off. Or at best not be able to gather the motivation to do something so unpleasant, even if you trusted them. But if someone comes along and lifts something for you that you have never been strong enough to lift for yourself, there's a much better chance that you will ask them what they did to become the way they are. Not everyone would even bother to ask. And out of the people who ask, still not all will want to put in the work. And out of the people who put in the work, a lot will give up and go right back to how they were. Some will injure themselves. But some actually will make it all the way through, and a lot will at least have improved in some way from where they were in the beginning.
There's no perfect way, but this way, I think, there is a lot less anger and judgment involved.

I don't think that hiding things is a good idea... I think being open and honest and unapologetic about who you are and what you believe is the best you can do to make your argument. But say things because you believe them, not because you want to make other people believe them. The same basic idea goes down a lot smoother if you can get as close to truth ("I have taken psychedelics") and as far away from opinion ("Psychedelics are beneficial") as possible.

 

Some people shouldn't do hallucinogens, but those people are the ones that tend to become easily brainwashed.
Now why do you suppose that is?
I think if you were brought up with them you could handle them better (not from personal experience, but seems logical to me).
I dunno, but these substances have been ridiculously criminalized.
More people need to wake up.