Nick Herbert on psychedelics, consciousness and science
The parallels between Herbert's experiences and those of Eastern philosophies are quite interesting.
Provocative quote, "Scientists and old people should have access to any drugs they want."
2 comments:
Anonymous
said...
One of my teenage freinds had similar "drug consumption philosophy". While he was staying away from those obviously "hard drugs" (think heroin), he was claiming that once he retire, he will experiment with pretty much anything. I wonder whether he still holds himself accountable in this manner.
I would think that once a person is retired, as you say, then they can pretty much do things that they might not have had the time or inclination for before; drug usage, when focused as a conscious act of personal responsibility, comes under the umbrella of cognitive freedom, as far as I am concerned; there has to come a time and a place, where an individual can have an autonomous zone; we have to be open enough in this society to allow for some of its members to go beyond the norm, and to do so consciously, without the fear of disapproval by the consensus; that would actually be a major step forward in a country that is so deeply conservative, and is so constipated about going beyond the limits, which is not the same thing as going to extremes, such as in extreme sports or mass consumption; there is something that just seems to put a lot of people off when somebody wants to alter the fabric of their OWN mindspace, which, I might add, is not owned by the consensus; accountability is not always the trump card, because it keeps minds in a too confining area; again, the watchword, is personal responsibility, but that is to be determined by the individual, and not outside representatives of what society thinks about accountablity in reference to cognitive freedom, and especially, mind-altering durgs, as they are referred to; drug useage, in this sense, is highly subjective, and therefore an area of exploration that should be allowed for, somewhere and sometime; this is not a philosophy; it is free cognitive right to explore potential where others will not go; thanks george for putting this on your blog; one more thing: an individual should have the free and unhindered choice to push the edge, seasoned of course by personal responsibility, without the rest of society holding something up and trying to judge them about it
2 comments:
One of my teenage freinds had similar "drug consumption philosophy". While he was staying away from those obviously "hard drugs" (think heroin), he was claiming that once he retire, he will experiment with pretty much anything. I wonder whether he still holds himself accountable in this manner.
I would think that once a person is retired, as you say, then they can pretty much do things that they might not have had the time or inclination for before; drug usage, when focused as a conscious act of personal responsibility, comes under the umbrella of cognitive freedom, as far as I am concerned; there has to come a time and a place, where an individual can have an autonomous zone; we have to be open enough in this society to allow for some of its members to go beyond the norm, and to do so consciously, without the fear of disapproval by the consensus; that would actually be a major step forward in a country that is so deeply conservative, and is so constipated about going beyond the limits, which is not the same thing as going to extremes, such as in extreme sports or mass consumption; there is something that just seems to put a lot of people off when somebody wants to alter the fabric of their OWN mindspace, which, I might add, is not owned by the consensus; accountability is not always the trump card, because it keeps minds in a too confining area; again, the watchword, is personal responsibility, but that is to be determined by the individual, and not outside representatives of what society thinks about accountablity in reference to cognitive freedom, and especially, mind-altering durgs, as they are referred to; drug useage, in this sense, is highly subjective, and therefore an area of exploration that should be allowed for, somewhere and sometime; this is not a philosophy; it is free cognitive right to explore potential where others will not go; thanks george for putting this on your blog; one more thing: an individual should have the free and unhindered choice to push the edge, seasoned of course by personal responsibility, without the rest of society holding something up and trying to judge them about it
Post a Comment