> From: "Bobby Whalen" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Sun, 20 Jul 1997 Geoff Smith wrties:
> >If psilocybin unlocks the power of 90% of our brain, why do we not see an
> >academic elite of psychedelic drug-users? (not to suggest that
> >there aren't any brilliant psychedelic drug-users!)
> Becasue its illegal!
That wouldn't stop most of us. Hell, you can buy any sort of "illegal"
drug you want on the free ("black" is a dirty word) market.
The fact is that psychedelic drugs are (at very best) an aid to
self-exploration, and have no other impact. They certainly don't open
up some magical way to be far smarter than you already are.
However, that's not what I'm here to post about.
What I find really disturbing about this discussion is that we are
having it at all. Half the people posting here are, quite frankly,
about as critical in their thinking as trepanned chihuahuas. This is
not the Extropians list of yore, where polymaths gathered to swap
Danny (<CALYX@aol.com>) and the rest are astounding to me. The
amount of junk they can post ("earth's polarity is going to reverse!
drugs are the way to observe other physical dimensions! 50 pounds of
raw meat are lodged in your stomach RIGHT NOW!") doesn't seem to have
much of a bound. Stuff that wouldn't make it past the bullshit
detector of a kid with high school chemistry, biology and physics is
posted as though it were something worth discussing.
Yes, I'm an elitist of sorts. I'd rather hear Carl Feynman woolgather
about ways to build craft to explore the Sun's atmosphere than hear
the empty-headed wannabes mumble along. Why? Because Carl is a better
thinker and his speculations are thus far more interesting to read,
that's why. I'd say that Carl is, in fact, "better" than "Danny", at
least at informed speculation on scientific topics of interest to me.
(And no, I wouldn't mind at all if the fuzzy-headed crowd felt
insulted and left. In fact, I highly encourage them to do so.)