/lit/ - Literature

Literally schizo. Read Hanegraaf

>>14264756
i'm high for the first time since three years. how can weedfags live like this? i feel completely sluggish and useless. the only thing i wanna do is listen to blind melon and eat peanuts. i hate weedfags so much and hope that garbage gets legalized so they just shut the fuck up forever.

>>14264827
I smoked weed this morning, went on a jog, ate a healthy breakfast, and read two chapters of a book and it's only twelve. I bet you are a faggot pseud who tells slutty hipsters that IJ is so deep but have only read the chapter about weed and gotten bored and given up afterward.

>>14264850
you fucking insect, don't talk to me ever again. how can you even read like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WMY-n9MF6o

>>14264879
Do you want me to ignore you or answer your question? The solution, if you care, is responsible usage and dosing. I cannot read when stoned out of my gourd but a relaxing puff in the morning and evening on weekends is hardly debilitating -- like having a drink with dinner. I find the free-associative nature of the drug to be quite helpful with writing too.

>>14264879
>>14264962
You're both vapid to the point of irredeemability and should be sent to the gulags for responding to this bait thread.

>>14264756
McKenna is cringe. I take shrooms in nature and Emerson is my preacher.

>>14264827
Quit being a fag. Your probably smoking an indica if you're tired. It's year of our Lord 2015+x, get on fucking really and look at stains. They literally have stats on every strain like a fucking rpg. Stop smoking random schwag and find a strain you like.

Also dude weed lmao

>>14265068
Get on Leafly** fucking autocorrect

>>14264756
Anyone here gone through a 5 gram plus mushroom trip. Specifically for your first trip?

>>14265094
I took 150 mgs of 4-aco-dmt once and went through my past lives for several hours

>>14265094
yeah, i don't recommend it unless you're either in the company of someone you trust who knows what it's about, or you're alone somewhere safe but have the option of calling someone you trust to come over and talk to you if need be.

Does anyone find the way he died, extraordinarily spooky? A mushroom tumor in his brain, he also had a final bad trip where the mushrooms told him that the truth is a complete lack of all meaning, and they showed him absolute eternal desolation.

>>14265110
>not having a gf to talk you down and intake your seed if you feel anxious
Why even trip?

>>14264756
Oh hi Jay.

>>14265094
just take smaller doses at first to get a feel for things
nothing wrong with starting below threshold dose, take 100mg, then another day take 250-300mg, then up to 500-800mg, then eventually hit 1-2g and get used to the whole thing
no reason to blast your mind wide open on your first trip. you have plenty of time to get your bearings and get there. Once you're there, you're there all the same.

>>14265153
>blast your mind wide open on your first trip
That's kind of the plan though.

Micro dosing is also an option, but that'd probably be something I did after the fact. I'd also need to do a bit more research to figure out a dosing schedule, and its benefits.

Irregardless, this won't be for another year, give or take a few months, so i have time to think about it.

>>14265114
La chorrera is spookier. Nihilism is just whatevs. The original experiment verges on lovecraftian cosmic horror -- and perhaps indeed it was a success and not a failure, I would certainly consider that scarier, especially if one views the shrooms thru the lens of the trickster.

That which drugs/subdues Body, and/or makes it opaque - drains Mind, depresses Spirit, and degenerates Soul.

>>14265283
Psychedelics (used responsibly) do none of these things.

have drugs

>>14265302
You are either: ignorant, or lethargic, or both.

>>14265334
>baseless ad hom
Prove it, Mr. Straight Edge.

>>14265068
No thanks not a smelly degenerate

>>14265357
You are proving point desu

>>14265357
That was an inference, not an ad hominem.

>>14265389
>broken english
no u

>inference
Baseless, nonetheless.

LARP elsewhere, namefag.

>>14265413
Latter half of >>14265413 was meant for you, Nemo :)

>>14264756
The next holocaust will be of druggies

>>14265425
The correct term is: "tripfag", not: "namefag".

>>14265425
weak rebuttal

>>14265455
Dully noted, tripfag.

Mind dropping that nugget of wisdom on me. How do psychedelics drain the mind, depress the spirit, and degenerate the soul.

>>14265486
>Implying their was anything of note to rebut
no u

>>14264756
This idiot makes psychonauts as a whole look really bad with his superstitious hokey shit.

>>14265334
Have you actually tried psychedelics? If not, then who are you to speak of ignorance?

Everyone who is “for” or “against” psychedelics is being reductionistic. They can be okay in the right setting for the right people at the right time in the right dosage. They can also be horrifying and detrimental to one’s sanity and life if these requirements aren’t met. Even the big talking heads like Leary, McKenna et al are going to agree with this at some level (although McKenna was a bit more reckless and enthusiastic about his propaganda than Leary). That they advocated for the use of these to explore one’s mind doesn’t mean “it doesn’t matter who you are just do a megadose of psilocybin it’s awesome bro it’ll cure your depression.” Yes, but you can also get PTSD from it, trigger a psychosis, even meet some unsavory nonmaterial entities who fuck around with you spiritually, mentally, and emotionally.

>>14265567
>Everyone who is “for” or “against” psychedelics is being reductionistic
You're not wrong, I'm an avid fan of psychedelics and I can't stand McKenna types. Hell, even Paul Stamets turns out to have all sorts of unscientific beliefs which really disappoints me. At least they serve as a reminder for whenever I take psychs, don't end up like these guys.

>>14265567
>Everyone who is “for” or “against” psychedelics is being reductionistic.
So....everyone? Those are the only two options. You're either "for" something or, "against" it.

>>14265567

finally, a logical post

>>14265525
>ignoring point because he cannot refute it
Is this what drugs do to you

>>14265624
You are unbelievably lost. Stupid people reduce problems into "pro" and "con". Intelligent people don't think in absolutes, understand the limitations of subjective ideas, and know that truth lies in the contradiction.

>>14264756
I wish
>tfw out of drugs

>>14265624
Are you for “penis in vagina”? Penis is vagina feels great for some people but what about people who get raped? You have to be specific. Are you for roller-coasters? What about 80 year olds with heart conditions going on them? This applying of “for” or “against” to everything makes the error of generalization and prevents looking at a thing with nuance.

im amazed that anyone can take notes while on these trips

>>14265666

>>14265635
Sure, but i'm not talking about absolutes.

In the case of >>14265567, he would be "for" the use of psychedelics, albeit responsibly. Most people who are "for" psychedlics, or any drug use for that matter, fall into this category.

In the case of Nemo, seen here >>14265283, he would be against, as they "...drain the mind, depress the spirit, and degenerate the soul". He has yet to quantify what any of this means, to my dismay.

>>14265651
You're brain is fried, anon. Maybe put down the spliff. Either way, see above.

>>14265666
satan can't handle his drugs, confirmed
pathetic...

>>14265666
>while on these trips
>these
>trips

>>14264756
Based
https://youtu.be/Hygj2wRODCE

>>14265666

>>14265525
>How do psychedelics drain the mind, depress the spirit, and degenerate the soul.
By recreationally drugging your Body, you induces chaotism within your Mind; by inducing chaotism within your Mind, you drain your psykhical vitality; by draining your psykhical vitality, you dissipate your Spirit, and exhaust your Soul.

>>14265908
This is some real terrence mcKenna level bullshit

>>14265908
>you induces
you induce*

>>14265916
That is the truth, regardless of whether you believe it, or like it.

>>14265908
>Mind
Define Mind. And how would inducing chaos within the mind drain physical vitality?

What do you even mean by physical vitality?

>Spirit
Define Spirit and what it means to dissipate it.

>Soul
Define Soul, and what it means to exhaust it.

Please speak in laymen terms, friend. I'm a bit of a brainlet.

>>14266065
>Define Soul, and what it means to exhaust it.
Soul is the ontological root of entity; Soul comprises, and is realized through integral motion of: Body, Mind, Spirit.

>Define Mind.
Mind is an organic medium that can exist beyond Soul; however, Soul necessarily comprises Mind.

>And how would inducing chaos within the mind drain physical vitality?
1. You mean "psykhical vitality".
2. By debasing your Body via recreational drugs, and succumbing to pleasure, you degenerate your Soul within this Kosmos, rather than allowing yourself to metagenerate, and resurrect, by overcoming this Kosmos with your Spirit, through your Body, via your Mind, thus attaining to the exalted image of your own Spirit.

>Define Spirit and what it means to dissipate it.
1. Lifeessence
2. To dissipate Spirit/lifeessence is to succumb to death/mortality.

>>14266462

>>14265705
lol

>>14266462
That's interesting, but so are the ramblings of schizophrenics and the delusional.

Ignoring that, you've yet to prove psychedelic drug use, recreational or otherwise, cause any of the above, and as a result, should be avoided at all costs.

>>14264827
I'm having weed withdrawals. Weed affects people different. Weed strains affect people differently. But yeah, im done with weed. Weed was like the best escapism i ever had and now since i stopped smoking, a wave of depression hit me like no other.

Let people smoke, once something goes wrong, it's a life lesson. It's also crazy how people go schizophrenic from weed. Weed is not safe at all for recreational use, eventually you are gonna get addicted and all kinds of bad shit happens.

>>14266616
>I was unable to cope with life in a healthy manner, and had/have low impulse control, therefore everyone does.
Sounds like your basing an absolute on anecdotal evidence. Fear monger elsewhere.

Also, kinda cringe.

>>14266590
I do not need, nor want, to "prove" what is intuitive, and recognizable, to any spiritually healthy, and discerning, individual.

>>14266647
>pic related
What's intuitive isn't always correct.

Cringe.

>>14266645
Did you read my second paragraph? You can smoke but just don't get addicted and if you do, it's a bad path and once you get addicted, it goes on for a while and it does all kinds of bad things.

I feel like Cannabis should be only used medicinally. I've seen the good, bad, dark, ugly side of this drug. So, i'm just talking in experience. Once you get really into weed, it just revolves around your life. You are always chasing a high, chasing a mind altering substance because life is so shit and boring which it is usually is and thats how people cope. Most people cope like this, most people don't admit it.

>>14266645
what's wrong with anecdotal evidence? how else are you gonna measure coping, impulse control, and general outlook? everyone has their unseen vices

>>14266660
>Let people smoke, once something goes wrong
Implying something will go wrong.

Your words, not mine.

>>14266678
There's nothing wrong with anecdotal evidence. The issue arises when applying it to absolutes.

>>14266658
Indeed, and that is why reason and sense help to affirm intuition, although, in relation to recreational drugs, intuition alone is sufficient for identifying their pessimal and/or suboptimal agency; if you cannot comprehend how it is that recreational drugs lead to impairment of psykhe, then you are most likely spiritually deficient yourself.

>>14266735
>affirm
I mean:
>confirm

>>14266695
Are you high? Lol. I know you love weed man. What will you do without weed? Then what?

>>14266735
Based tripfag

>>14265691
My brain may be fried but I still have a point, views need to be qualified. Are you for water? Water is good when you drink it, bad when you drown in it. Are you for fire? Fire is good to warm you, bad when you get burned by it. You could say I’m for the responsible use of psychedelics, but even that’s a simplification because I wouldn’t recommend it for everyone and I do think you can get along fine without it, so it’s not as if I’m outright “for” it.

>>14266735
>although, in relation to recreational drugs, intuition alone is sufficient

Clearly it isn't. If it where, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

>if you cannot comprehend how it is that recreational drugs lead to impairment of psykhe, then you are most likely spiritually deficient yourself.

Sounds like a cope to me.

With that being said, it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

Out of curiosity, which spiritual books would you recommend to an individual who may or may not be spiritually deficient?

>>14266765
>pic related
Seethe elsewhere.

>>14266784
>My brain may be fried but I still have a point

You didn't, and still don't.

>You could say I’m for the responsible use of psychedelics

I would, and am, because you are "for" psychedelics.

>>14266786
>Seethe elsewhere
Why are you escaping the question? What would you do if weed never existed?

just bought some weed /lit/ what should I read while I smoke it?

>>14266820
>>14266820
I am not “for” psychedelics in the sense that I suggest people en masse should use them. I think it should be allowed and left up to people’s personal choice, but, again, I view them as being just as potentially harmful as they can be beneficial. They can even just be neutral, causing someone to have a good or weird time but not get much permanently out of it. So I’m simultaneously for, against, and neutral about them. Psychedelics just are. They exist. They have psychedelic effects. They can be used for good, evil, or just for listening to music and staring at the ceiling for a few hours.

>>14265666
6 6 6
6
6

>>14266845
I love this post. You get it
>just for listening to music and staring at the ceiling for a few hours.
i guess so.

>>14266824
>Why are you escaping the question?
Because it has no bearing on what was said.

Ask a pertinent question, and I'll answer.

Spoiler / I'd continue on as usual / Spoiler

>>14266845
>I'm 'for' psychedelic drug use.
Like a broken record.

Daily reminder that faghot didn't do shrooms once in the last 15 years of his love because of a bad trip but still pushed it on normies

Sick

>>14265114
where did you read this?

>>14266879
>Because it has no bearing on what was said.
Now you are just being stubborn, i tried. Enjoy your weed man

>>14266895

>>14266879
>>I'm 'for' psychedelic drug use.
>Like a broken record.
Reread the post, that phrase never turns up in it.

>>14266907
How am i delusional? Cannabis has its pros and cons. You really sound like hardcore stoner now. If you use cannabis because you are ill, yeah lots of pros no doubt about it. You are ill and Cannabis is helping you a lot. No cons.

Doing weed recreationally is not bad either. It's psychologically addicting and thats the bad part. I know you smoke everyday but do you really want to for the rest of your life? There are stories of people smoking daily for like decades and it hit them.

>>14266462

>By debasing your Body via recreational drugs, and succumbing to pleasure, you degenerate your Soul within this Kosmos, rather than allowing yourself to metagenerate, and resurrect, by overcoming this Kosmos with your Spirit, through your Body, via your Mind, thus attaining to the exalted image of your own Spirit.

not a single person in this thread is suggesting that you smoke crack or shoot up heroin for fun. psychedelics when used properly (or even recreationally) can offer years of insight within the span of a few hours. to suggest that everyone who takes them is killing themselves is ridiculous, and ahistorical as well. psychedelic ergot was used in greece along with their mysteries, peyote in north america, and ayahuasca have all been used to reflect on the universe and the self. so if you are unable to learn anything from a psychedelic trip, that may be your own problem. its also highly wrong to suggest that these drugs are always pleasant. they aren't.

lastly, your shtick of copying rei completely is uncool. be yourself

>>14266920
>So I’m simultaneously for, against, and neutral about them
That's oxymoronic, and impossible. You can't be simultaneously for and against something.

Once again, you are 'for' psychedelic drug use. Yes, their are varying levels of 'for', but that doesn't change the fact that you are for.

@14266938
You can't even keep track of what's being argued.

No more (You)s.

>>14266462
this is what sobriety does to a person

I hold an exceptionally long list of sampled drugs, containing various entries in every category imaginable. This includes many different varieties you likely have not heard of, as well as combinations that would cause mild alarm for the medically learned.

Hallucinogens have an ancient history with humans, and historically served as components in rites of passage in many cultures around the globe. To reject these experiences is to reject one of the most universal sacred traditions of man, one that marks a coming of age period in our lives.

That being said, psychedelics are not the ideal route for this. Salvia Divinorum is the key to the gate, beyond which lies unknowns so confusing and strange that the drug naive are turned off from further usage of any drug in their future. If we as a society are to elevate traditional values, while also acknowledging the dangers of drug experimentation, then advocacy for the usage of salvia divinorum extracts seem to be an ideal route to accomplish both.

And having spent much time on this board, I endorse many posters within being exposed to the experience so enigmatic it's renowned for inspiring existential crises in those who bear witness.

>>14266970
You did not comprehend, nor address without projection, anything in my post.

>lastly, your shtick of copying rei completely is uncool. be yourself
I am not "copying" anyone.

>>14267062
I'm still waiting for my book recommendations Nemo.

Shepherd me down thy righteous path. Lead me to a state of spiritual enlightenment.

>>14267062

i understood you just fine, and only addressed your argument. dismissing me with "projection" isn't going to work

>I am not "copying" anyone.

haha

>>14266970
>>14267062
For better clarity:
>By debasing your Body via recreational drugs, and/or* succumbing to pleasure...

>>14267087
Your request is overly general, so my general recommendation for you is: Christian/Gnostic literature, not to be confused with judeochristian literature; next time, be more specific in your requests.

>>14267123
>and/or* succumbing to pleasure
I missed the latter portion of that in my original pass over.

So you believe any and all pleasure should be avoided?

>Christian/Gnostic literature
I was hoping for something a little more specific, but, as you said, that's on me.

How do you feel about pic related?

>>14265228
>La chorrera
now I'm reading True Hallucinations because of your comment
but I haven't gotten to the scary part yet.
it seems like they just tripped out in the jungle and then wrote a crazy story about it. Obviously it's a wild story and worth reading, but I don't see any realistic thing to be afraid of.
I say this as a hallucinogen user

>>14267007
>Salvia
I've done plenty of different drugs
Salvia was actually the one I didn't like
my experience: full paranoia, nothing else