Can Dimethyltryptamine DMT create Psychic Visions

[bit_pattern]

What does 'potential for phenomena such as psychic ability' mean?

Is there more potential for these phenomena than there is for the existence of leprechauns?

What if "leprachauns" or other paranormal/anthropomorphic beings were a phenomenon caused by neurochemistry? And if this reality that you believe so fervently in is also a result of neurochemistry then wouldn't the potential accessibility to other realms of experience be interesting and worthy of investigation?

No. A more sceptical and rational starting point is to demonstrate that these paranormal experiences exist.

How do you propose that one demonstrate something that is purely subjective? As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone else, just mentioning what it was that changed my view of things. How you want to interpret that is up to you, it's no skin off my nose. But for me, on a personal and subjective level, I've already demonstrated to myself that such paranormal experiences can exist. I guess that the only way to make some demonstration is to try it for yourself, you won't convince anyone but yourself either way. But, to me, the possibility that such widely reported phenomenon such as psychic ability can be tested by anyone with the balls to subject themselves to something as powerful as DMT is well worth further investigation. At the very least, it should spur further and rigorous empirical research into whether such experiences are meaningful or whether they are the product of a deluded mind. Either or, such investigation would yield fascinating results and insights into the nature of experiential reality.

A million bucks says this part can't be done, so looking for whatever enables them seems a bit premature.

Maybe, but I still say that an experience as profound as to alter the very nature of reality as we know it is worthy of consideration and further investigation. For me, it was a deeply personal experience, and as I've said a few times now I don't expect my anecdotal experience to mean anything much whatsoever, but for me it was a subjective experience powerful enough for me to question the primacy of our current view of reality and the nature of mind.

What experiences? Drug-induced hallucinations may be kind of interesting, but they aren't 'psychic phenomena'.

Well, they're not if they don't yield any "psychic" results but, for me personally, they have. There could be any number of 'rational' and 'logical' explanations why my experience might not have been 'psychic' but I am yet to come across a reasonable explanation for my experience. That's not to say there isn't such an explanation but, so far, the idea of compounds such as DMT to trigger a 'psychic' experience is as good as any other rationalisation. But I still say, regardless of the veracity of any such experiences, the fact that the human mind - which is fundamentally based on neurological mechanisms to interpret reality - is capable of shifting into new and undiscovered forms of experience when its neurochemistry is adjusted to me is a fascinating concept that really draws into question the nature of reality as we experience it in our everyday waking consciousness. What evidence do you have that your current perception of reality is not, in fact, "drug induced"? DMT is a neurotransmitter, no different to the chemicals (ie "drugs") in your brain which construct your perception of reality as you experience it here and now.

Might it? Good-oh.

Yes. It might. Your entire experience of reality, in this thread, on this forum, in this waking life, is based on neurochemical reactions. Is it such a huge leap top assume that changing that neurochemical reaction might alter reality itself?

 

[Ashles]

Yes. It might. Your entire experience of reality, in this thread, on this forum, in this waking life, is based on neurochemical reactions. Is it such a huge leap top assume that changing that neurochemical reaction might alter reality itself?

Yes because we can observe someone, change their neurochemical reactions while continuing to observe reality. If reality does not then change we can conclude that altering their neurochenical reactions did not alter reality.

 

[Ashles]

At the very least, it should spur further and rigorous empirical research into whether such experiences are meaningful or whether they are the product of a deluded mind. Either or, such investigation would yield fascinating results and insights into the nature of experiential reality.

By the way this has been done.

And no it didn't.

No interesting results have ever been garnered from experiential psychology (ie when people make exactly the kind of claims you are making about the effect of drugs on our 'perception of reality') other than when you take drugs it alters your perceptions.
Exactly as you would expect for a system based on neurochemistry.

It doesn't teach us anything interesting about the nature of reality, only the nature of how our perceptual processes are affected by drugs.

 

[sadhatter]

And, just in terms of potential for phenomena such as psychic ability, if one were to look for a sceptical and rational explanation then starting with neurochemistry (DMT is an endogenous chemical) would be a good point imo, as it would for a whole raft of 'paranormal' experience. Even if such experiences were shown to be a result of neurochemical changes then wouldn't that raise some interesting questions about the nature of the mind and our ability to experience such things. It might even call into question the primacy of any particular state of mind having sway over our interpretation of reality?

So um, if you had this type of vision why wouldn't you have actually done something to prove it happened? If you really felt it was a vision, why for example, didn't you have a statement notarized or at least witnessed by a professional in the legal field written up? It seems to me that if something of this nature happened one would want proof that it did, instead of just doing the same old same old, and coming somewhere much after the fact and saying " this happened....trust me".

Anyone can write a story, anyone can claim psychic abilities, but they never seem to have that crucial thing, proof. Not a single person claiming psychic abilities, for any reason goes to any trouble to prove their power, and every incidence of a claim ( such as yours ) is long after the fact, with no way whatsoever to prove it.

Now, do honest people go around trying to get people to believe things without proof? Not in my experience, in my experience when someone is being honest they go to lengths to prove themselves, before trying to convince people. People who are doing things due to dishonest motivation ( wanting attention, having a laugh, getting money, etc.) are the only people who attempt to get people to believe something when there is 0 proof available.

To expect anyone to believe this story without proof, which you easily could have gotten , is silly. Any thinking person is not going to take any claim, especially on the internet, especially of this nature, at face value without any proof. I mean i sure as heck know in your situation, if i felt truly sure it was a vision of some form, i would at least have told my father's doctor , even assuming the man could do nothing, you would have been able to get a statement from him later that you predicted the death, which would be the first step in exploring this phenomenon further.

Now i have a feeling that the logic your going to use is that " it was my fathers death i am not going to use it for personal gain, you cad!" , but this rings hollow to me. If you had some form of moral issue with using your father's death to further psychic research, or prove your own ability was genuine then at some point you lost this, as you can clearly see you have been using it to attempt to convince us ( and please do not say your not. If you weren't we wouldn't even know of the incident.).

 

[Ashles]

Maybe, but I still say that an experience as profound as to alter the very nature of reality as we know it is worthy of consideration and further investigation. For me, it was a deeply personal experience, and as I've said a few times now I don't expect my anecdotal experience to mean anything much whatsoever, but for me it was a subjective experience powerful enough for me to question the primacy of our current view of reality and the nature of mind.

Have you actually studied the subject?

You could for example study Experimental Psychology which deals with exactly this - the nature of the brain, our perceptual processes, brain neurochemistry, how can we measure subjective experiences etc.

If you are really interested in the subject this would be a good place for you to start.

 

[Akhenaten]

What if "leprachauns" or other paranormal/anthropomorphic beings were a phenomenon caused by neurochemistry?

What if a "flat Earth" or unicorns/magic dragons were phenomena caused by yeast infections?

It seems obvious that there's no point in looking for explanations for things that haven't even been demonstrated to exist.

And if this reality that you believe so fervently in is also a result of neurochemistry then wouldn't the potential accessibility to other realms of experience be interesting and worthy of investigation?

No.

Also, reality is not that which any of us 'believe so fervently in'. Reality is what exists, regardless of our subjective point of view.

The Matrix wasn't a documentary.

How do you propose that one demonstrate something that is purely subjective?

I don't.

As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone else, just mentioning what it was that changed my view of things. How you want to interpret that is up to you, it's no skin off my nose.

Why do you keep banging on about it then?

But for me, on a personal and subjective level, I've already demonstrated to myself that such paranormal experiences can exist. I guess that the only way to make some demonstration is to try it for yourself, you won't convince anyone but yourself either way.

I don't need to do anything to demonstrate to myself the possibility of subjective experiences. I'm 100% sure that they occur all the time, and I'm equally sure that they don't affect reality.

But, to me, the possibility that such widely reported phenomenon such as psychic ability can be tested by anyone with the balls to subject themselves to something as powerful as DMT is well worth further investigation.

Psychic ability is not a widely reported phenomenon. It has not yet even been shown to exist.

The decision to drop a few tabs and document the ensuing hallucinations in terms of a psychic experience is not, as you claim, a courageous one at all.

In fact it's just plain silly.

At the very least, it should spur further and rigorous empirical research into whether such experiences are meaningful or whether they are the product of a deluded mind.

The verdict is in already.

Either or, such investigation would yield fascinating results and insights into the nature of experiential reality.

Experiential reality???

Maybe, but I still say that an experience as profound as to alter the very nature of reality as we know it is worthy of consideration and further investigation.

Why do you keep repeating this claim that experiences can alter reality?

If two people experience a single event but interpret it differently, do both experiences represent reality?

[FONT="Georgia]I go down to speaker's corner I'm thunderstruck
They got free speech, tourists, police in trucks
Two men say they're Jesus - one of them must be wrong.[/FONT][/INDENT]
Dire Straits indeed.


[QUOTE="bit_pattern, post: 6057289, member: 39781"]
For me, it was a deeply personal experience, and as I've said a few times now I don't expect my anecdotal experience to mean anything much whatsoever, but for me it was a subjective experience powerful enough for me to question the primacy of our current view of reality and the nature of mind.


[/QUOTE]


Psychedelics are like that. They don't alter reality though.

Thinking that they do is just silly.

Well, they're not if they don't yield any "psychic" results but, for me personally, they have.

Again with the insistence that there are different versions of reality?

There could be any number of 'rational' and 'logical' explanations why my experience might not have been 'psychic' but I am yet to come across a reasonable explanation for my experience.

Hallucination + coincidence = post hoc ergo propter hoc​

I'll bet you don't count that as 'rational' or 'logical'.

That's not to say there isn't such an explanation but, so far, the idea of compounds such as DMT to trigger a 'psychic' experience is as good as any other rationalisation. But I still say, regardless of the veracity of any such experiences, the fact that the human mind - which is fundamentally based on neurological mechanisms to interpret reality - is capable of shifting into new and undiscovered forms of experience when its neurochemistry is adjusted to me is a fascinating concept that really draws into question the nature of reality as we experience it in our everyday waking consciousness. What evidence do you have that your current perception of reality is not, in fact, "drug induced"? DMT is a neurotransmitter, no different to the chemicals (ie "drugs") in your brain which construct your perception of reality as you experience it here and now.

As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone else, just mentioning what it was that changed my view of things.

Just mentioning it dozens of times. I think we get it.

Yes. It might. Your entire experience of reality, in this thread, on this forum, in this waking life, is based on neurochemical reactions. Is it such a huge leap to assume that changing that neurochemical reaction might alter reality itself?

Yes, it is.​

 

[Maia]

And if this reality that you believe so fervently in is also a result of neurochemistry then wouldn't the potential accessibility to other realms of experience be interesting and worthy of investigation?



How do you propose that one demonstrate something that is purely subjective?
(snippety snip)
But, to me, the possibility that such widely reported phenomenon such as psychic ability can be tested by anyone with the balls to subject themselves to something as powerful as DMT is well worth further investigation. At the very least, it should spur further and rigorous empirical research into whether such experiences are meaningful or whether they are the product of a deluded mind. Either or, such investigation would yield fascinating results and insights into the nature of experiential reality.

.

Well, I can't say anything about psychic ability or paranormal experiences. But I CAN say something about topiramate, both because I take it three times a day and because I've researched it very thoroughly. It is a very daunting med to subject yourself to-- it has just about the worst potential side effect profile of anything I've ever seen, right up there with chemo drugs. (I've been lucky to not get most of the effects, but I have had some of them, and I may not escape all of them eventually. DMT is nothing next to this.)

Maybe, but I still say that an experience as profound as to alter the very nature of reality as we know it is worthy of consideration and further investigation.

Topiramate is a prescription med, so it has gone through the FDA approval process. It has been studied and the studies are ongoing (all published on Pubmed. I also have some if anybody wants to see them.) It does have some applications which appear to be unique, and which may be related to the actions of the psychomimetics such as DMT. Do these applications include "alter(ing) the very nature of reality as we know it"? I think that it's very possible that for at least some people, their perceptions and understanding of their own behavior can be significantly altered. This may be why topiramate is being used successfully off-label for a lot of different addictions, and these studies show one way that a subjective experience can be quantified. Did the experience of taking this medication help people to quit drinking/smoking/gambling etc., or not? And experiments actually were done several decades ago with the psychomimetics, such as LSD, for exactly these types of applications. If a med can help people to change their behavior, that's pretty amazing. But T does not have any of the hallucinogenic or dissociative effects of LSD/DMT; it's very much the opposite.

So just based on that, I have to say that I really doubt DMT could have anything to do with psychic abilities. I think what people may be getting out of it is the increased perception, understanding, and insight that comes from the serotonin agonist action plus the hallucinogenic action.

 

[quarky]

Cool.


dmt is back.

Haven't seen that since the 60's.

 

[woddyallen]

What if "leprachauns" or other paranormal/anthropomorphic beings were a phenomenon caused by neurochemistry? And if this reality that you believe so fervently in is also a result of neurochemistry then wouldn't the potential accessibility to other realms of experience be interesting and worthy of investigation?



How do you propose that one demonstrate something that is purely subjective? As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone else, just mentioning what it was that changed my view of things. How you want to interpret that is up to you, it's no skin off my nose. But for me, on a personal and subjective level, I've already demonstrated to myself that such paranormal experiences can exist. I guess that the only way to make some demonstration is to try it for yourself, you won't convince anyone but yourself either way. But, to me, the possibility that such widely reported phenomenon such as psychic ability can be tested by anyone with the balls to subject themselves to something as powerful as DMT is well worth further investigation. At the very least, it should spur further and rigorous empirical research into whether such experiences are meaningful or whether they are the product of a deluded mind. Either or, such investigation would yield fascinating results and insights into the nature of experiential reality.



Maybe, but I still say that an experience as profound as to alter the very nature of reality as we know it is worthy of consideration and further investigation. For me, it was a deeply personal experience, and as I've said a few times now I don't expect my anecdotal experience to mean anything much whatsoever, but for me it was a subjective experience powerful enough for me to question the primacy of our current view of reality and the nature of mind.



Well, they're not if they don't yield any "psychic" results but, for me personally, they have. There could be any number of 'rational' and 'logical' explanations why my experience might not have been 'psychic' but I am yet to come across a reasonable explanation for my experience. That's not to say there isn't such an explanation but, so far, the idea of compounds such as DMT to trigger a 'psychic' experience is as good as any other rationalisation. But I still say, regardless of the veracity of any such experiences, the fact that the human mind - which is fundamentally based on neurological mechanisms to interpret reality - is capable of shifting into new and undiscovered forms of experience when its neurochemistry is adjusted to me is a fascinating concept that really draws into question the nature of reality as we experience it in our everyday waking consciousness. What evidence do you have that your current perception of reality is not, in fact, "drug induced"? DMT is a neurotransmitter, no different to the chemicals (ie "drugs") in your brain which construct your perception of reality as you experience it here and now.



Yes. It might. Your entire experience of reality, in this thread, on this forum, in this waking life, is based on neurochemical reactions. Is it such a huge leap top assume that changing that neurochemical reaction might alter reality itself?

This is twice I posted here for Bit pattern forgive me if this is a double post and my old post resurfaces. I could have swarm there were 5 pages, it is like a page wen't missing. Maybe I saw the future...lol

Thanks Bit pattern for your understanding into seeing if this maybe a possibility, I'm not saying DMT Creates psychic visions, I am asking if DMT Creates Psychic visions.

 

[wardenclyffe]

And I'm asking if chocolate milk Creates Psychic visions.

Please, somebody study this.

Ward

 

[Akhenaten]

And I'm asking if chocolate milk Creates Psychic visions.

Please, somebody study this.

Ward

I once had some chocolate milk and while I was drinking it there was an ad on TV for lawnmowers. Three weeks later, my next door neighbour mowed his lawn.

I realise this story won't convince anyone, but I believe it demonstrates that further study is required to determine whether chocolate milk Creates Psychic visions or if it alters the reality Of Grass growing.

 

[Naddig74]

This is twice I posted here for Bit pattern forgive me if this is a double post and my old post resurfaces. I could have swarm there were 5 pages, it is like a page wen't missing. Maybe I saw the future...lol

Thanks Bit pattern for your understanding into seeing if this maybe a possibility, I'm not saying DMT Creates psychic visions, I am asking if DMT Creates Psychic visions.

When I saw that Woddy had made a new post, I had a vision of the future; I saw myself reading the phrase 'I am not saying DMT creates psychic visions, I am asking if DMT creates psychic visions.'

Thanks for not dissappointing me Woddy, oh and a big congrats on the worst mutilation of the english language I've yet to see on these forums. 'I could have swarm'...'Wen't.' Jebus.

Now, I am asking does Woddyallen cause Psychic Visions? James? We need to research this....James?!

 

[Sledge]

Thanks Bit pattern for your understanding into seeing if this maybe a possibility, I'm not saying DMT Creates psychic visions, I am asking if DMT Creates Psychic visions.

And we've answered you. Continuing to ask the same question will not result in a different answer.

 

[LashL]

Several posts have been split to Abandon All Hope. Please keep it civil, stay on topic, and don't personalize the discussion.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[quarky]

OK, here's a reasoned response; no anger; no agenda:

Yes.

DMT brings on visions.


Big time.

Try some soon, and get back to me on it.

Or not.

We're cool.

 

[Czarcasm]

This is twice I posted here for Bit pattern forgive me if this is a double post and my old post resurfaces. I could have swarm there were 5 pages, it is like a page wen't missing. Maybe I saw the future...lol

Thanks Bit pattern for your understanding into seeing if this maybe a possibility, I'm not saying DMT Creates psychic visions, I am asking if DMT Creates Psychic visions.

Do you understand that neither JREF, nor James Randi himself, have the proper equipment or the training to do what you have repeatedly asked them to do? Will you acknowledge that you are asking the wrong people to do this for you?

 

[woddyallen]

Hay Everyone James returned my email and there may be hope to answering this question Can DMT Create Psychic Visions!!!

Keep your fingers crossed!

 

[Naddig74]

Hay Everyone James returned my email and there may be hope to answering this question Can DMT Create Psychic Visions!!!!

He returned it? You mean he sent it back to you, or he replied?

Keep your fingers crossed!

Haven't you worked out that we don't do that kind of thing here?

 

[sadhatter]

Hay Everyone James returned my email and there may be hope to answering this question Can DMT Create Psychic Visions!!!

Keep your fingers crossed!

At least we have proven that humor, like money is not infinitely divisible. You have officially reached 0 humor through repeating the same tired joke. The only thing to do now is wait till you try it again to see if humor can go into the negatives.

 

[Paul2]

Hay Everyone James returned my email and there may be hope to answering this question Can DMT Create Psychic Visions!!!

Keep your fingers crossed!

Why don't you copy to this forum what you got? We'd all love to see it.