Quoi de neuf ?

Bienvenue sur Psychonaut.fr !

Le forum des amateurs de drogues et des explorateurs de l'esprit

Has anyone else noticed the psychonautic communities'...

  • Auteur de la discussion Auteur de la discussion Rymmen
  • Date de début Date de début

Rymmen

Sale drogué·e
Inscrit
2/9/07
Messages
814
affinity for only going for drugs obtained in nature?

I mean, I've met people that shy away from all types of drugs that create very spiritual mindsets because they aren't natural. Why? I mean, a chemical is a chemical. You can synthesize mescaline, psilocybin, and they become the same to those found in peyote and mushrooms.
 
I think this is because there is something magical about putting some spores in the ground, seeing the shrooms grow and some time later get a trip in return for giving the shrooms their life.
And offcourse there is the issue of the historic use of the sacred mindchanging 'splants and fungi. For century's shrooms and peyote have been used to 'contact the gods' and the idea of speeking to the gods appeals to everyone, I think most people rather use a proven god-communicating substance than a substance that has only been around for a few decades.
 
A lot of trip connect you to the "nature". So, when you use a natural product, you fell in the right way. Using nature to go back to the nature! In harmony with Gaya! :D
It'y maybe a detail but, as Dale Pendell say, "magic is empowerment by attention to detail".

In another way, when you be realy interesed by chemicals, when you work on them, then they take a sort of personality! The magic can be found here too! It's the Shulgin's way! Read pihkal :wink:

Finally, the true thing which counts, it is the person and her way of approaching this material!

(A detail: a mescaline trip isn't the same as a peyote trip. Peyot contains a lot of different alkaloids! It's right fo lsa and morning glory too!)

Sorry for my poor english...
 
When I trip classic psychedelics, I choose nature, too, because it is much more beautiful than what can be seen on the streets, so I understand a connection. However, this includes semi-synthetic LSD.

(I know about the peyote thing, too.)
 
I think that the main reason is that most psychedelics are natural... :)
 
also because there are more people with a garden than people with laboratories
 
Good points by Psychoid and Meduzz. I would actually prefer synthetic psilocybine if I could obtain it, because then I could more carefully measure the dose.

I don't have much free time, so I'd rather take a substance with a short effect (say 2 to 6 hours) than LSD which keeps me busy for 8 to 12 hours.

I also don't like needles and I have no experience with snorting. So I prefer psychedelics that can be eaten or drunk, and then preferably without upsetting my stomach.
 
Rymmen a dit:
affinity for only going for drugs obtained in nature?

I mean, I've met people that shy away from all types of drugs that create very spiritual mindsets because they aren't natural. Why? I mean, a chemical is a chemical. You can synthesize mescaline, psilocybin, and they become the same to those found in peyote and mushrooms.

Why?
Most people think that "natural" automatically means healthy, and "synthetic" is unhealthy. This assumption is offcourse not correct. But say for yourself, a natural substance sounds alot more friendly than a synthetic chemical, doesn't it?
Synthetic substances are synthesised by scary scientists in white labcoats, that's alot further away from our bed than the homegrown mushrooms... You could say people are (instinctively) affraid of the unknown...
 
Synthetic substances are synthesised by scary scientists in white labcoats, that's alot further away from our bed than the homegrown mushrooms... You could say people are (instinctively) affraid of the unknown...

Hey, there's no need to get personal now is there ? ;)

Actually I thinks CaduceusMercurius makes a good point:

I would actually prefer synthetic psilocybine if I could obtain it, because then I could more carefully measure the dose.

Dosing is far easier with synthetic or extracted compounds. Consuming plant material will always be trial and error to find the right dose. In the extreme cases like with datura species this can be even dangerous, but also the allkaloid content of mushrooms can vary quite a bit. And sometimes, the extracted product can prevent nausea etc like in the case of LSA versus plain H. woodrose seeds.

To get back to the original question: I too think that 'natural' producst just have more positive associations in peoples minds than 'synthetic'. But really, it's no big deal as long as both the natural oriented and synthetic oriented people just respect each other. To each his/her own .. stuff like that :)
 
phalaris a dit:
Synthetic substances are synthesised by scary scientists in white labcoats, that's alot further away from our bed than the homegrown mushrooms... You could say people are (instinctively) affraid of the unknown...

Hey, there's no need to get personal now is there ? ;)

Haha no offcourse not mate... I also wear a labcoat at school :mrgreen: :wink:
 
I think there's a more clearly distinctive line between substances with a natural effect, so to speak, versus an artificial effect. For example, whether synthetic or natural, substances like LSA, LSD, DMT, salvinorum A & B, psilocybine and mescaline are not going to guarantee a happy evening, whereas substances which directly stimulate or suppress neurotransmitters like dopamine, serotonine, adrenaline can be relied upon for relaxation, bliss or energy (which of course increase the risk of dependence and addiction).

So there are some who do all types of psychedelics, but avoid drugs like speed, coke, heroin etc., whether natural or synthetic.

It becomes more difficult when talking about new substances like 2CB, PCP, MDMA, ketamine etc. Some of these are appreciated by psychonauts for their spiritual of psychological effects, whereas others are simply not interested in them, often for cultural reasons.

As far as I'm concerned, I really like the idea of experiencing what all mystery school initiates have gone through, mostly the mushroom experience, the cannabis high and some other plant experiences.
 
Hmmm, natural or unnatural?
Well all psychoactives are fundamentally natural, for they wouldn’t be able to be produced if naturally these compounds couldn’t synergise and exist; however aided by man or any other organism.

Wether it be made by a plant or not does not change its ability to alter consciousness. However, the bigger issue is the knowledge and wisdom surrounding these substances, which for the natural psychedelics, there are thousands of years of shamanic, religious and cultural information supporting the intricacies of their nature and use. However, with the newer synthesised psychoactives, there is very little if any detail about their method and effects pertaining to a generalised reaction, long or short term, on the human body and mind.

This brings me to my other point; don’t all people and chemicals have a degree of subjectivity pertaining to their exact effects? We know that it will affect our perception in some way, but how well, strong or dangerous over long and short term are all subject to the individual; substance, dose and person.

And besides, aren’t all the most potent, profound and utterly amazing substances produced directly BY nature and have so for millennia before mankind was around to toy with them? Whereas the amphetamines for example, and other synthetically refined or produced substances, are very sketchy in their ability to produce the magical sates of mind, longevity and ritualism of use associated with the harmonic, natural psychedelics. Excluding LSD of course.

MDMA is a good instance where a synthetic synergises directly with a natural substance; serotonin. A continued reaction, which will cause more lasting damage than immediate bliss and euphoria. It desynchronises a natural system, thus producing unwanted and ‘unnatural’ effects in the longer term following frequent and prolonged use.

There is a larger ‘unknown’ element to these newer substances as opposed to the seeming unknown attributed to the direct psychological response to say, psilocybin. This is demonstrated by reactions to methamphetamine, heroin and crack abuse in more recent decades; they, being more controlled and thus more pleasurably addictive, produce more problems than solutions or insight; including far more damage to the body’s systems. A trait which to my mind, the true, natural psychedelics will never inflict on the traveller; however uncontrolled and unpredictable the psychotropic effects may be on the individual at the time.

All the best substances are all there already; they don’t need to be created or so it would seem, by our supposed intellectual and thus superior knowledge about the nature of physical structure and system. In reality we know very little, and this headstrong attitude toward our own knowledge about the body and the substances we consume will only lead to the destruction of the former. This has been demonstrated over and over again throughout history and continues to be, with the currant problems of abuse of these monestrous creations by those who believe nature obsolete to our own ingénues and supposed intellectualism as to there purpose and worth.
This, coupled with the systemic enforcement of power and through this, disinformation about new substances and a loss of knowledge about the more archaic ones produces a situation where people don’t know who to trust or to believe; which in turn produces destruction on a large scale.

Trust the mother; she knows the true path and will provide love and understanding if you return this and show respect to her. Gaia got it right!

Peace.
 
What about NMDA receptor antagonists? With these pharms, you avoid possibility of them having something bad in them (as could be the possibility with street synths (only excluding possibly LSD)), get to measure with simple multiplication, and, in my opinion, are the ones that most definately will create a very magical mindset, whether you like it or not.

However, damage is something to worry about with these, while with classic psychedelics, that just isn't so.
 
I think Buffachino's right on with this one i agree with everything you're saying man!
 
I think people prefer natural drugs because they can see what it is , with pills , drops and powders who realy knows what they contain and in what dose . I only like to take chemical drugs if i know who made them or if i have extracted them myself .
 
I think people prefer natural drugs because they can see what it is , with pills , drops and powders who realy knows what they contain and in what dose . I only like to take chemical drugs if i know who made them or if i have extracted them myself .
 
Retour
Haut