all entheogen, all the time.

January 14, 2005 4:49 AM

The Trip Receptacleswas a series of three 3-hour shows consisting of all-psychedelic, all-entheogen radio, featuring names like Leary, Grof, Capra, McKenna and more. Nearly four hours of shows on mp3. [via FutureHi].
posted by moonbird (23 comments total)

tripfilter: yeah i have lots of friends that will be throwing these into reason to make some ambient rants ala Mushroom Jazz
posted by sourbrew at 5:25 AM on January 14, 2005

Leave it to me to make a post too early in the morning. Please pardon the accidental merging of words.
posted by moonbird at 5:40 AM on January 14, 2005

downloading and delighted, thank you!
posted by Peter H at 5:47 AM on January 14, 2005

Just last week I contacted The Professor for permission and played two long Trip Receptacle excerpts on my radio show. Very cool, compelling stuff.
posted by davebush at 5:57 AM on January 14, 2005

Excellent! There goes my weekend. Thank you very very much moonbird.
posted by DelusionsofGrandeur at 6:02 AM on January 14, 2005

Wow, the colors...


Thanks for this.
posted by LouReedsSon at 6:15 AM on January 14, 2005

Thank you! I've been scouring the web for audio lectures re: consciousness and the like for my commute to work. This will make driving to work a joy! Thanks!
posted by lyam at 6:40 AM on January 14, 2005

I think there is validity in the ability to see further into the different layers of consciousness with the use of drugs. However, since there are methods that deepen your discovery of consciousness that don't unnaturally change the chemical structure within your body, I find those to be the more practical, substantial and truthful methods, i.e. pranayama or subjective meditation ("who am I"*)

*see Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharishi
posted by mic stand at 6:41 AM on January 14, 2005

If you want more episodes of Over the Edge you can get them from SerpentX but please buy stuff from Negativland if you like what they do. Don Joyce cranks out this show almost everyweek for 3 hours (sometimes 5) and really deserves support. I've got all the serpentX files and my iPod is almost full. I recommend the Another UFO series of shows too.
posted by jackiemcghee at 6:50 AM on January 14, 2005

mic stand: there are methods that deepen your discovery of consciousness that don't unnaturally change the chemical structure within your body

What "chemical structures" are "unnaturally" "changed" within our body by, say, LSD?

I find those to be the more practical, substantial and truthful methods

Definitely disagree with the 'practical' part. 'Substantial' is subjective, so I can't disagree. The 'truthful' sentiment, I respectfully submit, is a relic of the contrived anthropocentric dichotomy between 'natural' and 'artificial'.
posted by Gyan at 7:07 AM on January 14, 2005

", said Gyan in a hushed voice. He then stood up and walked around his desk to retrieve a pair of nail clippers from a drawer.
posted by foot at 7:41 AM on January 14, 2005

I don't believe our body wants to ingest extracts of fungus, although it is intriguing that such powerful experiences come about. It doesn't seem like a 'natural' (for lack of a better word) form of nutrition.

'Practical'=doesn't cost a dime to do breathwork/meditate (unless you are stuck with the adage, time=money, of course)...the risk for getting in trouble with the law is much less (but I've had friends meditating be approached by police before)

'Substantial'=fair enough.

'truthful'=trancension of consciousness (speculation) has been obtained by subjective meditation/breathwork for tens of thousands of years prior to the introduction of LSD (according, of course, to scientific and historical suggestion, given that, mold has existed longer than humanity)
posted by mic stand at 8:03 AM on January 14, 2005

...and furthermore, with LSD, the longer you use, the more you need to take to experience greater heights (in my experience). With meditation/pranayama, the longer you practice, the more effective you become, thus achieving greater states in less time. It is the initial time investment period that you may find not to be as practical.
posted by mic stand at 8:06 AM on January 14, 2005

mic stand: I don't believe our body wants to ingest extracts of fungus, although it is intriguing that such powerful experiences come about. It doesn't seem like a 'natural' (for lack of a better word) form of nutrition.

I don't think the body wants to or not wants to ingest anything. If it doesn't kill you, and if it doesn't hurt in natural selection, it gets integrated, e.g. the presence of endocannabinoids, supposedly introduced in mammals around 600-700 million years ago.

trancension of consciousness (speculation) has been obtained by subjective meditation/breathwork for tens of thousands of years prior to the introduction of LSD

Your original comment referred to drugs in general. Psilocin has presumably existed for pretty long. That's a drug, as well.

LSD tolerance is transient. As is the same with probably all processes, I guess. Lay off all psychedelics for a month or two, and you're back in business. Actually, just a couple of weeks is fine as well. Furthermore, your tolerance to hallucinogens might have to do with your specific neurochemistry (certain serotonin receptors and down-regulation).
posted by Gyan at 8:54 AM on January 14, 2005

Let's not forget N,N-DMT and its analogues -- DMT occurs naturally in the body, so ingesting some of it really only shifts the balance already there. Completely unlike LSD, psilocybin/psilocin, etc.
posted by 5MeoCMP at 9:46 AM on January 14, 2005

All entheogens work because they contain molecules which are identical to or very close to neurotransmitters already present in our bodies. Why do you think that there are human neurotransmitters in a fungus? We have co-evolved with these other organisms.

The lifting of the veil is indeed possible without the use of entheogens, and reportedly is more effective, but a modern human may have a difficult time finding the "place" where this is possible without a prior experience with entheogens.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:05 AM on January 14, 2005

5MeoCMP: You can say the same about morphine.

But I wouldn't say it's 'completely unlike' LSD/psilocin. Both of these compounds are tryptamines. Psilocin is pretty similar to serotonin, which is an important endogenous neurotransmitter.

To expand on what sonofsamiam said, from a physicalist perspective, the only requirement for a substance to be a psychedelic is functional. It or its metabolite must cross the blood-brain barrier and it should be able to disrupt ongoing homeostasis. Psychedelics do this by being to able to bind at certain receptors in a selective fashion at specific regions. So, in theory, 20-30 years down the line or even now probably, one should be able to design psychedelics at will and with specific properties.
posted by Gyan at 10:20 AM on January 14, 2005

mic stand, I understand what you're saying. Psychedelics give a lot of people their first taste of mystical experience. It's not nirvana or moksha, but it's a glimpse. Of course, if you're looking for a more stable, permanent route to transcendence, drugs aren't going to get you there.

Not everyone who takes consciousness-altering drugs are looking for that kind of experience, though. I have a friend who tried to convince me to see Blair Witch Project on mushrooms a few years ago. (Dear God, no!) This same friend loves nothing more than to spend a day at Cedar Point (gigantic amusement park in Ohio) with a head full of acid. For him, it's just wacky, zany fun.
Some people just want a new way to look at life--explore art or make music--that doesn't require the investment of time and effort that pranayama requires.

with LSD, the longer you use, the more you need to take to experience greater heights (in my experience).

This has not been my experience. I've taken LSD maybe 15 times since I was 13 (I'm 29). As much as I have enjoyed certain trips, I've never been eager to trip again afterwards.

It's worth thinking of hallucinogens in the context of our history as a species. Ingesting consciousness-altering chemicals is extremely common in most cultures. I personally favor more ritual with my usage. I suspect people often have bad trips because they don't have any cultural framework or guides to help them interpret the experience.
posted by apis mellifera at 10:25 AM on January 14, 2005

apis mellifera: Ingesting consciousness-altering chemicals is extremely common in most cultures.

Is 'chemical' an umbrella term for all psychoactives, like caffeine as well? If so, then true. Else 'extremely common' is a gross exaggeration.
posted by Gyan at 10:57 AM on January 14, 2005

Along the same lines, here is an amazing online dialogue between Terence McKenna and Robert Hunter.
posted by Roach at 1:18 PM on January 14, 2005

Gyan--sure--caffeine, alcohol. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that alcohol usage, in the US for example, is more mind altering than consciousness altering/expanding, though. What I should have said is that in most cultures you can find people taking drugs to trip. Raver kids candyflipping in Detroit, Bwiti eating eboga in Gabon, yage in Mexico. It's interesting to me that you can find people who crave these kinds of experiences almost everywhere on the planet, and to think that human beings have been snorting, eating or drinking things in order to change their sense of their relationship to the world around them for thousands of years, at least.
posted by apis mellifera at 2:33 PM on January 14, 2005

apis mellifera:What I should have said is that in most cultures you can find people taking drugs to trip.

I don't know about 'most cultures' but 'many cultures' is more accurate. It would be correlated with dominant socioreligious environments and botanical presence in that culture's geography. Within most cultures, trippers are rare. 24 million in the US have ever used hallucinogens in their lifetimes. That's about 1 in 12. And that includes E and PCP. Current use is about 1/10th that. Ritual use of DMT/mescaline among native cultures in the Americas is probably higher. But 'extremely common', like I said, is a gross exaggeration.
posted by Gyan at 2:50 PM on January 14, 2005

This conversation is great -- thanks Roach.
posted by sudama at 11:52 AM on January 16, 2005