Reminds me of Paul Erdős, who used amphetamines (think Adderall) for a similar purpose.
After 1971 Erdős also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdős won the bet, but complained that during his abstinence mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine use.
Amphetamines did help him become arguable the most productive mathematician (in terms of papers) of all time. Although I think LSD is completely different and more of a creativity unleashing type drug. Either way the potential for psychedelics are incredible and it's a shame the drug war (thanks to Reagan in particular) have draconian laws that inhibit its responsible use. LSD is one of those in particular that can turn people into a healthier and more peaceful mental state if used correctly, even just through one use (think enlightenment through ego death).
The difference is that amphetamines, though potentially addictive and dangerous, can actually help you do math or programming. I'm skeptical that people can code better (if at all) while on LSD.
It's not that you code better or write math equations better... It's a temporary change in the state of your mind which helps you see things from a different perspective. Think of a time when you were stuck on a really hard problem and then went away from it for a while only to have the solution pop in your head... It's kinda like that, but on an entirely different level.
The problem with your line of thinking (and many others that condemn the use of psychedelics) is that you clearly have never tried LSD. Your absolute bias is one of the many reasons its potential is hindered.
You can manage to code while on LSD but it is very hard. After trying it a couple of times I decided it just takes out the fun from both LSD and coding.
I've taken small doses of LSD (half a hit) with great success while coding or creating more traditional art. I find that the small dose makes it easier for me to imagine where bugs might be, visualize and compare algorithms, and consider both high level architecture ideas as well as low level details simultaneously. That said, I've only tried it a few times back in college, so I don't have many data points.
Larger doses work differently, and less directly for me. They tend to help me gain greater perspective on my life and my work. It can give me a renewed energy and excitement for what I am doing, or, conversely it can help me realize that I am on the wrong track, and will motivate me to make changes that help me live a more fulfilling life. I often end a strong experience with so much energy that I can't wait for the next day to begin so I can put into action everything I had been thinking about. I code vastly better when I have a deep understanding about why I am coding.
As with anything, these experiences have diminishing returns, so spacing them out over years has helped me keep them 'productive'.
I have ADD and am a coder. I am on Concerta (methylphenidate, a derivative of methamphetamine) and find that my interest in math, as well as programming, has increased significantly.
If we're getting technical it's merely in the same family as methamphetamine. Meth causes a _much_ larger dopamine response which among other reasons is why people find it awesome and addictive.
Err, no. Methamphetamine is significantly different from methylphenidate. Methylphenidate (Concerta, Ritalin, etc) is more closely related to amphetamine, but still not a derivative. It's like saying that thebaine is a derivative of codeine due to them being similar in structure.
I can confirm this. Concerta increases my performance, but I actually need it to function day-to-day. My ADD was only noticed at age 20 because despite suffering badly from it, I kicked ass in school. When I first took Concerta it was one giant ball of what the f*ck: was this vast quiet possible?
I've given dex to other programmers on occasion; they're often amazed at how much it helps them concentrate and get things done.
It's kind of like coffee that WORKS.
Hence my favourite programming beverage: grind your beans, sprinkle finely powdered amphetamine on the top of the basket, and make yourself a nice motherfuckiato.
The only reason why you wouldn't is because you can't always choose what draws you in. If you can keep your focus pretty much anything is possible; you're not handicapped in the same way as you would be on alcohol for instance. For some interesting reading, see this [0] about a SF bike courier who works while tripping.
It's not so much coding that can benefit, but conceptualizing the architecture of the system as a whole, which is where the greatest gains in efficiency and elegance are to be found.
I've played chess under the influence of psilocybin with a sober friend. I was massacred.
There are creative aspects to programming, and you might gain some insights that are applicable, but I'd save the implementation till you come down unless the dose was rather small.
In college I lived with artists. A few of their artist friends come over with big sketch pads, pencils and whatever else artists use. They all drop acid while telling me they can't wait to see their amazing creations once their minds are opened. I went out for a few hours and came back to find them all sitting around the living room.
One sketch pad had a long black squiggle on it, the same design you'd make if you fell asleep while holding a pen to paper, and the rest had even less (One was literally two 1" lines forming a 90 degree angle). The next day they described the night as a huge success even though they never really attained any of their stated goals.
I don't doubt they had a good time, but seeing them utterly fail to use the drug as a tool kinda makes me skeptical of the productive benefits.
As a side note, if you want your ego stroked then ask a student artist for his opinion of your work. In the two years I lived with artists not a single negative comment was spoken by a student of anyone else's work. It was a guaranteed self-congratulatory feedback loop.
There's a major difference in the way the mind of a scientist or engineer works versus the mind of an art student. Whenever I take mushrooms, I usually follow a "schedule" of things to do and try. Others I know will literally lay on a couch for 10 hrs.
"Others I know will literally lay on a couch for 10 hrs."
You can't tell how much the person is getting out of the experience just by looking at them. They could just lie on the couch for ten hours with their eyes closed and be having one of the most profound experiences of their life. In fact, someone who is using the drug for introspection is almost certainly getting more out of the experience than someone who is using the drug to explore the world. Most serious psychonauts recommend taking the drug laying down in the dark while blindfolded to get the most out of it.
I mean think about it, you're about to have one of the five most important experiences of your life, on par with death or the birth of a child.[1] Do you really want to have that experience while in a movie theater watching Harold & Kumar?
"Even at the 14-month
follow-up, 58% of 36 volunteers rated the experience on the psilocybin session as among the five most personally meaningful
experiences of their lives and 67% rated it among the five most
spiritually significant experiences of their lives, with 11% and
17%, respectively, indicating that it was the single most meaningful experience, and the single most spiritually significant experience. Furthermore, 64% of the 36 volunteers indicated that the
psilocybin session experience increased their sense of well-being
or life satisfaction either moderately or very much, and 61%
rated that the experience was associated with moderate to
extreme positive behaviour change."
I remember hearing a story, maybe from Ken Kesey, of someone who was given LSD during a medical trial and left with a pen and pad and told to write down how they felt about their mother. The researcher would be back later to get their notes and ask questions.
Research returns and is disappointed to find the pad empty and the subject unwilling to talk about his mother. The reason? He's just seen God and is busy drawing God on the wall.
So he utterly failed at his assigned task, but he had (arguably) achieved something far more important.
Absolutely this, from a personal experience. (Throwaway since a decent amount of people know who I am here.) I smoked a sizable amount (~4x my usual amount to get high) of marijuana one night with friends. They later reported me as simply staring into space, looking around, and saying random words from other languages. However, I was having one of the most incredibly profound, enlightened moments in my life, getting closer to understanding the basic questions behind life and what it is.
Nothing major... About a dozen different strains of magic mushroom, lsd, pot a few times, and opium once. I don't smoke hardly ever, but I do try to trip a few times a year.
Ahh, haha. I see. I've watched certain movies and shows that I found profound without tripping (surprisingly the most profound thing I've watched is the Futurama episode, Godfellas). I've done many many artistic things, drawing, painting, etc. We built things with legos before. Listened to different kinds of music. Played with animals (I swear my dog could sense something was up... never seen him in such a lovey mode). Once I mixed highlighter fluid with bubbles and created a "universe" on the wall in our basement (no windows, and all black lights at the time). I've done the mundane like play video games (went for an hour in GTA-IV sailing out to sea.. it never ends). Played music alone and with friends (recorded some). I've tried reading books. One time I took a programming quiz because I'd forgotten to and it was due within the hour (extremely hard). One of the most profound things I did was go on a several hour walk through only back alleys with friends and reflected on urban decay. There's more, but thats the best I can think of off the top of my head.
> Played with animals (I swear my dog could sense something was up... never seen him in such a lovey mode).
Psylocybin (however you spell it) actually tends to leak out through your sweat pores, so your dog was probably having just as fantastic of a time as you were.
When we did shrooms last time, we petted our cats for about an hour. Shortly after that, they went into the hallway and started chasing imaginary flies on the walls - leaping full-on into the wall, only to bounce off. They've been prone to that sort of thing ever since. :)
You plan out simple fun things like watching a movie or go to a party.
But after started, you won't get bored for sure, you may even try out new personalities just to see how people will react to that.
In the case of this story, it's not what they drew while they were in a clinically insane state, but what doors that state opened for later sober pondering. Which may or may not have been productive.
I did shrooms a few dozen times throughout my college years. Most of the time it was in a group environment just for fun. Sometimes we would try things like the artists you mentioned, but as we were all bio/engineer types it was never serious.
That said, I did perform a handful of solitary experiments where I would lock myself in my room with a programming assignment working non-stop for some 5-7 hours. The output was remarkable. But the drug was rough on my system and would take me days to recover.. so no more than once a month. Eventually stopped doing it altogether after a bad experience.
I took a pottery class last winter and I observed the positive feedback loop in action. As someone who is not used to constantly bullshitting, it really threw off my chi to listen to an overly peppy woman tell me how amazing my work was even though we both knew it was garbage.
I have several drawings and paintings that I did under the influence that still amaze me today. I could never reproduce the techniques or forms. There were many times that I wouldn't spend the entire duration drawing/painting, but I had several marathon creation sessions under the influence of LSD.
We would always make sure to have plenty of supplies. Art or otherwise. Pen and paper was probably the most difficult. The effects on your vision are pronounced and drawing can be... hard. I always enjoyed oil pastels the most. Thick and flowing pools of color. Man those were good times.
I was in art school at the time, and critique (the ability to give and receive) was one of the greatest things I walked away with. We would formerly critique on a regular basis in class.
> I don't doubt they had a good time, but seeing them utterly fail to use the drug as a tool kinda makes me skeptical of the productive benefits.
This is akin to coming onto a software project, seeing a huge tangle of grotesque code produced by some other programmer(s), and determining that the tools were at fault. In both cases it is not necessarily the wand, but perhaps the magician.
This was an 8 hour marathon of oil pastel madness. I was in my tiny apartment with 6-8 friends and literally spent the entire time engrossed in this thing. The background was the technique that I could never get back. This was a series of this basic type of drawing I did. There were 4 and this one I like the most. Gave one away to some chick I was seeing :/
Bic pens have always been a favorite as well. These are actually meeting drawings from a fairly recent (sober) time, but are representitive of the drawings I don't want to go dig out and scan. My brain didn't do this prior to LSD ;)
I got out of art school and went into a more technical field doing 3d graphics for training applications. Had kids, stopped doing drugs, eventually switched over to programming computers... I always threaten to get back into it and really do miss it. The creation of images more than the psychoactive chemicals ;0
I would also be interested in seeing scans. LSD has been a wonderful experience for me, undertaken roughly once a year, but with beneficial and creative effects that last much longer.
I think the OP missed the point-- LSD isn't Aderall, it isn't something that makes you push out more. Rather, it can unlock doors that were perhaps holding you back.
Or perhaps it can open doors that will end up holding you back. There are people who are legitimate acid casualties. I know a guy who now has social anxiety so bad that he rarely leaves his house. This was most certainly not the case before he indulged in copious amounts of LSD and Psilocybin.
Weed will much easily make you paranoid in my opinion.
But in fact, too much introspection can go wrong and plant ideas that don't make you go forward.
There is a saying of a guru: "If something goes bad, just drop some more acid" but I am not sure if it is a good advice, only that it doesn't work with weed.
Anyone that is not a doctor or pharmacist who says anything along the gist of "If you aren't doing X while taking drug Y, then you need more of drug Y" is an idiot. Everyone is different, dosages will be different, and interactions, chemically with other drugs and psychologically with other issues, will always be present.
I'm all for anyone doing whatever they want with drugs, psychoactives in particular, but taking more is usually the wrong answer. Psychoactive drugs are not a cure-all or magic key that opens creative inspiration in uncreative types, just as much as taking Vicodin won't give you an erection lasting for more than 4 hours.
Good psychotherapy can heal him. I suggest "Changing Personal History" or more powerful (but harder to learn) "Core Transformation" from NLP.
P.S. There is a huge amount of inefficient and even dangerous psychotherapy schools, and there is quite a lot of inefficient stuff in "NLP", that's why I recommend exactly the above techniques.
To add balance to the statement about asking an art student to give an opinion of your work to get your ego stroked, I had a far different experience. I went to art school, and from foundation year (where you learn a smattering of everything: drawing, painting, sculpting, etc.) to senior year (when I focused on film and animation) I constantly had my work reviewed. Sometimes I got effusive praise, and sometimes I left class devastated. Usually, the feedback was right-on, usually honest, and usually came from a good place. Learning how to express criticism of another's work, and learning how to accept constructive criticism of my own, was one of the most valuable skills I learned from school.
To make this germane to hacking: I'm kind of baffled that peer code review isn't the cornerstone of this industry. No one works best in a bubble, and everyone has something to teach and to learn.
One last thought -- context for feedback matters. It's a helpful, kind, human thing to do to give someone some helpful encouragement, even when it hasn't been earned yet.
Code review takes too much time. You can take a painting that took 100 hours to make, and start delivering useful criticism after a minute or so. Giving useful feedback on a programming project that took 100 hours will take much, much longer.
Also, art is meant to be examined - that is its primary purpose. Source code, not so much.
Nope. I think art's purpose is to change and mature you, if you let it.
It's just that the Internet is home to a lot of people that believe rationalism is the only valid way to perceive the universe, when in reality it is just one way to do so. Personally, I found myself unhappy when I restricted myself to it. The universe seemed cold, empty, and cruel. I think a lot of people hit this stage and then just give up completely.
I only meant "examine" as in "observe", "look at", "listen to", as opposed to "use", "run" or "execute". I never meant to make the universe seem cold or cruel. Sorry about that.
I'll agree that while a project is being bootstrapped, peer code review could be cumbersome. Once a project has matured enough, some amount of code review, done incrementally, shouldn't be a burden. At that point, if you're typing out reams of code every day, you might be doing it wrong ( something code review could help catch [ e.g., "Library X does this; you don't have to re-implement it" ] ). The point would not be to circle back after 100 hours of work to review, but rather every (say) 10.
I don't agree that source code is not meant to be examined ( but maybe we work in totally different fields ). I regularly read source code from my coworkers, and they regularly have to read mine. Often, the developer who wrote the code is not available for questions, or isn't with the company any longer. My own code might as well have been written by another developer if I look at it after about a year. All these issues could be mitigated or muted by another set of eyes, either by sharing the knowledge ( "Why did Bob do this?" might be answered by someone else who'd reviewed the code ) or by asking the questions initially ( "Bob, why did you do it that way?" Bob: "Because of X -- I'll leave a comment in the source ).
I've found that it's not the actual code review that's helpful, but preparing for a code review. It forces you to describe the code clearly, which often makes the code clearer in the process. Plus you try to anticipate the comments your co-workers will give.
> To make this germane to hacking: I'm kind of baffled that peer code review isn't the cornerstone of this industry. No one works best in a bubble, and everyone has something to teach and to learn.
Richard P. Gabriel has been advocating an MFA program for hackers. I don't think it's gotten off the ground yet.
That's hilarious, the exact same thing happened to me. I used to draw some pretty interesting stuff while in college.
Then I took some mushrooms with a pen and paper in hand. All I could draw was stupid smiley faces. It was just inane gibberish.
So yeah, I guess there is a bit of a myth about LSD and creativity... at least anything that involves fine motor skills and concentration. In this context it was a creativity killer.
It was not functioning as a tool... immediately? It's a interesting experience, if they couldn't produce it while it was happening it that doesn't mean it didn't influence them in the long run.
This series is breathtaking. I don't think I've experienced anything beyond what beer does- this is a fascinating experiment to see from the first frame to the last. Thanks for the link.
A friend of mine tried to program while on Salvia (I gave him the programming problem to solve: basically implement Solomon Golombs self-describing sequence) and as he scribbled notes on paper, he kept muttering phrases like "what is she saying to me now". We didn't check the results until the next morning, but it turned out he had figured out an O(1) closed form for the sequence - it was very simple and very fast. He claimed a woman told him the answer.
I have since searched for good solutions to the same problem and the only thing I could find that is better than O(n) is a 70's paper on the sequence. The solution in the paper was complex (I didn't understand it - actually, I don't know if it even came up with a closed form or not...), certainly not as short and simple as the one my friend came up with. Sadly, we didn't think much of it and didn't write it down - which, of course, means I have no proof to back this story up[1]. Still, it was a pretty strange and interesting thing to witness.
[1] We also only tested it with a handful of numbers and did not make any attempt to formally prove its correctness, so its not impossible that it was just coincidence that it worked for the test inputs (we only verified low input numbers against the naive implementation). Still, I like to think it was a full solution.
I just can't visualize anyone doing any kind of meaningful thinking while in the influence of salvia divinorum, or scribbling, the effect is just too strong and too disconnected from our reality. The only thing in your story that gives it a bit of credibility is this: "He claimed a woman told him the answer."
I don't care if you believe me. I cannot prove it, so I won't lose sleep if you think I made it up. For me, its enough that I witnessed it.
Having said that, I obviously simplified the story and I have a pretty good theory of how he came up with the solution (since I now know the guy a lot better). I actually think he has a very very slight case of autism (never diagnosed, but over the years, there have been some hints that it may be the case). I of course don't believe that a woman actually told him the solution, I think the autism is what helped him come up with it (since properly autistic people are able to do some amazing things) and the drug made him trip out and believe a woman spoke to him.
As for not believing that somebody could do things on Salvia, I disagree. Normally I don't like to admit to drug use on the internet (since its easy to figure out who I am), but what the hell. Maybe I'll come to regret it later... While I haven't taken any in a few years, I have taken Salvia many times over the past ten-ish years (and I took it that night with my friend too). I have taken it in the middle of the day, in the sun. I have taken it at night, in a dark room. I have taken it at a party (despite people saying its not a party drug). Each time the experience was very very different. It depends on your surroundings and on your mood. Yes, salvia is extremely intense and gives a very disconnected experience, but I think the actual extent depends on the factors I mentioned above. For example, every time I took it at night, it was a very weird and "heavy" experience, but when I took it in the sun, it was a bright and happy (almost mdma-like) experience.
I don't know if you get this on Salvia, but most people I have spoken to about it have said they experienced something similar. When on Salvia, theres this feeling of "pressure" pulling you into the experience (often its a feeling of something pushing or pulling you some direction, perhaps spinning around, falling or weightlessness). I've got this every time (that I remember, there may have been times when I didn't that I don't remember). Every time I've tried to resist it and go against it, I broke out in heavy sweats. When we did the programming problem, it took a LOT of effort to resist it to write in the notepad. After a few minutes, I gave in and forgot about the notepad (skin soaked with sweat). I guess my friend was able to resist it more than I was. But. honestly, I don't remember the exact details, nor do I remember anything about the trip I had or what I wrote in my own notepad, since my friends was much more interesting and this happened maybe five or six years ago.
My point is that it is hard to resist it, but its not impossible (at least, for a while) and while resisting it, you can be tripping and still do things (well, kind of). But, at the end of the day, if you don't believe me, thats fine. Maybe you can try it for yourself? Just be aware that (in my experience) there will be an intense "pressure" pulling you away from what you're trying to do and you may have to try pretty hard to resist it.
You shouldn't worry about some random person on the internet believing you or not, but sharing experiences is good anyway.
The woman part was the interesting part to me because thats something recurrent, the presence of a woman (maybe not a woman, but a femenine entity)
I get the pressure while on the effect, and most of the people I have seen smoking extract here at home do too (some just getting pulled to a specific direction, others feel a rotating force).
Not everyone gets the same physical effects but a lot of it is common.
Something that happens to me that so far only one friend has shared is being split in two (we feel it on the tongue, the nose, the chest, the whole body, left is separated from right).
But the physical aspects of the experience are not what I find problematic for trying to do something like scribbling, it is the mental aspect. Do you even know that you are under the effects before they are already fading out? do you remember that you wanted to scribble? do you know who are the people there with you? mm.. do you even know that there are people there?
How did you guys (in your experiment) consume it? smoked extract? smoked leaves? chewing leaves?
After such positive results, did you ever try the experiment again? if not, why not? (if I had such experience I would like to try more and more)
I'm not worrying if people believe me ;-) My lengthy post was because you said you were interested in hearing more details. If you believe me then great, but if not, whatever.
The pressure aspect is very interesting. As far as I remember, I've always had it, but it varied each time. I've never experienced the splitting in two; that would certainly be strange. I remember one trip where it felt like I was slowly rotating, so that roughly 50% through the trip I was upsidedown. When I rotated the full way and was upright again, I instantly snapped out of it. I often had those kind of "when X happened, I instantly snapped out" experiences actually (another time I was walking around and it felt like I was falling (the pressure) away from where I took salvia (in a car), bouncing off people to get back "up" to where I was and when I got back, I sat into the car and the door shut, I snapped out of the trip).
Hmm, good point. Honestly, it was too long ago and I don't remember. I do remember that after a little while I gave up and dropped the pen. As for knowing if there are people or not, I've had different experiences each time - sometimes I forgot about people completely and was lost in my own world, other times the people were there with me (eg, the car trip I mentioned above, I was interacting with people and it felt like I was bouncing off them to get back to the car, kind of like being the ball in a pinball machine).
I've only ever smoked extract, usually in a pipe (the other times in a bong). I have smoked different strength extracts, the weakest being either 5 or 10x, the strongest being perhaps 50x and most often 30 or 35x. I have never tried it any other way (due to availability). I don't remember what strength it was that night or if we used a pipe or bong.
I didn't try it again. Thinking about it now, I really don't know why, it seems obvious that I should have, yet somehow it never ocurred to me to do it again. We thought it was a bit of a laugh really, which is probably why we didn't put any effort in recording the solution. Kicking myself now, of course. I remember that day we were doing projects for class or soemthing, so perhaps thats why we decided to program on it, while other days we wouldn't have been, but we did a lot of random programming, so I don't think thats why. I don't have a good answer for it really. Then over time I ended up taking salvia less and less until I stopped altogether, for no other reason than that I just didn't feel like it. Then they banned most formerly-legal drugs here, so now I don't think I can even get any anymore (afaik anyway, I never actually checked after most headshops were closed down here). I kinda want to repeat the experiment now!
> I have taken it in the middle of the day, in the sun. I have taken it at night, in a dark room. I have taken it at a party (despite people saying its not a party drug).
I was kinda hoping you were going to run with that and turn that into a "green eggs and ham" tribute poem.
I can certainly believe this - LSD is screwy like this.
On one of the very few occasions I used it, I had what I thought was a profound understanding of how everything in the universe was connected together. I couldn't recall what the big idea was afterwards (or to this day), but I'm quite certain it was just my brain making up nonsense.
This article doesn't do a very good job explaining what it is that makes psychedelic drugs so intellectually interesting. I'd recommend listening to Terence McKenna talking about his childhood and how he discovered psychedelics.
I predict that LSD will become much more popular in the near future due to services like The Silk Road and Bitcoins. While other drugs can be detected quite easily in mail with scanners and such, LSD in plotter form can't be detected without actually opening every letter.
For people like me, who didn't know what "Silk Road" was in this context:
It's an anonymous market for drugs using Tor. [1] Bitcoins are used for paying.
If you need to take psychedelics to 'unlock the wonders of your mind' or whatever just to do some simple programming, software may not be the field for you.
neither. I have realized that caffeine dulls my senses (and it makes me care less about things in general). I drink tea once-in-awhile, but generally try to avoid anything with caffeine. I also sleep much better at night.
I don't drink coffee. I have. Sometimes I have tea when it's around. They're both very successful at doing absolutely nothing for me, so much so that up until a couple years ago, I wasn't convinced that everyone is just bullshitting about it. Much like when you'd go to a house party in high school and people who've had very little (or perhaps unknowingly, nothing at all) go on about how drunk they are.
You misunderstand. I don't mean 'simple' as in base, uncomplicated, or trivial. What I mean is there's no programming problem so complex that it requires the use of a hallucinogenic to understand or solve.
How do you know? Have you solved every problem there is to solve? And of all the problems you have solved, have you done so in the most elegant and efficient way possible?
If I haven't solved every problem there is to solve, is my assertion less true? Is your argument "There are problems in software engineering that can only be solved by dropping acid?"
The best programmers in the world -- those who work together to solve the most complex and aggressive problems asked of the human mind -- are those who come to work every day, solve problems, and write code, and go home. They don't spend their time justifying "lifehacks" like taking LSD for that extra "edge" over other programmers.
It can't be justified, that is all. I don't know that there are problems that can only be solved only by taking LSD, but neither can I categorically say that there aren't any at all, as you just did.
How do you know? That is what I asked, and you haven't answered me. You're making assertions about the best programmers in the world that you can't possibly back up. How do you know that some of them don't take LSD?
The concept of "getting an edge" is so not what we're talking about here.. not quite the opposite but the attitude of wanting to get an edge is the exact opposite.
It's about wanting to know more and to expand your horizons for their own sake. Look at some of the "best programmers in the world". Lots of crazy beards in that group, right?
>If I haven't solved every problem there is to solve, is my assertion less true?
Either that or you've discovered some property of 'complex' problems that precludes the use of LSD to solve them. Otherwise, yes, it is less true (i.e. baseless and false).
I'm sorry. You're asking me to... enumerate every single problem in software engineering? I don't see the point. How about we take one of the most impressive, extreme cases of software ingenuity: launching the Space Shuttle.
"But how much work the software does is not what makes it remarkable. What makes it remarkable is how well the software works. This software never crashes. It never needs to be re-booted. This software is bug-free. It is perfect, as perfect as human beings have achieved. Consider these stats : the last three versions of the program -- each 420,000 lines long-had just one error each. The last 11 versions of this software had a total of 17 errors."
Do you think that perfection, that stability, in the face of lives at risk for every mistake, is a suitable place to suggest that taking LSD could make them better? These are the best programmers in the world, by many standards. And they're not writing node.js servers and map-reduce queries, they're using billions of dollars of hardware to achieve manned space flight. And they don't take LSD.
"It's strictly an 8-to-5 kind of place -- there are late nights, but they're the exception. The programmers are intense, but low-key. Many of them have put in years of work either for IBM (which owned the shuttle group until 1994), or directly on the shuttle software. They're adults, with spouses and kids and lives beyond their remarkable software program.
That's the culture: the on-board shuttle group produces grown-up software, and the way they do it is by being grown-ups. It may not be sexy, it may not be a coding ego-trip -- but it is the future of software. When you're ready to take the next step -- when you have to write perfect software instead of software that's just good enough -- then it's time to grow up."
Says who? The article says 260 people worked on that part of the code. I'm sure they're all security-cleared and background-checked up the wazoo, but i'd wager that more than a handful of those 260 have had psychedelic experiences at some point.
The shuttle is an excellent example of many things, but not necessarily of a conceptually difficult task. It's hard, but it's not mind-bending. The hardest part comes from having to prove the systems correct because lives depend on it.
While I am not an expert on the shuttle flight software, these are some challenges in flight software in general: Consider the problem of orbital insertion around a moon of saturn, or around an inner planet, or an asteroid. Not only does the guidance and control subsystem have to react (i.e., actuate the thrusters whose thrust can vary by orders of magnitude) within a razor-thin margin, but each scientific instrument has requirements as well, and introduces its own perturbations (e.g., extension of an antenna boom causing vibrations). Plenty of PhDs, and PhD topics to be found in this and associated problems. ANother example, consider space network links. You can't just use TCP (it's been tried, and it simply breaks down), you need to engineer a protocol -- in fact a whole new suite of protocols -- from the ground up that provides the same reliability but over much faultier links. Although TCP is simple in concept (just ACK/NACK till you got everything, right?), 30 years of its evolution shows that it is anything but. Both of these problems necessarily involve some bending of the mind to solve, and I image there are related ones for the folks in the manned-space sector
EDIT: and among other things that I'd consider important to mention, there are significant robotics challenges, autonomous behavior and decision making (with associated problems in formal model verification), along with the general high degree of fault tolerance required in just about every software (and hardware) subsystem. I think many of the hardest problems in CS can be found in the spaceflight domain.
You're right - there's no point trying to 'find the right approach' when it comes to space flight. But not every piece of software has to get every little detail right. When the issue is more about figuring out what you're trying to accomplish with software than accomplishing something perfectly, creativity is very important.
Not that I plan on trying it, but how do you really know that?
Such a broad statement strikes me as saying something akin to 'I can prove there is no God.' As much as I believe it to be true and want to see it proved, I just can't say for sure.
I understand and I agree with you taking psychedelics is not an everyday task.
One does not take a trip to solve a simple problem, but to find ideas and new viewpoints.
Those actually could be useful, even in your field. Software or not.
It's not just about solving problems. It's also about finding the inspiration or the right approach. coding an algorithm that is predefined and coming up with something like page rank or OOP paradigm are not problems in the same category. psychadelics can definitely help in the latter category.
indeed, the unexamined life...
Acid use means taking your life and examining it from every angle. A key point I like to get across to people I discuss acid use with is to never imagine that experiences you have whilst under the influence of LSD are as discountable as their known experience with alcohol - with LSD the reprogramming sticks (for better or worse!)
I don't think anyone is saying it's a necessity, just arguing the benefits. I seriously doubt it enhances code quality during the trip but the ideas and ways you visualize the problem may be drastically different. I'm guessing it's kind of like those ah-ha moments in the middle of the night when you solve a difficult problem.
Around the world, there are many different patterns of regulation of drugs, and here in the United States, schedule I controlled substances like LSD can be used for legitimate medical research. Research on new drugs is a multibillion dollar industry in several different countries. But there is a dearth of well statistically controlled studies of the safety and effectiveness of LSD for any purpose. Indeed, medical research more often pursues the issue of how to help emergency room patients who appear for treatment of psychotic symptoms triggered by illicit use of LSD.
On the specific issue of programmer or scientist creativity and productivity, that too is a much researched field, but again there are not well controlled studies showing that anyone increases productivity or creativity in any occupation while using LSD. The checkered academic career of Timothy Leary is instructive in this regard. What research shows makes a huge difference in the productivity and work quality of programmers and scientists is steady deliberate practice building up problem-solving skills and growth mindset, along with accumulation of domain-specific knowledge.
It's worth noting that Timothy Leary espouses some silly shit, and I'm not sure he improves the perceived legitimacy of psychotropics, despite his intentions.
Surely you're joking.. he talked about experimenting with LSD, marijuana, ketamine, and sensory deprivation tanks. After becoming a heavy drinker he said he eventually gave up alcohol because he didn't want to damage his brain.
Let me chime in here with some personal experience. I am pretty much addicted to marijuana in terms of working and enjoying it.
That is, I don't really enjoy programming nearly as much compared to when I am a bit baked. Mind you, I can work.. but it feels like such a chore (not always but I'm talking typically). There are a lot of us like this.
As for LSD.. I have had many revelations while tripping, some I've had to later reject (which is a difficult process) and probably some that I should but have not yet. However, have learned a tremendous amount from whatever it is that is happening while tripping.
I really think most people should trip their face off at least once. What it feels like is that you are tapping into something truer and deeper (when you are tripping, the hallucinating reality is the 'real' reality, that is how you experience it). I don't know what is actually happening, but it can be just absolutely amazing, or absolutely devestating.
Take for instance, having an intellectual idea of the universe; like what it actually is. Some people are fascinated by thinking about these things anyway, others can't be bothered.
Now imagine, instead of having some mathematical and intuitive understanding of the 'building blocks' of the universe.. you were thrown into hyperspace and pulled of your body and shown what the universe is, and what your place in it is. And it's a truly beautiful, elegant thing. And many many people have seen the same thing (it's the universal 'mystical experience').
It's like you were pulled out of the matrix, if just for a bit, and you can actually talk to other people about it, because it happens to lots of people who trip.
Whether it is actually giving insight or not (it could definitely be some idiosyncratic interaction that lsd is having with your brain to make you see things in a certain way); it's at the very least fun, and can have a drastic effect on the way you oritent yourself toward reality.
It can also affect your mental processes--LSD has the effect (at least in me) of continually changing the level of abstraction I am thinking in. You see a situation, then you see the bigger picture of that situation, and on and on until your mind can't even fathom any thing anymore.
You set out to write a bash script to move some files, you suddenly realize an amazingly better way to do bash scripting, which makes you realize some basic change in the OS that would make UI 1000% friendlier, then you realize we shouldn't be using computers at all, then you realize you are here on earth for a purpose and you are wasting your life then your buddy is like--YO you're spacing off and the chain of thinking starts over.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Except for me, weed keeps pushing up the levels of abstraction (good for architecting software), but LSD makes things hypperreal. IMO, LSD should only be taken on a desolate beach at night, with people who are dear to you.
I've seen several and they are underwhelming. Those photos of glowing curtains of color are taken from space, here on earth they just look like dim green glow (brief explanation below). You are not missing anything, I promise you.
Most of the energetic particles from the Sun are deflected around the Earth by the magnetosphere, but some get trapped. Electrons trapped in the Earth's magnetic field (the magnetic mirror effect) are accelerated along the magnetic field toward the Polar Regions and then strike the gases into the upper layer of the atmosphere, called the ionosphere. In the ionosphere, the speeding electrons collide violently with gas atoms. This gives the gas atoms energy, which causes them to release both light and more electrons. In this way, the gases of the ionosphere start to glow producing the spectacle that we know as the auroras.
Variations in colour are due to the type of gas particles that are colliding. The most common auroral color, a pale yellowish-green, is produced by oxygen molecules located about 60 miles above the earth. Rare, all-red auroras are produced by high-altitude oxygen, at heights of up to 200 miles. Nitrogen produces blue or purplish-red aurora.
I really hope that anyone reading this doesn't heed this advice. I used to live in a smallish city in Canada where aurora borealis was a common nighttime event and every time I've been back and seen them again I've appreciated and been wowed by them more. The hubble telescope can produce for more detailed and composed pictures of the stars but they are nothing compared to the time I spent star gazing in the Atacama desert in Chile here on Earth. By not seeing the aurora borealis you definitely are missing something. Exactly how much is what you need to see by experiencing it for yourself.
Agreed. I saw the Aurora Borealis once whilst flying from the US to the UK - I happened to wake up and look out the window at just the right time and was absolutely mesmerised, just stared and stared until our heading changed and it was no longer in sight. I thought it was absolutely beautiful.
> You set out to write a bash script to move some files, you suddenly realize an amazingly better way to do bash scripting, which makes you realize some basic change in the OS that would make UI 1000% friendlier, then you realize we shouldn't be using computers at all, then you realize you are here on earth for a purpose and you are wasting your life then your buddy is like--YO you're spacing off and the chain of thinking starts over.
But let's be honest here: If your goal was to write the script, that sounds horribly unproductive.
But is your goal to write the script? Or is it to enjoy your time here on Earth?
If writing that script at that time made sense and you were enjoying it, nothing could stop you from doing it. If you were wasting time and an unfocused individual, you'd see that.
I think that the semantics behind the question implied end goal, as in is the ultimate goal of writing a bash script simply to write a bash script or is it something more, something beyond that? One would almost certainly reason that the answer must be the latter, yes?
Why? eof's comment was wonderfully open and honest, but jpk's response was true. In the description, it's not clear that the script even got written. Would you accept this result if you had hired a freelancer to write the script?
Right; you shouldn't be writing bash scripts while tripping :)
I was just giving an example many people here would be familiar with so I could actually go through examples of each 'new level.' The whole thinking pattern goes on over and over starting with new 'seeds' to abstract from.
Care to expand on that? Do you know something outside your mind? No, your mind is the knowledge, your mind is your truth and your reality. Your own perception is all that exists and you have no evidence outside of intuition (which is in the mind) for the existence of some extra-mental world.
"Whether it is actually giving insight or not (it could definitely be some idiosyncratic interaction that lsd is having with your brain to make you see things in a certain way); it's at the very least fun, and can have a drastic effect on the way you oritent yourself toward reality."
There is something seemingly objective about it though in that others seem to have very similar experiences.
If he feels like he's tapping in to something deeper, then isn't that enough? It's his experience after all. It doesn't require objective validation, does it?
From a great number of people's reports about their experiences while using psychedelics, they all seem to follow a common theme (things about opening their mind to God, communing with the great underlying themes of life, opening previously locked doors in their minds). If a plurality of people report having the same experience, then to me, that validates it.
Then there's the solipsist point of view, which is to say, it doesn't matter that someone else thinks you are deluding yourself, because all that is knowable is in your own mind, so you aren't capable of validating anything anyway.
Either way, the experience is validated, to one's self or to the world.
The experience which is validated by many independent tests is the feeling of tapping into something truer and deeper. I don't think the GP is questioning the feeling, just the actual truer, deeperness of it.
The question that scientists and other empiricists ask when considering ideas is not "is it true?" but "is it useful?"
Do people bring back useful (in the engineering sense) knowledge from their times tripping/rolling? Are they more likely to experience e.g., fruitful insights akin to Kekulé's vision of the benzene ring as an ouroboros, as a result of having consumed these drugs? If so, then the drugs may indeed live up to the claims that they grant access to "truer and deeper" levels of reality. Otherwise, their users are simply fooling themselves. (Although fooling yourself can prove useful; the almost universal belief in deities among humans fulfills some sort of purpose, though it is my belief that that purpose is no longer relevant.)
You're using the word 'useful' as a euphemism for 'practical,' and missing the point. You cannot expect to fully grasp a wholly subjective experience through a predominantly rational mindset. Better to simply discard the intellectual point of view for this topic and attempt to engage it otherwise.
Ultimately, all our experiences are subjective and we can't be sure that any of them are authentic. Perception is reality. LSD really makes this fact stand out.
Perception isn't reality. Incorrectly perceiving an oncoming car will prove this.
There are perceptions and there are facts. This is true whether the facts are easily knowable or not, and extends as much to the existence of God and other such questions as it does to the sum of two numbers.
Most drugs are not mind expanders, but blockage solvers. We care a lot about what others say and think. This is blocking our creativity. But you don't need drugs to solve this blockage. You can train yourself letting creativity flow and don't care about what other people say.
A simple method is to start extreme. I think this applies to both graphic creativity as for programming creativity.
There is a theory that the connection between the right and left hemisphere of the human brain has been diminishing over generations (The ancients used to audibly hear the voice of the gods, which was likely the right hemisphere, but that ability diminished around 4-5000 years ago).
I wonder if all these psychadelic drugs are doing is enhancing the communication between right and left, or perhaps suppressing the left such that the right takes greater charge? The left does, after all, have very narrow focus as opposed to the right, which processes greater but less focused patterns.
That's actually a very interesting biological question that I've never thought of before. It would be nice if the US would loosen its restrictions on testing of Schedule I drugs so that this could be studied more concretely with modern fMRI and so forth. (You'd think they'd be more understanding with LSD, they did run a program for 5 years where they unwittingly dosed people with the drug to no realized detriment...)
I tought exactly that, when I watched Jill Bolte Taylor's Ted talk.[1]
She tells her experience of getting stroke in her left brain, and many things were very similar to some of my psychedelic experiences.
This is a really interesting theory to me (and probably many others). Care to share some links, documentaries, or documents regarding this topic? Would love to know more.
I've read a few books over the years that touch upon the subject, but I don't remember anything online (It's been quite a number of years since I've visited the subject).
I do know that Colin Wilson subscribes to the theory, so some of his nonfiction works might be helpful (I seem to remember something in The Criminal History of Mankind).
I assume this is a reference to the 1976 book _The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind_, by Julian Jaynes.
Richard Dawkins wrote of it: “It is one of those books that is either complete rubbish or a work of consummate genius, nothing in between! Probably the former, but I'm hedging my bets.”
Interesting idea. As I understand it, most of these drugs take the place of existing neurotransmitters like seratonin, or modify their action on receptor sites.
Let me put forward a metaphor: you're currently experiencing reality indirectly, through an imperfect lens which throws into focus an internally coherent system of perceptions we might colloquially call a "seratonin hallucination". You could think of the changes that occur after taking e.g. LSD as replacing that lens with another one.
Is it a less accurate one? Almost certainly it's one less valuable in helping our ancestors adapt to the evolutionary pressures they faced than our normal neurochemistry; in terms of representing an "objective" reality though, there may be some ways in which it affords a more faithful depiction.
Or perhaps not; it's hard to say. I think the value lies not in the affordance of new and more authentic powers of perception, but in shaking up the assumptions we make about how objectively truthful our "normal" experiences might be.
Classical psychedelics like LSD tend to impart hallucinations which are reinterpretations of familiar objects: hearing a song in the sound of flowing water perhaps, rather than a disembodied voice dispensing commands; seeing a cloud as an intricate organism dripping with lacework skirts drifting in the eddies of an invisible current, rather than a creature standing in the middle of the room with no basis at all in reality.
Furthermore, it's generally pretty obvious to those involved that what they're seeing is an "hallucination"; the deliriants, such as scopalomine, are another story, and an altogether more terrifying class of drug.
Bicameralism's emphasis on bona fide auditory hallucinations, especially disembodied voices issuing commands, is quite distinct from the subjective experience of most psychotropics; the inhibited self-awareness and metareflective capacity described by the article - the "zombie mind" - is almost the opposite of a trip, where every perception seems saturated to the point of overflow with deep, often autobiographical, meaning.
What you're suggesting bears some similarity to the writings of Aldous Huxley:
""One explanatory model for the experiences provoked by hallucinogens is the "reducing valve" concept, first articulated in Aldous Huxley's book The Doors of Perception.[7] In this view, the drugs disable the brain's "filtering" ability to selectively prevent certain perceptions, emotions, memories and thoughts from ever reaching the conscious mind.""
In summary, I'd suggest that it's quite possible that inter-hemisphere communication is increased, but certainly so is the way the entire brain functions.
It is amazing what psychedelics can bring to the table. Once you step outside of the stream of consciousness society creates for us, it's tough to want to be apart of it again. You feel free. No longer a cog in the machine, but perhaps more an observer or tinkerer. I realized for myself that I no longer have to be a part of that. It is truly out of the box thinking. I find myself outside of the box and generally I'm trying to find the boundaries. This may or may not effect my programming abilities, but it definitely puts the time I have in this world into perspective. The ability to abstract and visualize connections between objects has most definitely increased since experimentation, but I'm not sure if that's a bi-product of myself programming more, or the drugs themselves. All I know is that I would never take those moments back, the bad and the good, as they have shaped who I am and what I strive to be.
There's no reason to attempt to prove (because you can't) or even speculate (because it doesn't matter) whether any of the "best" programmers anyone has or could suggest have done LSD or still do on a regular basis. However, I find it odd when people seem to insist that LSD is completely unnecessary or necessary to do things. Like it has been brought up before, Steve Jobs cites LSD as one of the most important experiences of his life. To rate it that highly would imply that he feels it somehow changed his psyche in such a way that it impacted who he is today. If that's the case, then you could (not concretely, but with good certainty) argue that LSD can have a positive effect on people's creativity. In fact, it does not actually matter whether it does or not so much as whether people perceive that it does (this could all be a placebo effect). Thus, the worst arguments that can be made on each end of the spectrum are that a) LSD is always unnecessary to foster innovation (Steve Jobs would argue it fostered his innovation in a way that wouldn't have happened if he hadn't tripped) and b) that everyone should do LSD at least once because it will enable them to accomplish more than otherwise possible. The choice is obviously personal and would work out beneficially for some and be fruitful for others. The important part is to remove the stigma of doing illicit drugs and to recognize that they can provide psychological benefits that are otherwise unrealizable OR acid can give you the best time you've ever had sitting on a couch. Most people that do it develop personal realizations that don't extend beyond themselves and that's all. It would be nice if people stopped passing judgment on those who belong to the other camp and instead offered their insights into why they have or haven't felt compelled to do acid. (Full disclosure: I've tripped about a dozen times over the last four years)
I don't know that Steve Jobs is creative as much as he is an unrelenting perfectionist. He doesn't design things, Apple's recent success comes mostly from his ability to say "No, that's not good enough. Try again."
Maybe his confidence to do that comes from having experienced some sort of revelations or profound experiences on LSD that make "good, but not good enough" products seem even more mundane and pedestrian to him.
That's a good point, although I would argue that he is in fact extremely creative. However, his creativity isn't physically manifest. It lies in his ability to translate abstract ideas about UX paradigms into devices. You're right though, LSD could have / may have given him a new conception of what is "perfect" that led to a his particular brand of perfectionism.
I'm very sorry to hear about your friend and his drugs abuse however this statement is pure speculation. I don't find drug abuse to be a convincing argument for prohibition - in the US, it has only escalated violence and addiction rates. There are obviously negative ways to use drugs. The article is about a positive way.
I don't want to sound callous -- I'm sorry for your loss, that sounds awful -- but your comment doesn't give enough context to gain any insight. It just sounds like "drugs are bad, mkay."
The problem is that some people can't handle LSD or other hallucinogens and won't know until they are dead, hurt, or mentally screwed. It's this risk that makes them bad.
Some people aren't capable of healthy romantic relationships and will cause and experience a lot of pain through trying to have them. Should we stop everyone from trying because some percentage will end up in abusive situations, or with broken hearts, or even dead? Risk alone doesn't make something bad, just risky. The question is if the potential rewards make the risks worthwhile, and the answer for LSD for many is clearly yes. Learning how to deal with risk is just part of life.
I'm very sorry about your friend. While LSD can provide great rewards, it is emphatically NOT for some people, or situations, or moods, or stages of life. It is extremely powerful and requires care and respect.
Of course, the same could be said for driving a car, having children, and a lot of other things that can make life better. Research and education are the proper responses to such risks and dangers, not banning the activity for everyone.
That really sucks that your friend killed himself. Having lived through it, maybe you know for sure LSD was the reason he did it. But perhaps he was covering up something else.
If I killed myself today, not a whole lot of people would know why. They might attribute it to something they knew about, but very, very few people know about the thing that makes me want to kill myself.
So what I'm saying is maybe you're right - I certainly have no idea why your friend killed himself, but maybe it could have been something that was devouring his mind that he kept covered up.
Or: One of my best friends committed suicide at age 32 in 2005. I think LSD was not part of his life, so I am sure that is not why he killed himself. Anyway, you get the point.
People die, sometimes I wonder why.
I am alive. I doubt I would be if I hadn't taken LSD at the right time.
(not trying to invalidate your argument at all, btw. and I am not saying that LSD is the only way or the best way it could happen. But it's the way how it did happen.)
why did you think it was more related to mdma versus an amphetamine? i remember when i saw limitless the first time, i kept thinking 'is this movie just about adderall and vyvanse?'
I've heard stories about people who were able to solve problems faster -- and tackle much bigger problems in their head -- while rolling. In fact they recommended using the drug for this purpose rather than just taking it and dancing at a rave or something, because the latter increases the risk that your brain will burn out. A bit like flooring it in neutral vs. flooring it in gear.
I had the same reaction as grandparent, so that's a good question. In my case, maybe it's just because it's the closest drug I've used that matches the description from the movie and I've never tried other amphetamines.
The bright blue skies and sun dappled leaves. The pronounced extroversion and talkativeness that makes you think you're a suave genius. The fearlessness. Like Jay-Z said, "MDMA has you feeling like a champion." MDMA is an amphetamine, so presumably all amphetamines may share these traits. If Adderall does it quite to the same degree as MDMA, I envy diagnosed sufferers of ADHD.
I've taken MDMA (Molly) and Adderall, separately. MDMA was good every time. The Adderall only gave me sweaty palms and the inability to stay seated. They don't compare to each other, at least for me.
My sole, true goal in life has been to attain deepest levels of consciousness, connectedness with the being, and crystal clear clarity and to do so without external dependencies like drugs.
I have struggled a lot with the odds and gotten only a few moments of what I am after. But I realized one thing in the process that it requires quite a bit of unlearning, forgiving, accepting, non-reacting and seeing it as it is.
I still haven't lost any amount of belief in the feasibility of my experiment as I have gone closer to it - the fact that the degree and duration of my experience can be controlled by me alone is a powerful realization.
Out of curiosity - do you ever drink wine with a meal? Have a beer with friends? Sip coffee discussing exciting new projects or dissecting a problem?
These are all "drugs". Anything we put into our body, food or otherwise, is a "drug" and serves to alter us in some way.
You will always have "external dependencies". You are dependent on food and water to live, social interaction to love and to feel friendship, and other humans to make your life possible through manufacture, farming, and medical care, among other things.
We all have external dependencies. One of the beauties of ingesting hallucinogens is that this is the first realization you will likely have.
I used to drink occasionally, of course. But I have been consciously cutting my artificially created dependencies wherever I can.
There is a big difference between dependency on food and dependency on beer for example. Need vs. Want. I don't need beer to survive, I do need water. Beer I will use to lighten up, enjoy - water to satisfy thirst and keep the body working. Drugs fall in mind made wants. Taking drugs to set yourself free of bonds and compulsions that kill your being, joy, clarity - that's illogical - you are trading one dependency for other.
I am not sure what you are getting at. Why is your focus on giving up - mine is on not letting it matter. I am not claiming to have given up on food - giving up is not what I am trying to do - my focus is happiness with understanding and minimalism. Minimalism does not equate to starving yourself to death. It involves doing everything "needful" without attachment or false pretenses or expectations. Doing nothing extraneous.
I am also not claiming to have been 100% done - it's my steady journey towards that goal that I was sharing. It's all about changing gradually with full understanding instead of looking at it as a means to some end.
GP: "and to do so without external dependencies like drugs."
Are you reading this as "without (any) external dependencies, for example, drugs"?
That is a bit silly (as you're trying to point out).
Try "without external dependencies similar to drugs" (i.e., chemical substances that may dramatically alter physical & mental operation and are not at all required to lead a healthy life).
Rule of thumb -- if you find yourself explaining to someone that "you need food and water to live" or something else similarly basic, you've either misunderstood their point, or are talking to a 4-year-old. :)
I disagree. They're illustrative more than condescending, similar to your "rule of thumb".
The idea is that we alter our bodies through external actions in innumerable ways all the time. The idea that "drugs" are somehow different and not part of the human experience strikes me as an oversimplification.
It reminds me of people who don't like things with "chemicals" in them. Chemicals are in everything... and food is the ultimate drug.
It was written during the brief period in Ram Dass' life when he wasn't taking LSD. He returned to the practice shortly thereafter, because he found that he needed the insight to stay on the path he had set for himself.
Also, Neem Karoli Baba never took the LSD; he performed a magician's pass and hid it in his clothing. So all that nonsense about his guru taking 900 mikes and not changing consciousness was just that, nonsense.
NK Baba later ground the LSD up with some holy ash and gave it to his closest disciples, who were blown away by the holiness and power of his darshan, no doubt.
Reference: the interview with Ram Dass in Zig Zag Zen.
A related excerpt from BBC Horizon documentary on Psychedelic Science with interviews including Micrsoft's Bob Wallis on the use at the Homebrew Computer Club and Kary Mullis (who claims that LSD was intrumental in the development of the Polymerase chain reaction) :
I'm a bit shocked here about people who expect LSD to make people code better or create better art and if it does not they complain it is "not effective".
Things like LSD (or meditating, running, ...) allow you to to get your mind into a state that enables you to look behind nature, people, society and everything else. It's not a productivity tool and should not be used as such I think :-)
Is this really a matter of discovering new patterns? Aren't those patterns just mutations and combinations of already-known patterns?
In that case, wouldn't a better process be to expose yourself to new experiences, especially those that challenge you or take you out of your comfort zones? How about reading books and watching movies you have not viewed before? That would have a similar effect, right?
>expose yourself to new experiences, especially those that challenge you or take you out of your comfort zones?
I haven't, and am not saying you should, merely pointing out that you seem to object on principle rather than for a reason. Drug "education" when I was in grade school amounted to massive scare tactics, usually without supporting evidence, while they now give you similar things for ADD (but you pay a hell of a lot more, and the chemicals have only existed for a few years). There's a lot of general, unsubstantiated fear in this area, and a lot of irrational trust in drug companies.
I've had a relatively drug-free life, although I've often volunteered to be the sober friend while everyone else imbibes. I've never regretted it, I've had some great times not on drugs.
But if you've ever seen Little Miss Sunshine, the grandfather has a perspective on drug use that I've adopted wholeheartedly:
Don't you start taking that shit. When you're young, you're crazy to do that stuff.
What about you?
I'm old! When you're old, you're crazy not to do it.
I agree, with my proven addictive personality (i'm a smoker!), I'm terrified of morphine (and less pure versions), I have been in situations where the big bad H or opium was offered but have always refused not because I was really afraid of harm or of legality but because I was afraid that I would like it too much. I've long held to the morbid fact that as soon as I get my cancer/heart-failure/other terminal diagnosis, then I'll be starting Opium use with gusto!
306 comments
[ 656 ms ] story [ 1177 ms ] threadAfter 1971 Erdős also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdős won the bet, but complained that during his abstinence mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine use.
Here's another reported success: "Use of LSD-25 for Computer Programming" by Dennis R. Wier http://www.maps.org/news-letters/v18n1/v18n1-MAPS_24.pdf (Previously on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=654168 )
Larger doses work differently, and less directly for me. They tend to help me gain greater perspective on my life and my work. It can give me a renewed energy and excitement for what I am doing, or, conversely it can help me realize that I am on the wrong track, and will motivate me to make changes that help me live a more fulfilling life. I often end a strong experience with so much energy that I can't wait for the next day to begin so I can put into action everything I had been thinking about. I code vastly better when I have a deep understanding about why I am coding.
As with anything, these experiences have diminishing returns, so spacing them out over years has helped me keep them 'productive'.
I've given dex to other programmers on occasion; they're often amazed at how much it helps them concentrate and get things done.
It's kind of like coffee that WORKS.
Hence my favourite programming beverage: grind your beans, sprinkle finely powdered amphetamine on the top of the basket, and make yourself a nice motherfuckiato.
That's mighty addictive stuff, for someone with the wrong combination of genetics and psychology, this could be really bad.
The drug war is full of nonsense - but amphetamines are regulated for a good reason.
[0] http://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=84954
There are creative aspects to programming, and you might gain some insights that are applicable, but I'd save the implementation till you come down unless the dose was rather small.
One sketch pad had a long black squiggle on it, the same design you'd make if you fell asleep while holding a pen to paper, and the rest had even less (One was literally two 1" lines forming a 90 degree angle). The next day they described the night as a huge success even though they never really attained any of their stated goals.
I don't doubt they had a good time, but seeing them utterly fail to use the drug as a tool kinda makes me skeptical of the productive benefits.
As a side note, if you want your ego stroked then ask a student artist for his opinion of your work. In the two years I lived with artists not a single negative comment was spoken by a student of anyone else's work. It was a guaranteed self-congratulatory feedback loop.
You can't tell how much the person is getting out of the experience just by looking at them. They could just lie on the couch for ten hours with their eyes closed and be having one of the most profound experiences of their life. In fact, someone who is using the drug for introspection is almost certainly getting more out of the experience than someone who is using the drug to explore the world. Most serious psychonauts recommend taking the drug laying down in the dark while blindfolded to get the most out of it.
I mean think about it, you're about to have one of the five most important experiences of your life, on par with death or the birth of a child.[1] Do you really want to have that experience while in a movie theater watching Harold & Kumar?
[1] source: http://csp.org/psilocybin/
"Even at the 14-month follow-up, 58% of 36 volunteers rated the experience on the psilocybin session as among the five most personally meaningful experiences of their lives and 67% rated it among the five most spiritually significant experiences of their lives, with 11% and 17%, respectively, indicating that it was the single most meaningful experience, and the single most spiritually significant experience. Furthermore, 64% of the 36 volunteers indicated that the psilocybin session experience increased their sense of well-being or life satisfaction either moderately or very much, and 61% rated that the experience was associated with moderate to extreme positive behaviour change."
Research returns and is disappointed to find the pad empty and the subject unwilling to talk about his mother. The reason? He's just seen God and is busy drawing God on the wall.
So he utterly failed at his assigned task, but he had (arguably) achieved something far more important.
Psylocybin (however you spell it) actually tends to leak out through your sweat pores, so your dog was probably having just as fantastic of a time as you were.
When we did shrooms last time, we petted our cats for about an hour. Shortly after that, they went into the hallway and started chasing imaginary flies on the walls - leaping full-on into the wall, only to bounce off. They've been prone to that sort of thing ever since. :)
That said, I did perform a handful of solitary experiments where I would lock myself in my room with a programming assignment working non-stop for some 5-7 hours. The output was remarkable. But the drug was rough on my system and would take me days to recover.. so no more than once a month. Eventually stopped doing it altogether after a bad experience.
We would always make sure to have plenty of supplies. Art or otherwise. Pen and paper was probably the most difficult. The effects on your vision are pronounced and drawing can be... hard. I always enjoyed oil pastels the most. Thick and flowing pools of color. Man those were good times.
I was in art school at the time, and critique (the ability to give and receive) was one of the greatest things I walked away with. We would formerly critique on a regular basis in class.
> I don't doubt they had a good time, but seeing them utterly fail to use the drug as a tool kinda makes me skeptical of the productive benefits.
This is akin to coming onto a software project, seeing a huge tangle of grotesque code produced by some other programmer(s), and determining that the tools were at fault. In both cases it is not necessarily the wand, but perhaps the magician.
http://i.imgur.com/mhg4c.jpg
This was an 8 hour marathon of oil pastel madness. I was in my tiny apartment with 6-8 friends and literally spent the entire time engrossed in this thing. The background was the technique that I could never get back. This was a series of this basic type of drawing I did. There were 4 and this one I like the most. Gave one away to some chick I was seeing :/
http://i.imgur.com/HZ2yG.jpg
Bic pens have always been a favorite as well. These are actually meeting drawings from a fairly recent (sober) time, but are representitive of the drawings I don't want to go dig out and scan. My brain didn't do this prior to LSD ;)
I think the OP missed the point-- LSD isn't Aderall, it isn't something that makes you push out more. Rather, it can unlock doors that were perhaps holding you back.
There is a saying of a guru: "If something goes bad, just drop some more acid" but I am not sure if it is a good advice, only that it doesn't work with weed.
I'm all for anyone doing whatever they want with drugs, psychoactives in particular, but taking more is usually the wrong answer. Psychoactive drugs are not a cure-all or magic key that opens creative inspiration in uncreative types, just as much as taking Vicodin won't give you an erection lasting for more than 4 hours.
P.S. There is a huge amount of inefficient and even dangerous psychotherapy schools, and there is quite a lot of inefficient stuff in "NLP", that's why I recommend exactly the above techniques.
To make this germane to hacking: I'm kind of baffled that peer code review isn't the cornerstone of this industry. No one works best in a bubble, and everyone has something to teach and to learn.
One last thought -- context for feedback matters. It's a helpful, kind, human thing to do to give someone some helpful encouragement, even when it hasn't been earned yet.
It is. In safety critical situations. In situations where millions are at stake for a few hours of downtime.
Also, art is meant to be examined - that is its primary purpose. Source code, not so much.
It's just that the Internet is home to a lot of people that believe rationalism is the only valid way to perceive the universe, when in reality it is just one way to do so. Personally, I found myself unhappy when I restricted myself to it. The universe seemed cold, empty, and cruel. I think a lot of people hit this stage and then just give up completely.
It's really sad.
I don't agree that source code is not meant to be examined ( but maybe we work in totally different fields ). I regularly read source code from my coworkers, and they regularly have to read mine. Often, the developer who wrote the code is not available for questions, or isn't with the company any longer. My own code might as well have been written by another developer if I look at it after about a year. All these issues could be mitigated or muted by another set of eyes, either by sharing the knowledge ( "Why did Bob do this?" might be answered by someone else who'd reviewed the code ) or by asking the questions initially ( "Bob, why did you do it that way?" Bob: "Because of X -- I'll leave a comment in the source ).
Richard P. Gabriel has been advocating an MFA program for hackers. I don't think it's gotten off the ground yet.
Then I took some mushrooms with a pen and paper in hand. All I could draw was stupid smiley faces. It was just inane gibberish.
So yeah, I guess there is a bit of a myth about LSD and creativity... at least anything that involves fine motor skills and concentration. In this context it was a creativity killer.
There is a distinct diregression, regression, and then a peak of intense beauty.
http://www.entheology.org/edoto/anmviewer.asp?a=295&z=4
http://www.google.com/search?q=alex%20grey&tbm=isch
A friend of mine tried to program while on Salvia (I gave him the programming problem to solve: basically implement Solomon Golombs self-describing sequence) and as he scribbled notes on paper, he kept muttering phrases like "what is she saying to me now". We didn't check the results until the next morning, but it turned out he had figured out an O(1) closed form for the sequence - it was very simple and very fast. He claimed a woman told him the answer.
I have since searched for good solutions to the same problem and the only thing I could find that is better than O(n) is a 70's paper on the sequence. The solution in the paper was complex (I didn't understand it - actually, I don't know if it even came up with a closed form or not...), certainly not as short and simple as the one my friend came up with. Sadly, we didn't think much of it and didn't write it down - which, of course, means I have no proof to back this story up[1]. Still, it was a pretty strange and interesting thing to witness.
[1] We also only tested it with a handful of numbers and did not make any attempt to formally prove its correctness, so its not impossible that it was just coincidence that it worked for the test inputs (we only verified low input numbers against the naive implementation). Still, I like to think it was a full solution.
Anyway, not enough to convince me.
Edit: of course, I would like to know more :)
Having said that, I obviously simplified the story and I have a pretty good theory of how he came up with the solution (since I now know the guy a lot better). I actually think he has a very very slight case of autism (never diagnosed, but over the years, there have been some hints that it may be the case). I of course don't believe that a woman actually told him the solution, I think the autism is what helped him come up with it (since properly autistic people are able to do some amazing things) and the drug made him trip out and believe a woman spoke to him.
As for not believing that somebody could do things on Salvia, I disagree. Normally I don't like to admit to drug use on the internet (since its easy to figure out who I am), but what the hell. Maybe I'll come to regret it later... While I haven't taken any in a few years, I have taken Salvia many times over the past ten-ish years (and I took it that night with my friend too). I have taken it in the middle of the day, in the sun. I have taken it at night, in a dark room. I have taken it at a party (despite people saying its not a party drug). Each time the experience was very very different. It depends on your surroundings and on your mood. Yes, salvia is extremely intense and gives a very disconnected experience, but I think the actual extent depends on the factors I mentioned above. For example, every time I took it at night, it was a very weird and "heavy" experience, but when I took it in the sun, it was a bright and happy (almost mdma-like) experience.
I don't know if you get this on Salvia, but most people I have spoken to about it have said they experienced something similar. When on Salvia, theres this feeling of "pressure" pulling you into the experience (often its a feeling of something pushing or pulling you some direction, perhaps spinning around, falling or weightlessness). I've got this every time (that I remember, there may have been times when I didn't that I don't remember). Every time I've tried to resist it and go against it, I broke out in heavy sweats. When we did the programming problem, it took a LOT of effort to resist it to write in the notepad. After a few minutes, I gave in and forgot about the notepad (skin soaked with sweat). I guess my friend was able to resist it more than I was. But. honestly, I don't remember the exact details, nor do I remember anything about the trip I had or what I wrote in my own notepad, since my friends was much more interesting and this happened maybe five or six years ago.
My point is that it is hard to resist it, but its not impossible (at least, for a while) and while resisting it, you can be tripping and still do things (well, kind of). But, at the end of the day, if you don't believe me, thats fine. Maybe you can try it for yourself? Just be aware that (in my experience) there will be an intense "pressure" pulling you away from what you're trying to do and you may have to try pretty hard to resist it.
The woman part was the interesting part to me because thats something recurrent, the presence of a woman (maybe not a woman, but a femenine entity)
I get the pressure while on the effect, and most of the people I have seen smoking extract here at home do too (some just getting pulled to a specific direction, others feel a rotating force). Not everyone gets the same physical effects but a lot of it is common. Something that happens to me that so far only one friend has shared is being split in two (we feel it on the tongue, the nose, the chest, the whole body, left is separated from right).
But the physical aspects of the experience are not what I find problematic for trying to do something like scribbling, it is the mental aspect. Do you even know that you are under the effects before they are already fading out? do you remember that you wanted to scribble? do you know who are the people there with you? mm.. do you even know that there are people there?
How did you guys (in your experiment) consume it? smoked extract? smoked leaves? chewing leaves?
After such positive results, did you ever try the experiment again? if not, why not? (if I had such experience I would like to try more and more)
The pressure aspect is very interesting. As far as I remember, I've always had it, but it varied each time. I've never experienced the splitting in two; that would certainly be strange. I remember one trip where it felt like I was slowly rotating, so that roughly 50% through the trip I was upsidedown. When I rotated the full way and was upright again, I instantly snapped out of it. I often had those kind of "when X happened, I instantly snapped out" experiences actually (another time I was walking around and it felt like I was falling (the pressure) away from where I took salvia (in a car), bouncing off people to get back "up" to where I was and when I got back, I sat into the car and the door shut, I snapped out of the trip).
Hmm, good point. Honestly, it was too long ago and I don't remember. I do remember that after a little while I gave up and dropped the pen. As for knowing if there are people or not, I've had different experiences each time - sometimes I forgot about people completely and was lost in my own world, other times the people were there with me (eg, the car trip I mentioned above, I was interacting with people and it felt like I was bouncing off them to get back to the car, kind of like being the ball in a pinball machine).
I've only ever smoked extract, usually in a pipe (the other times in a bong). I have smoked different strength extracts, the weakest being either 5 or 10x, the strongest being perhaps 50x and most often 30 or 35x. I have never tried it any other way (due to availability). I don't remember what strength it was that night or if we used a pipe or bong.
I didn't try it again. Thinking about it now, I really don't know why, it seems obvious that I should have, yet somehow it never ocurred to me to do it again. We thought it was a bit of a laugh really, which is probably why we didn't put any effort in recording the solution. Kicking myself now, of course. I remember that day we were doing projects for class or soemthing, so perhaps thats why we decided to program on it, while other days we wouldn't have been, but we did a lot of random programming, so I don't think thats why. I don't have a good answer for it really. Then over time I ended up taking salvia less and less until I stopped altogether, for no other reason than that I just didn't feel like it. Then they banned most formerly-legal drugs here, so now I don't think I can even get any anymore (afaik anyway, I never actually checked after most headshops were closed down here). I kinda want to repeat the experiment now!
I was kinda hoping you were going to run with that and turn that into a "green eggs and ham" tribute poem.
On one of the very few occasions I used it, I had what I thought was a profound understanding of how everything in the universe was connected together. I couldn't recall what the big idea was afterwards (or to this day), but I'm quite certain it was just my brain making up nonsense.
http://matrixmasters.net/archive/TerenceMcKenna/215-McKennaT...
Alternatively, listen to Alicia Danforth's amazing talk on giving psilocybin to terminal cancer patients to ease end of life anxiety:
http://vimeo.com/10931182
[1] http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3984.0
The best programmers in the world -- those who work together to solve the most complex and aggressive problems asked of the human mind -- are those who come to work every day, solve problems, and write code, and go home. They don't spend their time justifying "lifehacks" like taking LSD for that extra "edge" over other programmers.
How do you know? That is what I asked, and you haven't answered me. You're making assertions about the best programmers in the world that you can't possibly back up. How do you know that some of them don't take LSD?
They won't be exceptional programmers because of this, but being a professional and still being curious is not something hardly imaginable.
It's about wanting to know more and to expand your horizons for their own sake. Look at some of the "best programmers in the world". Lots of crazy beards in that group, right?
Either that or you've discovered some property of 'complex' problems that precludes the use of LSD to solve them. Otherwise, yes, it is less true (i.e. baseless and false).
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/06/writestuff.html
"But how much work the software does is not what makes it remarkable. What makes it remarkable is how well the software works. This software never crashes. It never needs to be re-booted. This software is bug-free. It is perfect, as perfect as human beings have achieved. Consider these stats : the last three versions of the program -- each 420,000 lines long-had just one error each. The last 11 versions of this software had a total of 17 errors."
Do you think that perfection, that stability, in the face of lives at risk for every mistake, is a suitable place to suggest that taking LSD could make them better? These are the best programmers in the world, by many standards. And they're not writing node.js servers and map-reduce queries, they're using billions of dollars of hardware to achieve manned space flight. And they don't take LSD.
"It's strictly an 8-to-5 kind of place -- there are late nights, but they're the exception. The programmers are intense, but low-key. Many of them have put in years of work either for IBM (which owned the shuttle group until 1994), or directly on the shuttle software. They're adults, with spouses and kids and lives beyond their remarkable software program.
That's the culture: the on-board shuttle group produces grown-up software, and the way they do it is by being grown-ups. It may not be sexy, it may not be a coding ego-trip -- but it is the future of software. When you're ready to take the next step -- when you have to write perfect software instead of software that's just good enough -- then it's time to grow up."
Says who? The article says 260 people worked on that part of the code. I'm sure they're all security-cleared and background-checked up the wazoo, but i'd wager that more than a handful of those 260 have had psychedelic experiences at some point.
Do you have any experience of the challenges of spaceflight software to demonstrate that all problems are of "sub-mind-bending" difficulty?
EDIT: and among other things that I'd consider important to mention, there are significant robotics challenges, autonomous behavior and decision making (with associated problems in formal model verification), along with the general high degree of fault tolerance required in just about every software (and hardware) subsystem. I think many of the hardest problems in CS can be found in the spaceflight domain.
Such a broad statement strikes me as saying something akin to 'I can prove there is no God.' As much as I believe it to be true and want to see it proved, I just can't say for sure.
Psychedelics are an intense way of doing this.
On the specific issue of programmer or scientist creativity and productivity, that too is a much researched field, but again there are not well controlled studies showing that anyone increases productivity or creativity in any occupation while using LSD. The checkered academic career of Timothy Leary is instructive in this regard. What research shows makes a huge difference in the productivity and work quality of programmers and scientists is steady deliberate practice building up problem-solving skills and growth mindset, along with accumulation of domain-specific knowledge.
http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/course/6/6.055/readings/eric...
I rest my case.
source: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-17/tech/steve.jobs.life_1_ap...
That is, I don't really enjoy programming nearly as much compared to when I am a bit baked. Mind you, I can work.. but it feels like such a chore (not always but I'm talking typically). There are a lot of us like this.
As for LSD.. I have had many revelations while tripping, some I've had to later reject (which is a difficult process) and probably some that I should but have not yet. However, have learned a tremendous amount from whatever it is that is happening while tripping.
I really think most people should trip their face off at least once. What it feels like is that you are tapping into something truer and deeper (when you are tripping, the hallucinating reality is the 'real' reality, that is how you experience it). I don't know what is actually happening, but it can be just absolutely amazing, or absolutely devestating.
Take for instance, having an intellectual idea of the universe; like what it actually is. Some people are fascinated by thinking about these things anyway, others can't be bothered.
Now imagine, instead of having some mathematical and intuitive understanding of the 'building blocks' of the universe.. you were thrown into hyperspace and pulled of your body and shown what the universe is, and what your place in it is. And it's a truly beautiful, elegant thing. And many many people have seen the same thing (it's the universal 'mystical experience').
It's like you were pulled out of the matrix, if just for a bit, and you can actually talk to other people about it, because it happens to lots of people who trip.
Whether it is actually giving insight or not (it could definitely be some idiosyncratic interaction that lsd is having with your brain to make you see things in a certain way); it's at the very least fun, and can have a drastic effect on the way you oritent yourself toward reality.
It can also affect your mental processes--LSD has the effect (at least in me) of continually changing the level of abstraction I am thinking in. You see a situation, then you see the bigger picture of that situation, and on and on until your mind can't even fathom any thing anymore.
You set out to write a bash script to move some files, you suddenly realize an amazingly better way to do bash scripting, which makes you realize some basic change in the OS that would make UI 1000% friendlier, then you realize we shouldn't be using computers at all, then you realize you are here on earth for a purpose and you are wasting your life then your buddy is like--YO you're spacing off and the chain of thinking starts over.
Or the woods, or a psychedelic show in the woods :)
Most of the energetic particles from the Sun are deflected around the Earth by the magnetosphere, but some get trapped. Electrons trapped in the Earth's magnetic field (the magnetic mirror effect) are accelerated along the magnetic field toward the Polar Regions and then strike the gases into the upper layer of the atmosphere, called the ionosphere. In the ionosphere, the speeding electrons collide violently with gas atoms. This gives the gas atoms energy, which causes them to release both light and more electrons. In this way, the gases of the ionosphere start to glow producing the spectacle that we know as the auroras.
Variations in colour are due to the type of gas particles that are colliding. The most common auroral color, a pale yellowish-green, is produced by oxygen molecules located about 60 miles above the earth. Rare, all-red auroras are produced by high-altitude oxygen, at heights of up to 200 miles. Nitrogen produces blue or purplish-red aurora.
Wow I would hate to have your perspective.
The Northern Lights are breathtakingly beautiful, considerably more wonderful than what you're seeing in photos, do not listen to this person.
But let's be honest here: If your goal was to write the script, that sounds horribly unproductive.
If writing that script at that time made sense and you were enjoying it, nothing could stop you from doing it. If you were wasting time and an unfocused individual, you'd see that.
Yes. Because if you are writing a script, it obviously serves a purpose.
I was just giving an example many people here would be familiar with so I could actually go through examples of each 'new level.' The whole thinking pattern goes on over and over starting with new 'seeds' to abstract from.
It might feel like you are tapping into something truer and deeper, but that doesn't mean that you are.
"Whether it is actually giving insight or not (it could definitely be some idiosyncratic interaction that lsd is having with your brain to make you see things in a certain way); it's at the very least fun, and can have a drastic effect on the way you oritent yourself toward reality."
There is something seemingly objective about it though in that others seem to have very similar experiences.
Then there's the solipsist point of view, which is to say, it doesn't matter that someone else thinks you are deluding yourself, because all that is knowable is in your own mind, so you aren't capable of validating anything anyway.
Either way, the experience is validated, to one's self or to the world.
Do people bring back useful (in the engineering sense) knowledge from their times tripping/rolling? Are they more likely to experience e.g., fruitful insights akin to Kekulé's vision of the benzene ring as an ouroboros, as a result of having consumed these drugs? If so, then the drugs may indeed live up to the claims that they grant access to "truer and deeper" levels of reality. Otherwise, their users are simply fooling themselves. (Although fooling yourself can prove useful; the almost universal belief in deities among humans fulfills some sort of purpose, though it is my belief that that purpose is no longer relevant.)
There are perceptions and there are facts. This is true whether the facts are easily knowable or not, and extends as much to the existence of God and other such questions as it does to the sum of two numbers.
Do you dispute that facts are also perceptions?
A simple method is to start extreme. I think this applies to both graphic creativity as for programming creativity.
They also call it "out of the box" thinking.
I wonder if all these psychadelic drugs are doing is enhancing the communication between right and left, or perhaps suppressing the left such that the right takes greater charge? The left does, after all, have very narrow focus as opposed to the right, which processes greater but less focused patterns.
[1] http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke...
I do know that Colin Wilson subscribes to the theory, so some of his nonfiction works might be helpful (I seem to remember something in The Criminal History of Mankind).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameralism_(psychology)
Richard Dawkins wrote of it: “It is one of those books that is either complete rubbish or a work of consummate genius, nothing in between! Probably the former, but I'm hedging my bets.”
http://deoxy.org/alephnull/jaynes.htm
There's a few related pages worth reading:
http://deoxy.org/alephnull/rhetd.htm
Let me put forward a metaphor: you're currently experiencing reality indirectly, through an imperfect lens which throws into focus an internally coherent system of perceptions we might colloquially call a "seratonin hallucination". You could think of the changes that occur after taking e.g. LSD as replacing that lens with another one.
Is it a less accurate one? Almost certainly it's one less valuable in helping our ancestors adapt to the evolutionary pressures they faced than our normal neurochemistry; in terms of representing an "objective" reality though, there may be some ways in which it affords a more faithful depiction.
Or perhaps not; it's hard to say. I think the value lies not in the affordance of new and more authentic powers of perception, but in shaking up the assumptions we make about how objectively truthful our "normal" experiences might be.
Classical psychedelics like LSD tend to impart hallucinations which are reinterpretations of familiar objects: hearing a song in the sound of flowing water perhaps, rather than a disembodied voice dispensing commands; seeing a cloud as an intricate organism dripping with lacework skirts drifting in the eddies of an invisible current, rather than a creature standing in the middle of the room with no basis at all in reality.
Furthermore, it's generally pretty obvious to those involved that what they're seeing is an "hallucination"; the deliriants, such as scopalomine, are another story, and an altogether more terrifying class of drug.
Bicameralism's emphasis on bona fide auditory hallucinations, especially disembodied voices issuing commands, is quite distinct from the subjective experience of most psychotropics; the inhibited self-awareness and metareflective capacity described by the article - the "zombie mind" - is almost the opposite of a trip, where every perception seems saturated to the point of overflow with deep, often autobiographical, meaning.
What you're suggesting bears some similarity to the writings of Aldous Huxley:
""One explanatory model for the experiences provoked by hallucinogens is the "reducing valve" concept, first articulated in Aldous Huxley's book The Doors of Perception.[7] In this view, the drugs disable the brain's "filtering" ability to selectively prevent certain perceptions, emotions, memories and thoughts from ever reaching the conscious mind.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen#Psychedelics_.28cl...
In summary, I'd suggest that it's quite possible that inter-hemisphere communication is increased, but certainly so is the way the entire brain functions.
Maybe his confidence to do that comes from having experienced some sort of revelations or profound experiences on LSD that make "good, but not good enough" products seem even more mundane and pedestrian to him.
Of course, the same could be said for driving a car, having children, and a lot of other things that can make life better. Research and education are the proper responses to such risks and dangers, not banning the activity for everyone.
If I killed myself today, not a whole lot of people would know why. They might attribute it to something they knew about, but very, very few people know about the thing that makes me want to kill myself.
So what I'm saying is maybe you're right - I certainly have no idea why your friend killed himself, but maybe it could have been something that was devouring his mind that he kept covered up.
What do we lose by not hearing your answer? What might we gain?
Your call, of course.
(not trying to invalidate your argument at all, btw. and I am not saying that LSD is the only way or the best way it could happen. But it's the way how it did happen.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xqcjNUqIAw
YouTube keeps deleting it, so in case link goes bad, just search for this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_%281998_film%29
Did anyone else look at the symptoms of the drug he took (the fictional "NZT-48") and think, "hmmm, sounds like a more extreme form of MDMA"?
Haven't tried it myself. Heard lots about it.
The bright blue skies and sun dappled leaves. The pronounced extroversion and talkativeness that makes you think you're a suave genius. The fearlessness. Like Jay-Z said, "MDMA has you feeling like a champion." MDMA is an amphetamine, so presumably all amphetamines may share these traits. If Adderall does it quite to the same degree as MDMA, I envy diagnosed sufferers of ADHD.
I have struggled a lot with the odds and gotten only a few moments of what I am after. But I realized one thing in the process that it requires quite a bit of unlearning, forgiving, accepting, non-reacting and seeing it as it is. I still haven't lost any amount of belief in the feasibility of my experiment as I have gone closer to it - the fact that the degree and duration of my experience can be controlled by me alone is a powerful realization.
Baba Ram Dass' book referenced in one of the comments on the wired site might be worth trying out - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00486UF8Y/ref=s9_simh_gw_p...
These are all "drugs". Anything we put into our body, food or otherwise, is a "drug" and serves to alter us in some way.
You will always have "external dependencies". You are dependent on food and water to live, social interaction to love and to feel friendship, and other humans to make your life possible through manufacture, farming, and medical care, among other things.
We all have external dependencies. One of the beauties of ingesting hallucinogens is that this is the first realization you will likely have.
There is a big difference between dependency on food and dependency on beer for example. Need vs. Want. I don't need beer to survive, I do need water. Beer I will use to lighten up, enjoy - water to satisfy thirst and keep the body working. Drugs fall in mind made wants. Taking drugs to set yourself free of bonds and compulsions that kill your being, joy, clarity - that's illogical - you are trading one dependency for other.
I am also not claiming to have been 100% done - it's my steady journey towards that goal that I was sharing. It's all about changing gradually with full understanding instead of looking at it as a means to some end.
That's some trivial reframing -- if you stopped eating food, it would start to matter.
Are you reading this as "without (any) external dependencies, for example, drugs"?
That is a bit silly (as you're trying to point out).
Try "without external dependencies similar to drugs" (i.e., chemical substances that may dramatically alter physical & mental operation and are not at all required to lead a healthy life).
Rule of thumb -- if you find yourself explaining to someone that "you need food and water to live" or something else similarly basic, you've either misunderstood their point, or are talking to a 4-year-old. :)
The idea is that we alter our bodies through external actions in innumerable ways all the time. The idea that "drugs" are somehow different and not part of the human experience strikes me as an oversimplification.
It reminds me of people who don't like things with "chemicals" in them. Chemicals are in everything... and food is the ultimate drug.
It was written during the brief period in Ram Dass' life when he wasn't taking LSD. He returned to the practice shortly thereafter, because he found that he needed the insight to stay on the path he had set for himself.
Also, Neem Karoli Baba never took the LSD; he performed a magician's pass and hid it in his clothing. So all that nonsense about his guru taking 900 mikes and not changing consciousness was just that, nonsense.
NK Baba later ground the LSD up with some holy ash and gave it to his closest disciples, who were blown away by the holiness and power of his darshan, no doubt.
Reference: the interview with Ram Dass in Zig Zag Zen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2WurhYEQyY [Flash video!]
Ha, maybe that works too ;)
Things like LSD (or meditating, running, ...) allow you to to get your mind into a state that enables you to look behind nature, people, society and everything else. It's not a productivity tool and should not be used as such I think :-)
In that case, wouldn't a better process be to expose yourself to new experiences, especially those that challenge you or take you out of your comfort zones? How about reading books and watching movies you have not viewed before? That would have a similar effect, right?
>expose yourself to new experiences, especially those that challenge you or take you out of your comfort zones?
I haven't, and am not saying you should, merely pointing out that you seem to object on principle rather than for a reason. Drug "education" when I was in grade school amounted to massive scare tactics, usually without supporting evidence, while they now give you similar things for ADD (but you pay a hell of a lot more, and the chemicals have only existed for a few years). There's a lot of general, unsubstantiated fear in this area, and a lot of irrational trust in drug companies.
But if you've ever seen Little Miss Sunshine, the grandfather has a perspective on drug use that I've adopted wholeheartedly:
Don't you start taking that shit. When you're young, you're crazy to do that stuff.
What about you?
I'm old! When you're old, you're crazy not to do it.