[[http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/28/why-were-early-psychedelicists-so-weird/][Why Were Early Psychedelicists So Weird? | Slate Star Codex]]

url

http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/28/why-were-early-psychedelicists-so-weird/

A fairly decent argument for not being as interesting as is within your capacity to become.

See Sacha Chua link from yesterday ¹ re competence trumping insight.

See also Ozy Brennan on insight porn - or, why social science speculation ought to be handled with extreme care, preferably by professionals. It generalizes rhymes with the feeling of me, personally, being called out on my love of big connection feeling.

I think this is only medium-risk; the explanation that weird people gravitate toward psychedelics, even in the sciences, is a strong one. But it’s sufficient that I am hesitant to repeat the common view that psychedelics are not at all dangerous, or that they have no permanent side effects. There seems to me at least a moderate chance that they will make you more interesting without your consent – whether that is a good or a bad thing depends on exactly how interesting you want to be.

Footnotes

Footnotes: