Aldous Huxley on Mescaline ( Interview ) 1961
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 พ.ย. 2020
- Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World, The Doors of Perception and Island gave a frank interview in 1961 in which he talked about a number of philosophical topics, including his use of the hallucinogenic compound mescaline.
The recording was released as a double LP vinyl in 1973 and later in CD format in 2002. Titled Speaking Personally, the CD is a treasured item in my collection. - เพลง
You only need mescaline once and it's miraculously permanent with amazingly enlightened calibration of one's mind.
As someone that has used many psychedelics for years, I completely understand him. Psychedelics prove to you undoubtedly that reality is a "construct" or illusion. Intelligent design basically. You don't know what it is but you at least now know that there is an order to the universe because you've seen it so that means everything must have a purpose, including evil.
Nope that's when you take too much and go crazy, reality is a illusion??? 😂 think you need to go to the psych ward bro
@@nemesis8626I had the same experience without mescalin, just by reading the Bible. You might want to pull your head out of your bazoo.
@@nemesis8626you've never taken a full dose
@@JoshuaLuellen-rg8xplol right bc i broke through for the first time yesterday (5meoDMT) and what @AngelFlores-bq4fd said about intelligent design, everything has been constructed and once you see it that's it.
@@nemesis8626 Have You tried psicodelics?
Thank you so much! Just started The Doors of Perception
Your in for a treat ! I must of read that so many times. It's not so long so it's perfect for my train commutes ✌️
Riders on the storm!
San Pedro whole plant is about being heart centred, it’s called The Grandfather. I think working with whole plant with great respect is very different to taking a synthetic pill. That said MDMA opened my mind to the power of truth, vulnerability and connection. The heard these two are similar. But where it’s grown, conditions, location, age, specie all vary. We are talking about a living thing.
Completely agree 100%. Medicine.
Thank you
All Right !
its a different medicine from Psilocybin or Lsd....Takes time to engage with this....and get to know ........Its quiet stimulative but sedative also and also Psychedelic......Seems to help Adhd.
The great American sacrament!
Amen Brother.
I find salvia divinorum to be most powerful psychedelic I have tried, I did it once I have no desire to do it again, Most psychedelics are like that. They are more spiritual in nature.
Jesus. I wouldnt call salvia psychedelic lol. Id call it a dilirient or. An A-typical hallucinogen. Not at all in any way like classic psychedelics. Every salvia exp i had i was thrown backwards by a gravitational force lol. And came to in a position such that youd think i was evading alien abductors lol. And its dangerous that way. Tied down***. Tie the person down*. Im dead serious*. Or have a large man capable of restraining a grown man lol
Psychedelics are not narcotics.
The law disagreed.
Psychedelics are mind manifesting medicines
The law calls cocaine a narcotic
Cocaine is the opposite of a narcotic
Well I meen it is narcotic by definition.. a narcotic is a drug or other substances that effects mood and behaviour and is also can be used recreationally. All of which Psychodelics can do and do do.. it is only because narcotics have been termed a "bad word" why you disagree with that, but factually psychodelics effect your mood and behaviour to a drastic measure actually
@joeladams2540 so cocaine doesn't effect your mood or the way you behave?
I have taken a lot …in fact far too much sometimes… you lean to respect your capacity to comprehend the universe can be very frightening if you take too much. It’s not a recreational drug unless your prepared to spend some time in psychiatric supervision in an ongoing way 😜😝😝😝
Don't mind me I'm just passing......🗝🚪🐌
He took synthetic mescaline not peyote like the illustration
Nice one Tim.
What he says is much broader than the title suggests
Right on. If you want to hear more let me know.
There is an image-processing issue between dimensionalities and art where the mathematical problems of dimensionality and representation remain unresolved and even outside of the so-called Big Questions that remain unanswered in science.
Although the rationale of perspective geometry can be applied to all visual products as an incontrovertible geometric fact of the height and width of the visual field, that zone of architectonic resolution remains beyond computable physics at this time, however because there is a geometric rationale to it, then surely it is something to be worked out, in the future at some stage.
Modern Art is the cultural simulacrum-as an attempt at that architectonic resolution, by whatever Wile E Coyote pursuit, nevertheless it is valid for being a fulcrum of experimentation towards that end.
In turn, that may have some research value with respect to computable physics, for better or worse.
podcast level audio quality lmao
You do know this was recorded in 1822 using two tin cans, chicken wire and mayonnaise right ?
@@PsyAmb I’ve heard a chicken/mayo ratio of 75-25 really ups the fidelity 😂😂😂
Rather hear Huxley as a crackly recording than some Dolbyesque dick with nothing to say.
good post, he reminds me of a character in "The Great Divorce"
insane asmr
I know, right?? I wonder why he does that only when he's speaking his native language, English!
1920s flappers were like the 1960s hippies a Stoned Age of wild sex and music.
I went to 11 dimensions using triple c's with weed and a small amount of whiskey ...
Peyote and Psilocybin mushrooms are sacred. The flesh of god.
I agree and are never easy to do, I amalways apprehensive to do but always glad I did
All Right capital A capital R I don't get that
Kind of iffy he was introduced to it by aleister Crowley ?
The beast loves mescaline
He was said to met Crowley in the 1930s, but there's no evidence that he was introduced to it by him. It's one of those unfounded rumours!
Not true. He met Crowley in the 1930's and Crowley was impressed by his intelligence. He was introduced to mescaline by English psychiatrist Humphrey Osmond in 1954
I wish someone introduced Huxley to the URANTIA.... Book!!! Im not against certain spiritual experiences allowed or enhanced with certain substances..... That being said.. The teachings of the Urantia book are as real as REAL Gets and can aid anyone looking for true spiritual guidance!
Forgive me my friend. I too blindly fell for the Urantia Book. I am also a Bible scholar. My intuition began speaking to me so I deeply researched the authors and history of the book. It's a brilliant hoax concieved by some incredible human beings. They took decades to prepare it's overwhelming effect upon it's readers. It isn't real at all. Give your will and life to Christ
Even aliens tremble at His name.
@@andyokus5735 You should smoke some of that yourself
Psychedelics teach you about the pointlessness of thoughts, and I imagine Aldous knew that which is why he supported krishnamurti. Wikipedia extract about Urantia: i knew In Paper 101, "The Real Nature of Religion," the authors write:[100]
We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries. These new developments we even now foresee, but we are forbidden to include such humanly undiscovered facts in the revelatory records. Let it be made clear that revelations are not necessarily inspired. The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired.
As pointed out by the likes of Martin Gardner, the science in The Urantia Book reflects the views that prevailed at the time the book originated.[101] The claim by the authors that no unknown scientific discoveries could be imparted can function as a ruse to allow mistakes to be dismissed later.[102] The appeal to convenience that post-1955 scientific knowledge is not being presented is consistent with a book written by humans in the 1950s instead of celestial beings with superior knowledge.[101]
Examples of criticisms regarding the science in The Urantia Book include:
The described formation of the Solar System is consistent with the Chamberlin-Moulton planetesimal hypothesis,[103] which though popular in the early part of the 20th century, was discarded by the 1940s after major flaws were noted.[104] The currently accepted scientific explanation for the origin of the Solar System is based on the nebular hypothesis.[103]
According to the book's descriptions, the universe is hundreds of billions of years old and periodically expands and contracts - "respires" - at 2-billion-year intervals. Recent observations measure the true age of the universe to be 13.8 billion years.[105] The book does not support the Big Bang theory.[106]
A fundamental particle called an "ultimaton" is proposed, with an electron being composed of 100 ultimatons. The particle is not known to be described anywhere else and the concept is at odds with modern particle physics.[107]
The Andromeda Galaxy is claimed to be "almost one million" light years away, repeating a systematic mistake in the measurements of the distance to galaxies made in the 1920s.[108] The galaxy is now known to be 2.5 million light years away.
The book repeats the mistaken idea that planets close to a sun will gradually spin slower until one hemisphere is left always turned to the sun due to tidal locking, citing Mercury as an example. Scientists at the time of the book's origin thought one side of Mercury always faced the Sun, just as one side of the Moon always faces the Earth. In 1965, radio astronomers discovered however that Mercury rotates fast enough for all sides to see exposure to the Sun.[106] Scientists further established that Mercury is locked in this spin rate in a stable resonance of 3 spins for every 2 orbits, and it is not slowing and so will never have one side left always turned to the Sun.[109]
Some species are said to have evolved suddenly from single mutations without transitional species.[110] The theory originated with Dutch botanist Hugo De Vries but was short-lived and is not now supported.[111]
The book erroneously says that a solar eclipse was predicted in 1808 by the Native American prophet Tenskwatawa. The eclipse actually was predicted in late April 1806 and occurred on June 16, 1806.[112] In 2009, the Urantia Foundation acknowledged the error and revised the book.[c]
Controversial statements about human races can be found in the book.[114] Gardner recounts that William S. Sadler also wrote eugenicist works that contain similar arguments to some ideas presented in The Urantia Book.[115]
While some adherents of the book believe that all of the information in The Urantia Book including its science is literally true, others accept that the science is not fully accurate.[116][117] For example, Meredith Sprunger, a liberal believer in The Urantia Book and retired minister of the United Church of Christ, wrote that research "has revealed that virtually all of the scientific material found in the UB was the accepted scientific knowledge of the period in which the book was written, was held by some scientists of that time, or was about to be discovered or recognized."[118][119] He further argued against its literal infallibility and said that fundamentalism over the book is "just as untenable as Biblical fundamentalism."[118]
@@MirageandReality I don't think anybody asked for a whole wikipedia page in the youtube comments, just send a link haha
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahyeaaaaaaa
@@sandytraveller85 Mescaline was the most beautiful trip I've ever had. And I've done them all.
Chromosomes