Talk:Psilocybin
You used "fambly" in the description. Are you an ICHC fan??-αmεσ (!) 19:46, 20 August 2007 (CDT)
- I dunno, what's ICHC? I've just alwiz speled it lik that. PS, glad to know someone is enjoying my edit summaries! humanbe in 19:57, 20 August 2007 (CDT)
- Mycology is for pleasure. tmtoulouse oppress 20:08, 20 August 2007 (CDT)
Contents |
[edit] Looking glass reference
Actually, it would appear the mushrooms referred to in the book are actually Fly Agarics (Amanita Muscaria), whose psychoactive chemicals are Ibotenic Acid and Muscimol, not Psilocybin. CrundyTalk nerdy to me 14:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- This seems like a classic example of reality and popular consensus diverging. Yeah, Carrol was not talking about psilocybin, but that has had remarkably little effect on whether or not Alice in Wonderland is an iconic piece of literature for the shrooms crowd. Or, put another way, the joke is considerably funnier than the pedantry. 71.88.35.24 (talk) 05:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Random BoNdroppings cut from article
"Actual psychedelic experiences and the like
Almost nothing you actually encounter in popular descriptions of experiences on psilocybin, LSD, or other psychedelics has any resemblance to reality. Actual psychedelic experiences tend to be more along the lines of a six hour free association exercise than a re-enactment of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Mostly, the key things to know are that hallucinations produced by psilocybin are very much distinguishable from reality, and that they rarely take the form of fully realistic and detailed visions of lizard people and the like. This, combined with the fact that they're expensive, nasty-tasting, and non-addictive, may the relative paucity of regular psilocybin users. It's almost like ingesting insect nerve poisons isn't as good an idea as it sounds on paper.
Psilocybin is also one of the textbook examples of societal lunacy regarding drug laws, being as it's non-addictive and basically impossible to overdose on, two traits it fails to share with widely legal drugs such as alcohol and tobacco. These arguments usually carry little actual political weight, however, because most of the people who are really invested in legalizing psilocybin are also the sorts of people who want to take lots of psychedelic drugs, which is to say, unusually easy to dismiss as nutjobs, often due to their being nutjobs."
Crap header. First sentence simply wrong. Rest of first paragraph just random emptiness. Second paragraph, how does one "overdose" on tobacco? Rest of second paragraph is so badly written it barely says what little it says. ħuman
05:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, well, I suppose we can trot out sources on the first sentence. My source is roughly "Well, none of the several times I've taken psilocybin have involved anything like what's depicted in any TV or filmic "psychedelic trip" I've ever seen, and were mostly just a sort of extended tendency to free associate and be really metaphysical." Feel free to fine-tune, but, I mean, to my mind, if I take my memory in one hand and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas in the other, they don't much resemble each other. In an article that is otherwise a bunch of jokes about real life Alice in Wonderland experiences, this seems like kind of useful information. As for the second paragraph, you are aware that nicotine is actually a really effective poison, right?
- I'm fairly sure that the depictions of trips in stuff like Fear and Loathing, Beavis and Butthead, Harold and Kumar, etc. are all meant for the benefit of the drugged-out viewers, and not to accurately display the effects of whatever drugs the characters may have taken. 199.195.109.134 (talk) 17:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not sure what to say about the writing style, as that mostly just seems like you complaining without actually saying anything. I mean, I think "Mostly, the key things to know are that hallucinations produced by psilocybin are very much distinguishable from reality, and that they rarely take the form of fully realistic and detailed visions of lizard people and the like," while possibly wordy (sorry, I have severe brain damage due to seven years of graduate education in the humanities) is, actually, a pretty straightforward and factual claim, as opposed to emptiness. I do, however, quite like "it barely says what little it says." Derrida would have a field day there. Feel free to propose a more clear wording of "People who complain about drug laws like to point out that psilocybin is, in most regards, much less dangerous than alcohol and tobacco. On the other hand, people who complain about drug laws tend to be habitual drug users that are generally ignored by people who make drug laws." 71.88.35.24 (talk) 06:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- I think there is a word missing here: may the relative paucity -- Nx / talk 06:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Good catch. 71.88.35.24 (talk) 06:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- I think there is a word missing here: may the relative paucity -- Nx / talk 06:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Psilocybin and the law
I feel like this section draws some questionable conclusions. It says if you argue psilocybin is relatively safe, you must not only use mushrooms but abuse them. Even if someone has used mushrooms, there's no reason to assume they've abused them to such an excess that they're incapable of critical thinking (not that this ins't a possibility).
Some people enjoy the drug's effects without attaching meaning and metaphysical explanations to their delusions, how does that make them nutjobs? — Unsigned, by: Nfrae / talk / contribs 05:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
[edit] "Reality" and things in between.
This line which reads: "Psilocybin, much like LSD and other psychedelics, is often portrayed in popular culture as being more intense and vivid than they are. In truth, hallucinations produced by psilocybin are very much distinguishable from reality..." is not true in every circumstance.
1. Doses of above 5 grams of P. cubensis can cause immersive experiences and total loss of "reality" (dosage may vary, depending from individual).
2. "Other psychedelics"? This is a hasty generalization. For example, the N,N dimethyltryptamine is just "another psychedelic", therefore; take one breakthrough dose, and good luck with distinguishing "real" from "not real" during the plateau of experience.