Just as long as we’re all perfectly clear that this is based upon your personal definition of insanity and not something silly like a clinical definition or diagnosis, sure, LSD causes insanity. Why? Because @Sage_Rat says so.
Oh, and I especially liked the unintended implication you make in this part:
Being happy is a sign that not only are you insane, but you are also in fact dead. Worse, it leads to some real fucked up logical conclusions. Like taking SSRIs to treat depression causes insanity. Oh, and death, must not forget the “you’re dead even if you’re still upright and mobile” part. Shit, do you know what this actually means? You’re back to agreeing with Elmo about self-medication of depression with ketamine:
Elon Musk, however, criticised the use of SSRIs, commonly prescribed for mental illness, stating concerns about their potential to “zombify” people.
There’s decent quality research to suggest that depressive people accurately understand reality and the non-depressed are deluding themselves with Pollyanna poppycock.
I do recall 1970s bumper stickers saying “Drugs are for people who can’t handle reality” which immediately triggered response bumper stickers saying “Reality is for people who can’t handle drugs”.
I can’t immediately say which is wisdom and which is sophistry.
I accept Sage_Rat’s take on colloqual insanity: IMHO believers in the Cosmic Coincidence Control Center (CCCC) with a Galactic substation called Galactic Coincidence Control (GCC) within which is the Solar System Control Unit (SSCU), within which is the Earth Coincidence Control Office (ECCO) are not necessarily shuffling a full deck of cards.
I accept the conclusions of Bouso et al that, “…regular use of psychedelic drugs could potentially lead to structural changes in brain areas supporting attentional processes, self-referential thought, and internal mentation. These changes could underlie the previously reported personality changes in long-term users and highlight the involvement of the PCC in the effects of psychedelics.” Thank you Sage_Rat for the citation.
I do not believe that being happy is a sign of insanity. Luckily nobody has argued this, AFAICT.
I have a light pickup truck. It won’t tow a plane or a tank full of commandos. But it is useful for moving gardening stuff and furniture, many weekly mundane tasks and I just like it and almost everything about it.
It is quiet, comfortable and has moderate gas mileage. I find it practical and fun to drive, it is great in the snow, and I would buy a similar model again. Sure, at an average given moment it is not used for those tasks.
A comparison with more modern versions may not be helpful. But I can certainly understand the appeal of the small truck, which never won over the overly hormonal subtype anyway. Musk is correct there may be a market there.
The US light pick-up was a great idea. As you say, the hormonal crowd was not impressed. IMO somebody could make a successful light truck & sell many. That they don’t is simply that the margins on bigger trucks are so lucrative the opportunity cost to make light trucks instead is insanely too big to withstand.
As I’ve said a couple times, Cybertruck ain’t that. It’s IMO a Hummer-killer, not a weekend DIY dude truck. Or a real working dude work truck.
Sure. But I’m happy to run Lilly’s ideas past any randomly selected panel and ask whether they think it came from a person of right mind or not. Clinicians involve themselves when a person is suffering because of their mental disconnect with the rest of the world. That’s definitional of mental illness. And, as such, we’ve had many debates over the years on these forums between the disconnect of the lay person’s understanding of “craziness” and the medical version, e.g.:
Most people consider you crazy if you say and believe things that are delusional, clinicians only call you that if it’s causing you harm.
You’re free to decide that the layperson’s definition isn’t meaningful. Personally, I think it’s the more reasonable version for this particular discussion because lots of people would prefer that their peers continue to think that they’re sane and, if they had reason to believe that might end, they’d consider the ramifications of continued use of hallucinogenic drugs more seriously.
Likewise, it might not be clinically relevant if your hair turned irreversibly purple because of some medicine that you’re taking. People would still prefer to know about that side effect before taking the pill.
Musk is talking about SSRIs, I’m talking about hallucinogens.
To give a better example, let’s agree that warfarin and heroin are wildly different drugs.
If I say that heroin will fuck up your life and Musk says that Warfarin will fuck up your life, we’re not basically saying the same thing. Sure, the end state that we’re talking about is the same, but that doesn’t mean that both statements are equally reasonable. Most research will show that warfarin is generally harmless and that heroin is generally harmful. One is genuinely likely to fuck you up and the other probably won’t.
Yes, Musk said that SSRIs will turn you into a zombie. That’s not the claim that I made about hallucinogens but, for the sake of argument, let’s say that I said the same thing. Why does what he said about SSRIs have any relevance to what I said about hallucinogens? Isn’t it more meaningful to use cited research as a measure of the reasonableness of statements than bizarre comparisons to things that Elon Musk said about other drugs?
And let’s say that there was some drug or procedure (e.g. a lobotomy) that really did turn you into a veritable “zombie” (a person living in a haze - not a person who tries to eat brains) and that this process was irreversible. Maybe you disagree that, that’s a form of death. I think we’d still both agree that it’s something that nearly everyone would rather avoid if they knew it was a plausible outcome.
An LSD, mushroom or DMT trip is also reality. Humans use drugs. Alcohol has been used since we came down from the trees. Ketamine is a relativly recent addition, but it is also reality.
Humans seek out altered states. Just ask any kid if they have spun around to make themselves dizzy, or a BASE jumper who gets a huge adrenaline rush.
Hell, even chocolate or coffee produce an altered state of mind.
No, it isn’t. Granted that one could argue philosophically that what we call “reality” is nothing more than the input of our perceptions. However, those perceptions are the product of millions of years of evolution that contribute to our survival because they mostly comport with the physical world. When I’m careful on a stepladder or avoid touching a hot frying pan I am acting in a way that’s consistent with physical consequences. If I take LSD and believe I can fly, or possess some other form of omnipotence or superpower, I am not. The reality distortions created by such drugs may be interesting and pleasurable, but they’re quite properly describable as a form of temporary insanity.
That’s a good and valid question, but it has nothing to do with the practical definition of “reality”. Different substances do produce a very wide range of effects, ranging from mild stimulation (coffee) to powerful schizophrenia-like delusions (LSD). The answer depends entirely on what line you’re trying to draw and the circumstances under which it applies. In this country, for instance, where recreational cannabis is legal, certain professionals engaged in occupations impacting public safety are either extremely restricted in how and when they can consume it, or are prohibited from it entirely.
LSD is so extremely reality-distorting that the line there is drawn at outright prohibition because it’s so potentially dangerous, and anyone who takes it anyway should absolutely be under competent supervision so they don’t hurt themselves or get into a traumatic panic. That is not “reality” in any meaningful sense.
Wrong. I took LSD several times in semi-legal and carefully supervised situations. It was genuine LSD sourced from Sandoz for a legitimate, legal research project. The “semi-legal” part is that I wasn’t a research participant, just a beneficiary of one of the researchers. So I know of what I speak.
The experiences were indescribably profound, but there was nothing about them that had any relationship to the real world. In one instance, somewhere in the back of my mind was the vague recollection that I was supposed to go to the airport to board a flight to somewhere the next morning (true) and the firm conviction that this was totally silly, since I could just will myself to fly there all on my own. What need did I have for an airplane? But this was just incidental to my incredible new ability to observe the entire universe in all its magnificent glory, and the realization of how obvious the answers were to mankind’s most profound questions!
No, this was not reality. It was fun, but it was temporary insanity.