posted May 07, 2008 03:09 PM           

"What I think a Psychedelic Society -- what that notion means, or implies, to me, in terms of ideology, is the idea of creating a society which always lives in the light of the mystery of being. In other words, that solutions should be displaced from the central role that they have had in social organizations, and mysteries, irreducible mysteries, should be put in their place."

"The British ensymologist, J.B.S. Haldane, in the 1920's, in an essay, said, 'The universe may not only be stranger than we suppose. It may be stranger than we can suppose.' And I suggest to you that, as we look back over human history, every pinnacle of civilization, whether it be Mayan, or Greco Roman, or the Sung Dynasty, has believed that it was in possession of an accurate description of the cosmos, adn of man's relationship to it. This seems to go along with the full flowering of a civilization. But from the point of view of our present civilization, we regard all those conceptions as, at worst, quaint, at best, half-right, and congratulate ourselves that our civilization, at last, has its finger on the real description of what is going on. But I think that this is actually not true, and that what blinds us, or what makes historical progress very difficult, is our lack of awareness of our ignorance, and that beliefs should be put aside, and that a Psychedelic Society would abandon belief systems for direct experience. And this is, I think, much of the problem of the modern dilemma is that direct experience has been discounted, and in its place, all kinds of belief systems have been erected. I would prefer a kind of intellectual anarchy where whatever was pragmatically applicable was brought to bear on any situation, but where belief was understood as a self-limiting function. Because, you see, if you believe something, you're automatically precluded from believing its opposite, which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeited in the act of commiting yourself to this belief. And I maintain that its pointless to have beliefs because, in a sense, the universe really is stranger than we suppose, adn what we need is a return to what, in the 16th century is called 'Baconian Method'. Which means, not the elaboration of fantastic thought-constructs which explain, but, merely, a phenomenological cataloging of experience. .. We are hindered by ideology."

"Experience must be made primary. The language of the self must be made primary. And anarchy carries this responsibility, even when its only political anarchy. What I'm advocating is that we each take responsibility for the cultural transformation by realizing that it is not someting which will be disseminated from the top down. It is something which each of us can contribute to by attempting to live as far into the future as possible. You know, we must get rid of the conceptions of the 40's, the 50's, the 60's, the 70's, the 80's, the 90's. We must smear ttttthe historical moment and become exemplars of the humanity of the endtime.... I believe that liberation, or, lets even say, decency, as a human quality, is a natural resonance and anticipation of this future perfected state of humanity... What does it mean in operational terms to live into the future as far as possible? It means taking a position vis-a-vis this emergent hyperdimensional reality. It does not necessarily mean becoming a pychedelic drug user yourself, but it means admitting to yourself the possiblity. And if you feel the heroic potential within yourself to be one of the experiencers, one of the pioneers, then you know what to do. If, on the other hand, you fear to be lost in the abyss, -- you fear what William Blake called 'falling into eternal death', -- falling from the spiral of being that connects one incarnation to another, and falling into the realm of eternal death, then you orient yourself towards the psychedelic experience, towards the psychedelic phenomenon, as a source of information."

posted July 06, 2009 07:11 PM         

I would prefer a kind of intellectual anarchy where whatever was pragmatically applicable was brought to bear on any situation, but where belief was understood as a self-limiting function. Because, you see, if you believe something, you're automatically precluded from believing its opposite, which means that a degree of your human freedom has been forfeited in the act of committing yourself to this belief.