Philosophy of Psychedelics (Letheby 2021)

March 3, 2023, Cybermonk

Contents:

Book Citation: Philosophy of Psychedelics (Letheby 2021)

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/philosophy-of-psychedelics-9780198843122

Philosophy of Psychedelics
Chris Letheby
October 25, 2021
https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Psychedelics-International-Perspectives-Psychiatry/dp/0198843127/ –

Blurb:

“Recent clinical trials show that psychedelics such as LSD and psilocybin can be given safely in controlled conditions, and can cause lasting psychological benefits with one or two administrations.

“Supervised psychedelic sessions can reduce symptoms of anxiety, depression, and addiction, and improve well-being in healthy volunteers, for months or even years.

“But these benefits seem to be mediated by “mystical” experiences of cosmic consciousness, which prompts a philosophical concern:

“do psychedelics cause psychological benefits by inducing false or implausible beliefs about the metaphysical nature of reality?

“This book is the first scholarly monograph in English devoted to the philosophical analysis of psychedelic drugs.

“Its central focus is the apparent conflict between the growing use of psychedelics in psychiatry and the philosophical worldview of naturalism.

“Within the book, Letheby integrates empirical evidence and philosophical considerations in the service of a simple conclusion:

“this “Comforting Delusion Objection” to psychedelic therapy fails.

“While exotic metaphysical ideas do sometimes come up, they are not, on closer inspection, the central driver of change in psychedelic therapy.

“Psychedelics lead to lasting benefits by altering the sense of self, and changing how people relate to their own minds and lives-not by changing their beliefs about the ultimate nature of reality.

“The upshot is that a traditional conception of psychedelics as agents of insight and spirituality can be reconciled with naturalism (the philosophical position that the natural world is all there is).

“Controlled psychedelic use can lead to genuine forms of knowledge gain and spiritual growth-even if no Cosmic Consciousness or transcendent divine Reality exists.

“Philosophy of Psychedelics is an indispensable guide to the literature for researchers already engaged in the field of psychedelic psychiatry, and for researchers-especially philosophers-who want to become acquainted with this increasingly topical field.”

Psychedelic Philosophy According to the Lens of Applied Psychiatry Therapy

Remember, this book is embedded in a “psychiatry” constraint; this book is part of International Perspectives in Philosophy and Psychiatry – a series of 33 books.

This non-psychedelic, ordinary-state-based series includes a clueless literalist ordinary-state book on Sacrifice of Isaac:

“delusion is not best understood by reducing it to brain chemistry, or by insisting that it is empirically false.

“It is best understood by examining its harmful personal and moral consequences – consequences that nearly unfolded when the biblical patriarch Abraham prepared to sacrifice his son Isaac in response to a command, he thought, from God.”

Who’s the dumb, crude, ignorant one here? The late-modern scientists strike a stance of intellectual superiority, revealing themselves to be ignorant, clueless fools.

Gallery:

Article title:
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching
Section heading:
Sacrifice of Isaac – Genesis 22:1-19
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/branching-message-mushroom-trees-psychedelic-eternalism-depicted-in-medieval-art-as-branching-mushrooms-handedness-and-non-branching/#Sacrifice-of-Isaac

Website & Twitter

http://www.chrisletheby.com – the following tabs have links to his videos or publications:
Research
Talks
Outreach

https://twitter.com/chrisletheby

cv

http://users.neo.registeredsite.com/1/5/3/23442351/assets/Letheby_public_CV_Dec_2022.pdf

Article: Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience (Letheby & Gerrans 2019)

Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience
Chris Letheby & Philip Gerran
https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2017/1/nix016/3916730
Neuroscience of Consciousness
https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nc/nix016
Outline on left.

Abstract:

“Users of psychedelic drugs often report that their sense of being a self or ‘I’ distinct from the rest of the world has diminished or altogether dissolved.”

Mere lifting of egoic processing is what beginner newbies experience — mere ego dissolution.

In contrast, at the advanced end of the spectrum is formal transgression and sacrificial repudiation of control agency in branching world — what real mystic experiencing is about. -cm

“Neuroscientific study of such ‘ego dissolution’ experiences offers a window onto the nature of self-awareness.

“We argue that ego dissolution is best explained by an account that explains self-awareness as resulting from the integrated functioning of hierarchical predictive models which posit the existence of a stable and unchanging entity to which representations are bound. “

remind me to not use the unhelpful, barking-up-wrong-tree jargon “predictive processing”

“Combining recent work on the ‘integrative self‘ and the phenomenon of self-binding with predictive processing principles yields an explanation of ego dissolution according to which self-representation is a useful Cartesian fiction: an ultimately false representation of a simple and enduring substance to which attributes are bound which serves to integrate and unify cognitive processing across levels and domains.”

The word ‘simple’ reminds me of how I characterize the egoic, autonomous monolithic control model vs. the sophisticated, mechanism-perceiving, 2-level dependent control model.

The Whole Egoic World Is an Illusion, Not Just “the Self”

I can best Letheby in scope of explanatory lameness & inefficacy:

The egoic world is an illusion.

Cybermonk 😑 huge realization 5:51 p.m. March 4, 2023 (Earth time zone)

🤯 🤯 🤯

Song at the time during this historical breakthrough: C’mon Everybody, by UFO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsHQ-WB3Q-A&t=4670s (= 1:17:50) –

I reject “is X true, or is X false” – it’s never helpful.

Your explanation’s helpfulness is ultimately a fiction.

When the mental worldmodel gets transformed by Psilocybin from possibilism to eternalism, the entire self-in-world model is repudiated and replaced/supplemented, though the mind still employs the retained child-thinking worldmodel 24×7 forever after that.

Mushroom Gate from False World Model

The lame, Pop “self is an illusion” pseudo-explanation fails to account for the world model (possibility branching) also being replaced.

If we’re going to “explain” by labelling “x is an illusion”, we need to mark a whole lot more than just “the self” as “an illusion”.

Tree is replaced by pole.

“The self-model is not a mere narrative posit, as some have suggested; it has a more robust and ubiquitous cognitive function than that.

“But this does not mean, as others have claimed, that the self-model has the right attributes to qualify as a self.”

Why are we not talking about the world-model around the self-model? Answer: because the Psychedelic Industrial complex is in the service of merely the personal autobiographical Freud couch psychotherapy model of 1880.

I do not mean to criticize all money-making business and services, when I disparage the “psychedelic industry”.

I have specific criticisms of how MEQ & especially CEQ proceeded and produced a bait-and-switch replacement and reduced the altered state into the ordinary-state mold.

“It performs some of the right kinds of functions, but it is not the right kind of entity.

“Ego dissolution experiences reveal that the self-model plays an important binding function in cognitive processing, but the self does not exist.” 🤨

More like, “our explanation’s usefulness does not exist.”

Every 2-bit, hack know-nothing writes the exact same grandiose conclusion as the above.

“Self Does Not Exist” Is Lame, Shallow, Unhelpful, Pseudo-Explanation

Cybermonk – See my 1997 summary which makes that point.
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/30/self-control-cybernetics-dissociative-cognition-mystic-ego-death/#tveati
eg in 1997 I wrote:

“The projection of the self-image is also partly suspended. Insofar as the mind confuses the projected self-image with that part of the self which is genuine, that projected self never existed, other than a perceptual illusion, and so could not cease to exist.

“If the ego is defined strictly as the natural assumption that the mentally projected self-representation is literally oneself, then it can be said that “the ego is only an illusion”.

“But such a narrowed definition of “ego” raises the question of what to call the real cognitive structures that reliably project that illusion.

“The ego is more than just an illusion.

“It’s a large, complex, and dynamic set of mental processes, of which the deceivingly tangible mental representation is only one part.”

/ end of 1997 excerpt

The Egodeath theory never employs the construct of “the self”.

It’s poor use of lexicon.

Section heading:
Journal of Consciousness Studies Article Recommends “Avoid terms such as ‘ego dissolution’, they are too vague”
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/26/the-risks-of-vague-abstract-descriptors-like-mystical-supernaturalism-vs-scientific-naturalism/#JCS-avoid-ego-dissolution-too-vague

Symposium on Letheby and Gerrans, “Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience” (2019)

Symposium on Letheby and Gerrans, “Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience”
DANIEL BURNSTON MARCH 7, 2019
https://philosophyofbrains.com/2019/03/07/symposium-on-letheby-and-gerrans-self-unbound-ego-dissolution-in-psychedelic-experience.aspx

“This symposium is based on Chris Letheby and Philip Gerran’s fascinating paper, Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience. 
https://academic.oup.com/nc/article/2017/1/nix016/3916730

“We have excellent commentaries from John Michael, Inês Hipólito, and Raphaël Millière. [scroll down to the expander sections within the linked philosophyofbrains page]

“These are followed by a response from Letheby and Gerrans.

“Letheby and Gerrans’ paper, “Self Unbound: Ego Dissolution in Psychedelic Experience,” combines three distinct research topics:

  • the longstanding conundrum of the nature of the self,
  • the predictive processing framework of perception and cognition, and
  • the puzzling phenomenon of ego-dissolution during psychedelic experience. 

“According to the authors, the predictive processing approach supports fictionalism about the self – the self is fundamentally an explanatory posit used by the brain to explain the unified aspects of autobiographical experience. 

“But there is no unitary entity that this posit successfully refers to. 

“Hence the self is a fiction.”

[Your writing and theorizing ability is a fiction. That’s a crude use of “is”.

As I wrote in my 1997 theory summary, don’t say the self is a fiction; the proper question is what’s its nature. -cm]

“Letheby and Gerrans use this account to further explain ego-dissolution, in which users of psychedelics experience a loss of their sense-of-self.”

I thought that symposium was lacking; it had nothing of Dionysus. See The Gods Bring Letheby & Metzinger to the Psilocybin Mixed-Wine Symposium Banquet below.

Article: Psychedelics, Atheism, and Naturalism: Myth and Reality (Letheby 2022)

Journal of Consciousness Studies
Issues:
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs

Psychedelics, Atheism, and Naturalism: Myth and Reality
Chris Letheby
2022
Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 29, Numbers 7-8, 2022, pp. 69-92(24)
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/imp/jcs/2022/00000029/f0020007/art00005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.29.7.069
Abstract:

“An emerging body of research suggests that psychedelic experiences can change users’ religious or metaphysical beliefs.

“Here I explore issues concerning psychedelic-induced belief change via a critique of some recent arguments by Wayne Glausser.

“Two scientific studies seem to show that psychedelic experiences can convert atheists to belief in God,

[perhaps he means: some say “the mechanism by which psychedelic therapy works: you have to experience and believe that mental constructs and spirit-world entities self-exist, independently from the physical material plane”]

“but Glausser holds that academic and popular discussions of these studies are misleading.

“I offer a different analysis of the relevant findings, attempting to preserve the insights of Glausser’s critique while setting the record straight on some important points.

“For one thing, the studies provide stronger evidence for atheist ‘deconversion’ than Glausser allows.

“For another, Glausser’s arguments against the ‘Metaphysical Belief Theory’ of psychedelic therapy involve scientifically dubious claims and inferences.”

“Finally, in evaluating this theory, we ought to focus on its strongest version, which posits belief shifts from metaphysical naturalism to nonnaturalism, rather than from atheism to classical monotheism.”

Book: Philosophical Perspectives on the Psychedelic Renaissance (Letheby & Gerrans 2023)

Philosophical Perspectives on the Psychedelic Renaissance
Chris Letheby, C. and Gerrans, P., eds., 2023. Oxford University Press.

Search:
“Philosophical Perspectives on the Psychedelic Renaissance” Letheby
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Philosophical+Perspectives+on+the+Psychedelic+Renaissance%22+Letheby

No abstract yet as of March 4, 2023:
https://philpapers.org/rec/LETPPO

Category of that book/entry:
Phil Papers .org > Philosophy of Cognitive Science > Drugs and Consciousness – 86 entries

Article: Philosophy and Classic Psychedelics: A Review of Some Emerging Themes (Letheby & Mattu 2022)

Philosophy and classic psychedelics: a review of some emerging themes
Letheby, C. and Mattu, J.
2022
Journal of Psychedelic Studies 5(3): 166–175.

Philosophy and classic psychedelics: A review of some emerging themes.
Chris Letheby & Jaipreet Mattu– Journal of Psychedelic Studies.
https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2054/5/3/article-p166.xml

“Serotonergic (or “classic”) psychedelics have struck many researchers as raising significant philosophical questions that, until recently, were largely unexplored by academic philosophers.

“This paper provides an overview of four emerging lines of research at the intersection of academic philosophy and psychedelic science that have gained considerable traction in the last decade:

  • selfless consciousness
  • psychedelic epistemology
  • psychedelic ethics
  • spiritual/religious naturalism

“In this paper, we highlight philosophical questions concerning

(i) psychedelics, self-consciousness, and phenomenal consciousness,

(ii) the epistemic profile of the psychedelic experience;

(iii) ethical concerns about the appropriate use of psychedelics; and

(iv) whether spiritual or religious dimensions of psychedelic use are compatible with a naturalistic worldview.”

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – timestamps and commentary are below; eg find “wy”.

According to that video, Letheby’s “naturalism” means: no mental constructs exist without an underlying brain.

First the brain evolved, and later it produced mental constructs.

Article: The Philosophy of Psychedelic Transformation (Letheby 2015)

The Philosophy of Psychedelic Transformation
Chris Letheby
2015
Journal of Consciousness Studies
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2015/00000022/f0020009/art00011
Post-print (author’s accepted manuscript):
http://users.neo.registeredsite.com/1/5/3/23442351/assets/PPT_postprint72495.pdf
Abstract:

“Recent scientific research into the therapeutic potential and mechanisms of psychedelic drugs raises intriguing and hitherto largely unexplored philosophical questions.”

(except for the past 10,000 years)

“A brief overview of the relevant science is given before addressing these questions.

“It is argued that psychedelic transformation is a distinctive psycho- pharmacological intervention because its mechanism of action ineliminably involves conscious mental representations, and thus is more transparent [read “not perceptible”] to the subject than the mechanisms of other drug therapies.”

In this topic, “transparent” means non-perceptible; non- meta-perception; naive realism.

“This argument connects with issues in the philosophy of (cognitive) scientific explanation.

“It is also argued that transformative psychedelic experiences may well confer three distinct kinds of epistemic benefits:

  • Knowledge by acquaintance of the subject’s psychological potential.
  • Knowledge by acquaintance of the meta-physical nature of the (sense of) self.
  • Revitalized capacities for the acquisition of modal knowledge.

“Non-naturalistic metaphysical and epistemological claims abound in psychedelic circles;

“thus, it is important to realize that psychedelics may yield naturalistically acceptable epistemic benefits.”

The Supernatural Egodeath Revelation

url https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kusyUCtaY-M

Is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism “Non-naturalistic metaphysical and epistemological claims“??

The Egodeath theory says the mind’s mental model transforms from possibilism to eternalism.

Cybernetic eternalism (along with superdeterminism in Physics) is not to be confused with FAD-Plus q’air’s “fatalistic determinism” (which term Letheby and then Matthew Johnson use).

The FAD-Plus instrument lacks the psychedelic-state experiential mode concept of cybernetic eternalism, even though cybernetic eternalism is the most characteristic “effect” of Psilocybin.

The most characteristic and remarkable “effect” of Psilocybin is cybernetic eternalism — yet FAD-Plus, CEQ, and Letheby, and everyone, lacks the concept of cybernetic eternalism, which is the central spotlight topic of the Egodeath theory, Egodeath.com.

Ego death is through experiencing cybernetic eternalism.

Cybernetic eternalism has nothing to do with “fatalistic determinism”, as revealed by the wording of the 5 questions in that subscale of the FAD-Plus instrument.

The FAD items’ wording assumes domino-chain causality and non-existing future, in fine egoic possibilism fashion, just like every flavor of metaphysics on offer in Paulhus’ 1-dimensional Devil’s buffet of offerings.

Every standard, familiar, classroom-debate, ordinary-state, textbook cliche position is made available to you by Letheby, straight out of this ordinary-state FAD instrument.

No matter which egoic freewill or egoic determinism metaphysics brand model you pick, the {dragon shadow monster} wins.

It’s ok, go see Griftiths at Hopkins for some psychedelic Grief psychotherapy using the CEQ. 😊👍 they’ve got almost all contingencies covered – everything you could imagine, in the ordinary state:

Familiar-sounding “Grief”; vague “fear”, and… that’s about it.

FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/03/fad-plus-free-will-and-determinism-questionnaire-paulhus-2011/

“Eadwine leg balancing image 2023-01-09.png” 6.5 MB
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom#
Crop by Cybermonk Jan. 9, 2023.

Erik Davis understands cybernetic eternalism (Led Zeppelin 4 p 118 & 122).

The difference between naturalistic & non-naturalistic is __.

Videos

Search YouTube for his vids:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Chris+Letheby

Videos at Talks Page at ChrisLetheby.com

http://www.chrisletheby.com > Talks (YouTube videos) –

• 2021. Philosophy of psychedelics
Live-streamed for the Garden States Microdose webcast series run by Entheogenesis Australis.

• 2021. Psychedelics and meditation: a neurophilosophical perspective
Delivered at the Altered States workshop series run by the Perth chapter of the Australian Psychedelic Society.
For his book chapter with the same title as the video lecture, see section
Chapter: Psychedelics and Meditation: A Neurophilosophical Perspective (Letheby 2022) in the present page.

• 2021. Philosophy of psychedelics
Live-streamed for the Emerging Minds Colloquium run by the Rotman Institute of Philosophy.

• 2020. Naturalizing psychedelic epistemology
Invited keynote presentation at the annual Australasian Postgraduate Philosophy Conference. Delivered online via Zoom.

• 2019. Psychedelic therapy and philosophical naturalism
Delivered at #INSIGHT2019, the biennial conference of the MIND Foundation: European Foundation for Psychedelic Science, in Berlin.

• 2017. The varieties of psychedelic epistemology
Delivered at the Entheogenesis Australis symposium in Eildon, Victoria.

• 2017. The epistemic innocence of psychedelic states
Delivered at Breaking Convention: The Fourth International Conference on Psychedelic Consciousness.

• 2015. Naturalizing psychedelic spirituality
Delivered at the University of Adelaide final of the Three Minute Thesis competition.

Video: The Epistemic Innocence Of Psychedelic States (Breaking Convention 2017)

Entry at his website “Talks” page:

2017. The epistemic innocence of psychedelic states
Delivered at Breaking Convention: The Fourth International Conference on Psychedelic Consciousness.

YouTube title:
Chris Letheby – The Epistemic Innocence Of Psychedelic States
Channel: Breaking Convention
Upload date: July 6, 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxft3z64cvQ
Filmed at Breaking Convention 2017 – 4th International Conference on Psychedelic Consciousness.
University of Greenwich London, June 30, 2017 – July 2, 2017

Clearly States What Letheby Thinks He’s Battling Against

In this video it’s clear that Chris Letheby thinks he’s battling against this idea:

“I experienced meta-perception, therefore mental constructs & consciousness/ awareness exist, but the referent external material physical world doesn’t exist. Consciousness is primary.”

Chris Letheby says Science means assuming that first, the material physical realm existed, then later it produced the epiphenomenon of mental constructs and awareness.

Chris Letheby argues that mental constructs and awareness would stop existing if the physical material realm were removed.

He says Science requires believing that first the physical material realm exists, and that only secondarily and dependently, mental constructs are awareness exist.

It will be interesting to see his planned TOC, which will be broader than just his speciality area topic of Epistemology:

Book: Philosophical Perspectives on the Psychedelic Renaissance (Letheby & Gerrans 2023)

Four-Layer Onion Model of the Order of Concerns of the Egodeath Theory

A major/key topic; important. See posts in the Egodeath Yahoo Group. I’m always doing quick summary sketches of this perspective, never officially writing an article to fix these topic-assignments determinately.

The Egodeath theory is not centered on Letheby’s battle/concern.

Letheby tends to conflate his Epistemology concern with the center of Philosophy of Psychedelics.

Letheby overestimates that the actual centrality of the topic of this Epist. topic. According to letheby’s narrative, everyone is always asserting that what psychedelics reveal — the big revelation of psycyehdelics that Huxley & A Watts assert (if Letheby’s assessment is to be believed) is that mental constructs + awareness is primary, and material physical plane is not.

Do I assert that the existence of mental constructs is primary? Yes but not in the sense he says.

I would not let Letheby represent my view here; he would misrepresent my view.

My point is not that mental … for me it’s a means to an end, to say mental constructs are what we primarily experience, in terms of Phenomenology.

Phenomenology, mental constructs are important, and brain neuroscience is not important or appropriate/ effective here, so any explanation of the main effect of Psilocybin must be in terms of mental construct processing, NOT in terms of Neuroscience.

I insist that my “loose cognitive binding” is the right approach, and “Neuroplasticity” prevents relevant comprehension of how psychedelic transformation of mental world model works.

Given that our real goal is to make a successful explanatory framework of what Transcendent Knowledge and ego transcendence is really about, we MUST form such explanatory framework in terms of Cognitive Phenomenology, NOT in reductionist (loses the essence, fails as explanation) terms of neuroscience/ brain.

Reductionism is not about vertical, it’s about wrong domain. when you explain domain A by preetning pretending that it’s domain B, that’s reductionism. Reductionism is a failure to engage the actual domain in question.

We need a scientific theory of how cognition works. Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism is when you pretend to explain dynamics that are in the cog domain, via a theory which is entirely situated in the Neuro domain instead.

A theory that’s in the Neuro/brain domain can ONLY explain the things in the neuro-brain domain, and CANNOT explain the things in the Cognitive domain.

Religious mental worldmodel transformation resides in the cognitive domain, therefore an actual Scientific explanatory model of religious mental worldmodel transformation must be in terms of a Cognitive-realm explanation.

A Neuro based model is instantly automatically a category error and can only produce error and confusion, irrelevance, and the shadow dragon monster continues to rule and control the field and we remain crude misunderstanders, opposite of Scientific understanding.

You CANNOT explain ego transcendence in terms of neuroscience; you MUST explain ego transcendence in terms of COG PHENY.

I can see how Hatsis can get himself permanently confused about what we’re debating about.

It can *seem* like what I care about is Secret Christian Amanita Cult & “Allegro’s theory”, but the grain of truth there will completely mislead you. It is merely an INCIDENTAL, minor overlap, between the Egodeath theory & “the Allegro theory”.

In no real way is the Egodeath theory project the same project as “the Allegro project”.

I can see how Letheby can get himself permanently confused about what we’re debating about.

It can *seem* like what I care about is whether what primarily exists is mental constructs or brain, but the grain of truth there will completely mislead you.

In no real way is the Egodeath theory project the same project as the “Cosmic Consciousness / primacy of existence of consciousness” project. Don’t I assert that, as Letheby thinks, b/c Huxley asserts “the perennial philsohpy” and I assert a “perennial model of mental transformation”?

No; even if there is a “perennialism”-like aspect of the Egodeath theory, in no way is the Egodeath theory “about” the primacy of existence of mental constructs rather than brain.

(And I have to check whether Huxley asserts primacy of consciousness as Letheby claims Huxley asserts – isn’t this just Letheby projecting HIS own topic-fixation onto Huxley?)

According to Letcher Hatsis, the entire field of entheogen scholarship is all about asserting Secret Christian Amanita Cult. Is it true? Unfortunately, due to the mis-leadership of Wasson, Allegro, Ruck, Heinrich, Irvin, and Rush, alas is is true that (per the Amanita Primacy Fallacy) the field of entheogen scholarship is grotestquely obscenely overly driven and organized around the premise of Secret Christian Amanita Cult. But Hatsis just perpetuates that problem, he doesn’t offer a way out of the trap.

Hatsis insists that all debate must remain trapped within the Allegro-defined options for eternity, locking the calendar at 1970 forever.

“You guys are not allowed to leave your Allegro-created world of options that you came from” (massive projection by Hatsis the #1 Allegro fanboy; the Egodeath theory came 0% from Allegro — or from Wasson [looking at you, John Lash]).

It’s not merely extreme strawmanning by Hatsis; more cuttingly, this is extreme PROJECTION from Hatsis.

Hatsis is greatly saddened when you “leave” Allegro-world (as if the Egodeath theory ever came from the Allegro world). In Hatsis’ confused mind, you must reify Allegro’s greatness by couching everything in terms of “Allegro’s theory”.

John Lash’s mis-focused thinking is very similar as Hatsis (same fallacy, same projection): you are assumed and expected to reify Wasson’s greatness by couching everything in terms of “the Wasson theory”.

In Lash’s confused thinking, to do entheogen scholarship is to debate & investigate “the Wasson theory” or “Wasson’s theory”, which is about “psychomimetics“[sic!!! 😵 😵 🤡] which are desirable because they “mimic the mind” (you don’t believe me, that Lash writes such basic ignorant nonsense? don’t make me bust out my photos of Lash’s 2nd edition of his book Not In His Image, again).

In Letheby’s mind, to write about “Philosophy of Psychedelics” (new book TOC: Psychedelic Renaissance) is to debate the psychedelic assertion, which is that consciousnes is primary, rather than phycial material brain.

Can you imagine a multi-author book that surveys entheogen scholarship edited by Hatsis? toc:

Book: General Survey of Entheogen Scholarship (Hatsis, editor, 2023)

  • Chapter 1. Ruck’s position re: Plaincourault/ Allegro/ Secret Christian Amanita Cult
  • Chapter 2. Irvin’s position re: Plaincourault/ Allegro/ Secret Christian Amanita Cult
  • Chapter 3. Browns’s position re: Plaincourault/ Allegro/ Secret Christian Amanita Cult
  • Chapter 4. John Rush’s position re: Plaincourault/ Allegro/ Secret Christian Amanita Cult
  • Chapter 5. Heinrich’s position re: Plaincourault/ Allegro/ Secret Christian Amanita Cult
  • …
  • Chapter 10. My Methodology Is the Best Ever, because I am not a web researcher.
  • Conclusion/Summary: I am a REAL HISTORIAN, not like those Discipliueai Allegroiae (that’s Latin 😑) web blog writers
    Reading Allegro Again (Hatsis 2015)

continuing from above:

I assert that that an authentic successful Scientific explanation of Psychedelics effects MUST be grounded in the domain of Cognitive Phen’y, NOT residing in the domain of Neuroscience, not because I care about asserting that cognition is what primarily exists; I DON’T CARE WHETHER COGNITION OR BRAIN PRIMARILY EXISTS!

Any explanation of the Cognitive Experiential & Mental Model domain in terms of Neuroscience domain is instantly inherently reduction and thus pseudoscience.

As the #1 cheerleader for Psilocybin, I am necessarily the #1 enemy of Meditation.

As the #1 cheerleader for Psilocybin, I am necessarily the #1 enemy of Amanita.

As the #1 cheerleader for true, actual, bona fide Cognitive Science, I am necessarily the #1 enemy of Neuroscience.

The only other option is that the phony reductionism continues, Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism, which is inherently a failure, irrelevant, useless and pseudoscience.

Neuroscience doesn’t explain cognition; Neuroscience explains away Cognition, it sub….

It’s the ol’ “substitute –> replace –> eliminate” strategy.

Neuroscience, claiming to explain Cognitive, is nothing but a way of ELIMINATING Cognition.

CEQ, claiming to outdo OAV’s Dread, actually REPLACES Dread effects by Grief ordinary-state treatment instead.

WE NEED A DIVORCE BETWEEN COG SCI AND NEUROSCI; NEUROSCIENCE IS KILLING (preventing) COG SCI.

Down with Neuroscience; up with Loose Cognitive Science.

Down with Amanita; up with Psilocybin.

Down with “Secret Christian Amanita Cult yes or no”; up with “To what extent Psilocybin in Western?“

Down with “Is mental constructs + awareness primary or is brain what primarily exists?”; up with “Explain control-related mental model transformation“.

It is a zero-sum game. Amanita refuses to share, and won’t give up its throne it falsely has been enthroned upon.

Down with the Meditationism religious worldview cult ideology & value system.

Warning: when you agree to “meditation”, you are actually agreeing to a huge entire false worldview, not just literally meditation.

The word ‘meditation’ in practice is a very loaded word, a bait & switch, a huge paradigm going way way beyond literal meditation.

What I care about is appropriately usefully explaining what ego transcendence is really about, and that is the mental model of personal control in world.

I came from trying to debug personal cross-time control integrity (1985-1987), so, that experience and mental operation is important: the objective is to explain malfunction in operating the mind.

Perpetually Off-Mission; Always Forgetting and Getting Confused About What Our Mission Is

We’re all on the wrong mission all the time, always forgetting our mission, what objective we’re trying to investigate & reach. Always perpetually off-mission.

And also bad trip treat of control seizure, ego death experience, is important and must figure centrally in any explanation of Psychedelic Medieval ancient art that describes religious transformation.

The actual purpose of myth is to describe mental model transformation in the Psilocybin state, so my theory of mental model transformation must / can prove itself by its ability to explain myth.

Myth confirms the psychedelic cybernetic eternalism Theory, & v.v.; the Theory explains myth (2-way support; two legs hold the theory up).

Explaining myth is an important requirement, to describe mental model transformation — all about subjective relevant experience.

The Egodeath theory is an explanation of change of experience.

The topic of whether experience or brain is the primary existent thing, is unhelpful; it is actively harmful of a focus, and that focus can only produce irrelvant failed confusion.

You cannot construct a successful theory of mental transformation that’s grounded in brain neuroscience, that is reductionism ie it omits the subject matter rather than fulfilling the requirement to explain the subject matter.

What ego transcendence is really about is transforming the mental model of control-in world — that is my care, my concern, my well-formed appropraite successful Scientific explanatory model/ framework.

That explanation MUST be in terms of cognitive phenomenology, NOT in terms of brain neuroscience.

… in the 4-layer onion model, the concerns of the Egodeath theory are: (this is not set in stone, just an example):

Importance of Selecting Right Topics for the Inner Core Focus

A huge part of my work is to shift the spotlight, move the center of the cosmos from earth to sun, from Amanita to Psilocybin, from psychedelic metaperception to control-model transformation.

I correctly identify what’s most important & relevant.

I don’t unconsciously project my sense of what’s important to debate/ investigate onto other people.

My focus is well justified for multiple reasons.

Evidence + Reason shows that in fact what’s most important is transformation from possibilism to eternalism including control model transformation.

In contrast, Hatsis unconsciously projects — he wrongly assumes that everyone else thinks the most important thing to debate is “yes/no Secret Christian Amanita Cult”.

Hatsis is partly right that ppl focus on Secret Christian Amanita Cult and treat that as the central topic of concern.

Letheby unconsciously projects — he wrongly assumes that everyone else thinks the most important thing to debate is “yes/no: is mental constructs + awareness primary, or is external naturalistic physical material realm primary?”

Letheby is partly right that ppl focus on “do only mental constructs + awareness exist/ exist in themselves as Primary” and treat that as the central topic of concern.

Letheby’s mis-focus is complicated by the fact that the whole field of Psychedelic Science misconceives “Mystical Experience” along Stacean lines.

Inner Core

transformative bad trips: threatened to death, how does that work to drive transformation from possibilism to eternalism?

non-branching block universe cancels egoic freewill steering power & agency.

how the mental model transforms from possibilism to eternalism.

My 1997 core theory spec

My August 1988 handwritten Minnesota draft 1 expressing Jan 1988 breakthrough combining

block-universe eternalism,

mental model transformation, [Metzinger is mediocre here, and Letheby is very weak here] – they wrongly think the big reveal here is metaperception, the fact of virtual mental world model constructivism. Actually control transformation is the central relevant reveal/ USEFUL HELPFUL significance.

loose mental functioning binding.

Outer Core

entheogen scholarship re: Psilocybin in Western history.

how myth is analogy describing psychedelic effects especially transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

To ‘decode’ a mytheme is to identify how a specific mytheme describes and is shaped like (analogous to) specific features of Psilocybin experiencing — complicated by network relations among mythemes.

How mushroom motifs and handedness and nonbranching are analogous to transformation from possibilism to eternalism. Modelling metaperception.

Inner Periphery

STEM as the right way to explain cognitive transformation.

Approach/ domain of expressing explanatory fwk: Pro-Cognitive, Anti-Neuroscience.

broad entheogen scholarship, greedy/broad full pharmacopeia in world religious history.

Physics: Superdeterminism, nonlocal hidden variables.

Reformed Theology.

world religious mythology

Full repeal of the schedules and Psilocybin prohibition.

Proving central presence of Psilocybin in Greek & Christian.

Outer Periphery

yes/no: Secret Christian Amanita Cult? [for Letcher Hatsis, this is the Inner Core concern]

Ahistoricity of Jesus?

Subtract 700 years (sun-revolutions) between year “1” and year “2000”? Chronology revision per Edwin Johnson 1895.

Does the referent material external physical world exist, or is mental constructs & awareness primary & self-existing. [for Letheby, this is the Inner Core concern, and defines the central concern of Psychedelics] Epistemology.

Hatsis Battling Against Wrong Thing

Thomas “Stuck in 1970” Hatsis thinks of himself as battling against “the Secret Christian Amanita Cult theory”.

I battle against the Amanita Primacy Fallacy, which overlaps with Hatsis’ target.

Hatsis’ target is not entirely fabricated by him, but he fixates and reifies & perpetuates a misplaced and malformed spotlight target.

It’s an unproductive and harmful, confusion-increasing angle of analysis.

We should not define our work in terms of debating whether Secret Christian Amanita Cult existed or did not exist.

That focus on, and framing investigation in terms of “Yes/no, was there a Secret Christian Amanita Cult?” is harmful, because it replaces the relevant, profitable topic of debate/ investigation/ discussion, which needs to be the topic of:

“To what extent Psilocybin in Western religion?”

Allegro has only a negative type of relevance for this important topic.

In 2006, I wrote a 64-page article about how the field took a wrong, Allegro-fixated turn, and needs to JUMP back to remembering its mission.

Irvin didn’t hear my message, though maybe my balanced judgement on Allegro planted the seeds for Irvin to around 2012 move from an Allegro-centered Gnostic Media branding to Logos Media branding.

side curiosity: It’s easy to use domain names to drive discussion of how Jan Irvin developed his intellectual branding, so did Hatsis, so did I in some sense.

I have yet to critique & analyze what the concept of “ego death” means & doesn’t mean, in the Egodeath theory. My website domains:

  1. http://www.best.com/~archangl ~1994
  2. CybTrans.com ~1995 (cybernetic transcendence)
  3. Egodeath.com ~1998-2007
  4. Egodeath Yahoo Group (groups.yahoo.com/group/egodeath) 2001-2019
  5. EgodeathTheory.WordPress.com ~2016/2020

The field lost its way, forgot its mission, got derailed onto a dead-end side track — that that problem, against Hatsis’ strategy, will NOT be fixed by endlessly perpetuating that same wrong framework of investigation and discussion.

My purpose of writing about Allegro was a call to move AWAY from Allegro and JUMP back to our remembered mission and question. Be careful about what we imaging ourselves to be interested in debating about.

YouTube Description of the Video “Epistemic Innocence Of Psychedelic States”

YouTube title:
Chris Letheby – The Epistemic Innocence Of Psychedelic States
Channel: Breaking Convention
Upload date: July 6, 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nxft3z64cvQ
Filmed at Breaking Convention 2017 – 4th International Conference on Psychedelic Consciousness.
University of Greenwich London, June 30, 2017 – July 2, 2017

Description at YouTube:

“One recent development in epistemology, the philosophical study of knowledge, is the notion of ‘epistemic innocence’ introduced by Bortolotti and colleagues.

“This concept expresses the idea that certain suboptimal cognitive processes may nonetheless have epistemic (knowledge-related) benefits.

“The idea that delusion or confabulation may have psychological benefits is familiar enough.

“What is novel and interesting is the idea that such conditions may also yield significant and otherwise unavailable epistemic benefits.

“I apply the notion of epistemic innocence to research on the transformative potential of psychedelic drugs.

“The popular epithet ‘hallucinogen’ exemplifies a view of these substances as fundamentally epistemically detrimental.

“I argue that the picture is more complicated and that some psychedelic states can be epistemically innocent.

“This conclusion is highly relevant to policy debates about psychedelic therapy.

“Moreover, analysing the case of psychedelics can shed further light on the concept of epistemic innocence itself.”

/ end of YouTube description

Video: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality (Aug. 2022)

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – timestamps & my commentary below; eg find “wy”.

This is a good video to quickly accurately get where Letheby is coming from, his contributions & limitations, how he agrees/ disagrees/ overlaps partly with the Egodeath theory (the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism; the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence).

This video is good and clear and succinct showing what his position is and how it overlaps with the beginner part of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

Description:

“Chris discusses the contents of his excellent book, Philosophy of Psychedelics, wherein he defends a naturalistic account of the epistemic, therapeutic, and spiritual benefits of psychedelics, and [Stacean mis-conceptualized] mystical-type experiences of unselfing.

[… where ‘self’ is considered spatially and as mental model representation, BUT NOT as control agent transformed model]

“You can find Chris at his website here:
http://www.chrisletheby.com
and on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/chrisletheby

“His book, the Philosophy of Psychedelics:
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/philosophy-of-psychedelics-9780198843122
and the Routledge Handbook on the Philosophy of Meditation, to which Letheby contributed:
https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Handbook-on-the-Philosophy-of-Meditation/Repetti/p/book/9780367647469

“I mentor meditation in Shinzen Young’s Unified Mindfulness system. If that or any of my ambling thoughts in long-form are of interest to you, you can check out my own website:
https://www.wystantbs.com
and Twitter:
https://twitter.com/WystanTBS

/ end of Description from the video

Video Notes: “Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality”

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing begins here.

Find eg “wy” below, for more timestamps and long commentary over the next sections.

[4:00] Letheby: “My approach is an Epistemological approach; epistemological issues is what I’ve concentrated on the most”

[10:00] “It’s hard to define ‘material’ & ‘physical’, my ‘naturalism’ position means means no belief in God or gods, no disembodied minds, no spirit world, no God, no gods.”

Letheby especially/ specifically means he rejects the existence of God or any god or spirit entity as a cognitive-only entity existing in disembodied realm of mental constructs/ consciousness-only.

ha ha Letheby would have NO OBJECTION to a purely physical, material God!

Letheby has no objection to the existence of physical, material demons.

Letheby only rejects immaterial demons that exist without physical bodies.

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing continues:

[20:00] “belief in God or gods is the same delusion as believing that only consciousness exists”

Cite Michael Pollan’s heavily cited NYT article  “comforting delusion”, the term is NOT from Pollan’s book How to Change Your Mind.

Search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=michael+pollan+new+york+times+comforting+delusion

Letheby praises/agrees with/ follows Pollan & Metzinger.

I question whether Letheby’s concern about whether the physical realm “exists” or “doesn’t exist” is an adequate range of options. I say, what more matters, is the sense in which the material word exists (the referent of mental constructs; the alleged referent of the mind’s projected virtual world).

Like the dumb debate “does God exist yes or no”, it is DUMB to debate “the referent material world does it exist yes or no”.

A stupid “yes” and a stupid “no” are NOT necessarily the only options (against Letheby). I advocate agnosticism about existence of the referent world behind the mind’s wall of representation.

See my 1996 article Bubble of Simulation, well before Metzinger’s books, and probably more adequately broad than his books.

The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment
http://egodeath.com/BubbleOfSimulation.htm

Letheby only is concerned & bothered about the psychedelic experiential report claim that “only consciousness exists”.

Letheby ought to be concerned about the MORE URGENTLY RELEVANT topic of transformation of the personal control model from possibilism to eternalism.

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing continues:

[26:00] “The change of sense of self is the real mechanism of therapy’s effectiveness, not the metaphysical deluded claim that only consciousness exists”. Letheby sees psychonauts claiming “I experienced metaperception; therefore, only consciousness exists”, and he overreacts by claiming (I say he is just GUESSING on HIS RELIGIOUS ARTICLE OF FAITH) that the referent world exists.

More timestamps & long commentary below, eg. find “wy”.

Letheby’s Focus Stops Short of Cybernetic Eternalism

Letheby Doesn’t Focus on Mental Model of Self (in World) as Controller, and Control-Model Transformation Including Transgression Crisis Threat

Letheby operates in same ordinary-state spirituality model as everyone else, so he has the same limitation as eg the 1988 Journal of Transpersonal Psychology that I contrasted my Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence against.

Need New Term Like ‘Cybernetic Eternalism‘

the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism

A term I’m needing and developing:
Cyber-Eternalism
Cybernetic Eternalism
the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.
Control problematizing/ control transgression, and control transformation.

The Unprovable Religious Metaphysical Faith-Commitment of Materialism/ Physicalism/ Naturalism

The External World Exists Because I Guess and Have Faith that It Does, and You Are Deluded to Not So Guess and Commit Along with Me (and This Is the Topic of Ultimate Concern)

The “naturalistic science” materialism/physicalism advocates/ apostles such as Letheby & Matthew Johnson GUESS and proselytize, with baseless (so all the more fervent) assertions that the external world exists.

As if that’s the most important, central topic in Philosophy of Psychedelics.

Letheby’s position is an article of religious faith, and is Guessing; doctrinaire commitment to a guess/speculation.

The Egodeath theory is the cybernetic theory of ego transcendence.

The central, driving focus of the Egodeath theory is on control stability and instability driving mental model transformation.

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing continues:

[36:00] Letheby says “different aspects of the mind’s modelling of the self” — what are these limited aspects, his shortcomings, he fails to consider the MOST IMPORTANT ASPECTS of modelling the self: I focus on one aspect as most important: control stability-driven transformation.

Letheby thinks we are debating whether only mental representations exist; he wrongly things that that is the main, central topic of dispute.

Similarly, Thomas Hatsis says that the main, driving, central contention is whether Jesus is a mushroom or not; esp: whether there was a Secret Amanita Christian Cult or not.

Letcher Hatsis is going to write an entire book — like his first book, Shroom — devoted to that specific topic, firmly disproving what he wrongly thinks is the most important topic in the whole field of entheogen scholarship: proving that there’s no evidence for a Secret Amanita Christian Cult.

How important to the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is the topic of “whether or not there was a Secret Amanita Christian Cult“?

Not at all (or, even better: negatively so), since I would never write (or think) along those lines, and I only write on that topic in order to tell people to stop thinking along those lines.

The worst thing we can do is discuss whether or not there was a Secret Amanita Christian Cult“.

We urgently NEED to trashcan that harmful, irrelevant, confused pseudo-topic, and discuss instead, the real topic: to what extent Psilocybin in Western history?

I have NEVER been debating “whether there was a Secret Amanita Christian Cult or not”; and I say people must stop putting that debate as the spotlight topic.

We need to instead, simply ask:

To what extent Psilocybin in Western religion?

THAT well-formed question should be the spotlight target.

Discussion that’s emphatically and expressly conducted in terms of “whether or not there was a Secret Amanita Christian Cult” is harmful; it prevents addressing the vastly more profitable and relevant question: To what extent Psilocybin in Western religion?

Similarly, Letheby assumes we should aim the debate spotlight on whether only the material world exists, or whether only consciousness exists.

Letheby’s spotlight of focus is mis-aimed.

Letheby thinks deluded people experience metaperception and then they wrongly conclude “therefore only consciousness exists” — that is the windmill he’s tilting against (like Hatsis, he’s not entirely wrong – but he’s mis-aiming the spotlight.)

Letheby is trying to redirect that argument that psychonauts make; Letheby is trying to tell psychonauts:

“YES, metaperception is the case/ how cognition works; YES the mind constructs / projects virtual world, but NEVERTHELESS, you are deluded if you conclude from that that ONLY the mental construct realm exists.”

“We MUST BE SCIENTIFIC NATURALIST PHYSICALIST MATERIALIST and HAVE FAITH and guess and suppose and make it our definition of Science and Rationality to guess that — AND COMMIT TO — the model that where mental constructs come from is material physical neuroscience; the physical brain.”

Letheby and Johnson believe that it’s impossible to do Science unless you commit to this article of metaphysical faith, that the source/producer of mental constructs is the material, “naturalism”, physical, brain; it is impossible to do Science if you leap from “I experienced metaperception” to “only mental constructs exist”.

For the record:
I HAVE NEVER ASSERTED THAT ONLY MENTAL CONSTRUCTS EXIST.

The only kind of thing that we can know exists is mental constructs, eg. the immediately present mental constructs in the present spacetime bubble.

That’s all that we can ever directly perceive: the wall of mental constructs as representations projecting an alleged external material physical world.

Not that this this should be considered the main spotlight debate, but:

Letheby cannot possibly have a single shred of evidence that the physical brain exists, as a referent of mental constructs.

Letheby name-calls and pressures people and insults them (“deluded”), based on his adopted article of FAITH COMMITMENT to the SPECULATION that the brain physical material brain exists and is the source/producer of mental constructs.

Letheby’s argument that we must believe in the physical plane as the source & producer of mental constructs, is just as fallacious and deluded as “I experienced metaperception, therefore I know that only mental constructs, not external referents, exist.”

I advocate agnosticism about the existence of the external, physical, material world.

I advocate a STEM approach to figuring sh*t out and explaining it, against the mystic approach that positively LOVES inexplicability & freewill fog; revels in it, enjoys asserting “ineffability”.

I stand w/ Sanders & Zijlmans their re: methodology: article Moving Past Mysticism (which asserts avoiding mysticism as a methodology, not as explanandum).

Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework

Not that this this should be considered the main spotlight debate, but:

Letheby uses fallacious reasoning and he has no basis of his false certainty that the brain exists.

Letheby ought to admit that he is pushing as an ARTICLE OF FAITH, the notion that the material physical world exists (and that that particular metaphysical belief/commitment is required, and important, to do Science).

I say, for all we know, maybe only mental constructs exist – that’s my description of metaperception, against Letheby’s MATERIALISM RELIGION which defines itself against Pure Idealism.

Letheby’s position is in the spirit of Anti- Pure-Idealism; his irrational knee-jerk reaction is over-extremist Pure Materialism.

Does he position himself as a kind of Dualist?

Letheby says mental constructs exist, and the brain projects in the mind a virtual world via representationalism, but he thinks that the most important doctrine/premise of all, is that mental constructs are a product of the material, physical, external brain & world.

I say that that topic is NOT the most important.

I’m not very concerned about historicity of Jesus, though the topic is relevant for how myth describes altered-state phenomena.

(Max Freakout did a great job of discussing ahistoricity and description-by-analogy with Kafei in the Transcendent Knowledge Podcast.)

My onion of concerns per a 4-level zoom scale: inner core, outer core, inner periphery, outer periphery.

Search the present site & the Egodeath Yahoo Group site on those terms to see what those 4 onion layers contain).

The Inner Core or Spotlight Target is *NOT* materialism aka “naturalism” vs. pure idealism (only mental constructs exist) – what REALLY matters is the transformed mental model of control-in-world.

THAT is the treasure and the required knowledge that we must have, to be able to enter the altered state like Griffiths is trying to do.

The First Requirement of psychedelic therapy science, I reveal, is, you must first transform the mind to rely on eternalism thinking rather than possibilism-thinking.

After you learn to {stand on right leg} (= rely on 2-level, dependent control per cybernetic eternalism), only then are you safe to use psychedelic therapy.

The first milestone requirement of psychedelic therapy is, you must have mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

I’m not very concerned about whether there was or was no a Secret Amanita Christian Cult.

I’m not very concerned about whether only mental constructs exist, or whether the external referent physical material world exists, or whether mental constructs are produced by the brain/ material/ physical plane.

What *I* am centrally most concerned with is that the REAL nature of ego transcendence is transformation of transformation of the mental worldmodel of self as control agent; transformation of the model of control, driven by control transgression, from autonomous monolithic control to 2-level dependent control with future control-thoughts timelessly pre-existing.

The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment
http://egodeath.com/BubbleOfSimulation.htm

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing continues:

[40:00] model construction, opacity: Letheby likes Independent Realism of the external world. Letheby also asserts we are only in touch with mental representations.  

In contrast, the Egodeath theory is most concerned with control-model transformation.

Control-model transformation is the real nature/ topic of ego transcendence.  not unity, not his consciousness-only debate. 

Metaperceptions, opacity, Thomas Metzinger. 

Letheby: “Conscious experiencing is a controlled hallucination”. 

Letheby strongly asserts representationalism, AND the reality of the external material physical world as the generator OF this wall of perceptions. 

Letheby and I agree 90% regarding: representationalism,  but he falls short and fails to think about representation of CONTROL AGENCY in particular.  

Letheby asserts that the sense of self is a construction – but I add: AS CONTROLLER — AND THAT THAT IS THE TRUE FOCUS of Transcendent Knowledge – not the topic or experience of unity, or unity of the spatial self. 

To attain and explain Transcendent Knowledge, the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism centrally focuses on the cybernetic self (similar to “agency”), not the spatial self. 

Not centrally focusing on whether referents exist externally. 

todo: Summarize the passage in Transcendent Knowledge podcast episode 28 (summary of the Egodeath theory), 4 factors in modelling a table (simple & unimportant), and then modelling control agency (profound & important).

re: representationalism / metaperception of a table, then of personal control model.

Representation of self *as controller*.

That passage is around the following sentence in page https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2021/04/08/transcendent-knowledge-podcast-episode-28/ –
“Awareness watches the workings and learns to observe the workings of the perceptual system, including the inward-directed perceptual system too, the idea, the mentation and thinking about oneself as a control agent across time.”

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM – My commentary/ paraphrasing continues:

[47:00] Letheby thinks what’s most importantly at issue is whether spirit cognition only exists, not the external world. 

But I say what’s most importantly at issue is transfroming the mental model of CONTROL instead. 

See my 2006 & 1997 subsections about control transformation in these two articles:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#flagship-The-Egodeath-Theory
See the TOC entries below.

Letheby lacks any coverage of that.

Here’s the TOC of my 1997 core theory summary spec, I don’t see “control transformation” but see the word ‘control’ in bold here:

Contents:

2006/2007 main article, has almost the phrase “control transformation” in the TOC: Major section:

Self-Control and the Hidden Source of Thoughts

Dread Rules 👑, CEQ Drools 🤡

CEQ needs to cover Control crisis/ transformation/ transcendence/ transgression issues; CEQ and its anti-scientific HACK authors (Johnson, Griffiths) lacks any understanding of control model transformation, and so they simply DELETED all the control effects questions, and replaced them by their profiteering, familiar-sounding, ordinary-state “Grief” category instead.

It just doesn’t get any more BUNK & phony & unscientific than this! CEQ –> 🗑

Dittrich’s Dread is Science. CEQ is anti-Science.

How does Griffiths et al fix bad trips? Ignore the kind they don’t understand (control seizure), and replace them by familiar-labeled, familiar-sounding experiences instead (“Grief” and totally vague “Fear”).

NEED TERM SELF MODEL –> ‘CYBER eternalism’ 

Metzinger and Letheby wrongly think that the BIG REVEAL and matter of contention is that the spatial self doesn’t exist.

I believe that Metzinger’s book, according to my first two posts about “Metzinger” at the Egodeath Yahoo Group, does have mediocre coverage of self as puppet, thus some presence of the control topic.

Actually — this was half of my big assertion discovery of January 1988 — the Big Reveal and actual nature of ego transcendence is about transformation of the model of self AS CONTROLLER.

Block-universe eternalism in the altered state cancels self not merely as a spatial thing, but rather, as a control agent weilding steering power in the world, among (purported) branching future possibilities.

Actually, in ego transcendence satori enlightenment regeneration, the Big Reveal is specifically control transformation: changing the mental model of the self as control-agent steering IN the purported branching world, not just of the self as an isolated thing that gets re-modelled.

Video title:
Chris Letheby: Epistemology of Psychedelics, Naturalism, and Spirituality
August 22, 2022
Channel: WystanTBS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEXfsils1hM

/ end of my commentary on the above video.

Letheby’s Chapter in Routledge Handbook on the Philosophy of Meditation

Chapter: Psychedelics and Meditation: A Neurophilosophical Perspective (Letheby 2022)

His video titled the same as the chapter:

• 2021. Psychedelics and meditation: a neurophilosophical perspective
Delivered at the Altered States workshop series run by the Perth chapter of the Australian Psychedelic Society.

Routledge Handbook on the Philosophy of Meditation
https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Handbook-on-the-Philosophy-of-Meditation/Repetti/p/book/9780367647469
https://www.amazon.com/Routledge-Handbook-Philosophy-Meditation-Repetti/dp/036764746X/ –

Meditation Is Built on Lies to Replace Psychedelics by Fake Methods that Don’t Work

Meditation Is Bunk – It Is Pushed Solely to Eliminate Psychedelics
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/17/meditation-is-bunk-and-is-pushed-solely-to-eliminate-psychedelics/

Pretending Meditation Doesn’t Come from Psychedelics

Article title:
Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework
Section heading:
Leading Chemist David Nichols Says Meditation Came from Psychedelics, Argues Against Meditation Huckster
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/#Meditation-Came-from-Psychedelics

Pretending that Meditation Rather than Psychedelics Is the Gold Reference Standard Authority

todo: search & link to where I wrote about this point, or simply search this site for “meditation”.

I have no problem with literal meditation.

I have nothing but problems with all the lying narrative around meditation, and the misuse of meditation and meditation doctrine for the purpose of making Psilocybin illegal.

Everyone is simply assumed to bow down to meditation — or actually, bow down gullibly swallowing false ideology.

Meditation isn’t inherently a lie, but it has been turned into a lie.

Meditation’s right attitude would be to bow down honoring its source and the true authoritative measure and point of reference, which is Psilocybin.

What’s worse than bunk Western religion? Bunk Eastern religion.

What a great idea: let’s make a religion (Meditationanity) that’s based on lies and falsehoods and dishonoring its source, which is Psilocybin!

Another Phony Meditation Book That’s All About Psychedelics, While Deceiving and Lying and Pretending that It’s Not

See Hanegraaff’s regrets “I was naive” that when he wrote his New Age history book, he foolishly believed the lying cover-story.

TRUTH: THIS MEDITATION BOOK IS ALL ABOUT PSYCHEDELICS, BUT LYING AND PRETENDING IT’S NOT.

Article: “Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs (Timmermann & Letheby 2021)”, Presents Letheby’s “Metaphysical Beliefs Questionnaire” (MBQ) and Draws Some Items from FAD-Plus Questionnaire

A non-psychedelic instrument, that presents an assortment of ordinary-state based EPISTEMOLOGY (not Phenomenology) positions.

My page about FAD:

FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/03/fad-plus-free-will-and-determinism-questionnaire-paulhus-2011/

Letheby’s article about FAD contains a table of all the ordinary-state based epistemology positions, as if that’s the options for metaphysics positions in “Philosophy of Psychedelics”:

Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs
Christopher Timmermann & Chris Letheby
2021
Cited by Johnson’s review of Letheby’s book.
https://www.google.com/search?q=timmermann+%22psychedelics+alter+metaphysical+beliefs%22
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34815421/
Open-access .pdf
Auto citation:
Timmermann C, Kettner H, Letheby C, Roseman L, Rosas FE, Carhart-Harris RL. Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs. Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 23;11(1):22166. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2. PMID: 34815421; PMCID: PMC8611059.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2

Matthew Johnson’s Coverage of Letheby

Matthew “Lose the Buddha statue” Johnson
Introduction: Psychedelic Science Needs Philosophy
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9452

Johnson is surprised and bummed that psychedelics move people away from his pet view, which is hardcore extremist definite materialism/ physicalism/ reductionism/ brain science/ neuroscience/ Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism/ “naturalism”.

Psychedelic Therapy vs. Egodeath Theory

tbd

The Limited Range of Philosophy Positions Available to and Considered by Letheby

Any position you want, as long as its main focus is the spectrum from Materialist Epistemology to Idealist Epistemology.

My philosophy and therefore the Egodeath theory’s and the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism’s is, agnostic about the external world’s existence, or in what sense does external world exist given that the only thing present to awareness is a wall of mental constructs.

Epistemological agnosticism rather than Letheby’s GUESS and COMMITTMENT to SUPPOSING that beyond the wall of mental constructs, is a certain type of material external world.

Letheby seems limited to ordinary-state experiencing.

Letheby CLAIMS to try to compromise — between what? Positions on the mere epistemology spectrum (inevitably ordinary-state based & limited), NOT on the multi-state phenomenology spectrum.

The Egodeath theory is grounded not in the epsitemology spectrum (Materialism — Dualism — Idealism) but in 2-state phenomenology.

The altered state gives metaperception, which produces epistemological agnosticism about whether the external, referent world exists.

The virtual projected world might or might not exist; it’s not possible to know, but only to suppose that it might exist.

My position is none of Letheby’s limited offerings: not “definite dualism”, not “definite materialism”, not “definite idealism”.

CERTAINLY mental constructs exist.

POSSIBLY the referent material physical external world exists — there’s no way to know, per perceptual empiricism.

I’m not persuaded that Letheby is a particularly astute or sharp philosopher.

I searched the Egodeath Yahoo Group today, found my first post about Metzinger, I dismissed him as shallow pop treatment.

My Bubble of Perception article from 1996 is better than Metzinger’s two later books.

The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment
http://egodeath.com/BubbleOfSimulation.htm

Mine is a highly defensible position WHICH SEEMS TO BE NONE OF THE OPTIONS OFFERED BY LETHEBY.

Or perhaps is none of the options conceived / grasped by the FAD-Plus q’aire either, which is Letheby’s state-inappropriate foundation of buffet choices/options.

Philosophy and Psychedelics: Frameworks for Exceptional Experience (Hauskeller 2022)

Philosophy and Psychedelics: Frameworks for Exceptional Experience
July 14, 2022 / March 23, 2023
by Christine Hauskeller (Editor), Peter Sjöstedt-Hughes (Editor)
https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Psychedelics-Frameworks-Exceptional-Experience/dp/1350373419/ –

Blurb:

“What do psychedelics reveal about consciousness?

“What impact have psychedelics had on philosophy?

“In this rapidly growing area of study, this is the first volume to explore the philosophy of psychedelic experience, from a range of interdisciplinary and cross-cultural perspectives.

“In doing so, Philosophy and Psychedelics reveals just why the place of psychedelics in our societies should not be left to medical sciences alone, as psychedelic experience opens up new perspectives on fundamental philosophical questions relating to human experience, ethics, and the metaphysics of mind.

“Mapping a range of philosophical responses to the surge in studies into psychedelic drugs in the cognitive sciences, this go-to volume examines topics including

  • psychedelics and the role of governance;
  • psychedelics and mysticism;
  • what psychedelics can tell us about dyadic thankfulness; and
  • psychedelics as ways to gain new knowledge.

“Written by leading international scholars, the essays cover Western and non-Western traditions, from analytic philosophy to Zen Buddhism, and discuss a variety of hallucinogens, such as LSD, MDMA, and Ayahuasca, in order to build a much-needed bridge between the rapidly growing scientific research and the philosophy behind psychedelic experience.”

Metzinger’s Journal of Philosophy and the Mind Sciences: Special Issue on Letheby’s Book

Page title:
Journal: Philosophy and the Mind Sciences (Metzinger 2020)
Section heading:
Vol. 3 (January 25, 2022) – Book Symposium: Philosophy of Psychedelics
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/29/journal-philosophy-and-the-mind-sciences-metzinger-2020/#Vol-3

I copied my details (the list of articles) from my Idea Development page 16 to below.
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#Philosophy-Mind-Sciences-Vol3 – list of articles in the issue about Letheby’s book.

Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, Vol. 3, 2022: Special Issue: Book Symposium: Philosophy of Psychedelics (Letheby 2021)

Philosophy and the Mind Sciences, Vol. 3, 2022: Special Issue: Book Symposium: Philosophy of Psychedelics
Volume 3
January 25, 2022
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/issue/view/270 – MAIN NAVIGATION LINK, but scroll down to the “Special Issue” section, below the regular “Articles” section.

I found the special issue by searching “Philosophy and the Mind Sciences” “Philosophy of Psychedelics”
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Philosophy+and+the+Mind+Sciences%22+%22Philosophy+of+Psychedelics%22

Concise List of Articles in Special Issue

Book Symposium: Philosophy of Psychedelics
1-page short overview of the issue.
Chiara Caporuscio, Sascha Benjamin Fink
The References section is links to the articles which are in the “special” section of the special issue, in author name order. Prefer instead the main page, above, starting w/ the Special section grouping of articles, below the first articles.
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9659

Introduction: Psychedelic Science Needs Philosophy
Matthew “Lose the Buddha statue” Johnson
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9452
Johnson is surprised and bummed that psychedelics move people away from his pet view, which is hardcore extremist definite materialism/ physicalism/ reductionism/ brain science/ neuroscience/ Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism/ “naturalism”.

Naturalistic Entheogenics: Précis of Philosophy of Psychedelics
Chris Letheby
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9627/9160 – the actual article; a 22-page summary of Letheby’s book.
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9627 – just a page about the article.

The Agency-First Epistemology of Psychedelics
Lisa Bortolotti, Kathleen Murphy-Hollies
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9283/9161

Belief Now, True Belief Later: The Epistemic Advantage of Self-Related Insights in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy
Chiara Caporuscio
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9310/9162

Serotonin, Predictive Processing and Psychedelics
Matteo Colombo
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9320/9163

Psychedelics Favour Understanding Rather Than Knowledge
Sascha Benjamin Fink
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9264/9164

Positive Affect and Letheby’s Naturalization of Psychedelic Therapy
Sarah Hoffman
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9285/9166

Through the Psychedelic Looking-Glass: The Importance of Phenomenal Transparency in Psychedelic Transformation
Aidan Lyon, Anya Farennikova
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9323

How Level is the ‘Cognitive Playing Field’? Context Shapes Alterations in Self-Conception During the Psychedelic Experience
Joshua M. Martin, Philipp Sterzer
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9326/9167

Self and Knowledge in Psychedelic Therapy: Reply to Commentaries on Philosophy of Psychedelics
Chris Letheby
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9642/9172

Selected Articles of Special Issue, with Abstract or Commentary

Naturalistic Entheogenics: Précis of Philosophy of Psychedelics
Chris Letheby
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9627/9160 – the actual article; a 22-page summary of Letheby’s book.
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9627 – just a page about the article. Excerpt from Abstract:

“The book discusses philosophical issues arising from the therapeutic use of “classic” (serotonergic) psychedelic drugs such as psilocybin and LSD.

The book is organised around what I call the Comforting Delusion Objection to psychedelic therapy [i totally agree, your therapy is delusion -cm]: the concern that this novel and promising treatment relies essentially on the induction of non-naturalistic metaphysical beliefs, rendering it epistemically (and perhaps, therefore, ethically) objectionable.”

It is highly unclear whether psychedelic cybernetic eternalism (the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence) constitutes “non-naturalistic metaphysical beliefs”.

In Physics, the kind William James objected to, the Minkowski block universe is about the physical material realm.

The Minkowski block universe is the basis for my 1988 theory of the cybernetic (rather than “unity + reduce size of ego”) nature of ego transcendence.

My Egodeath theory (the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism) is based on (in part) Minkowski spacetime Physics.

My theory fits what Letheby called for in the start of his good video.

Letheby says we should make Philosophy compatible with Naturalism (physicalism/ materialism/ reductionism) and not make Philosophy wholly independent of naturalistic Science.

WARNING FLAGS:

1) Letheby’s “Philosophy” book is SOLELY about “therapy”.

2) Letheby’s abstract jargon term ‘naturalistic‘ means ideological commitment to a philosophy/ ideological anti-religion, a literally, explicitly anti- belief-in-God paradigm of hardcore extremist definite materialism reductionist physicalism, very much Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism, pointedly so.

Journal of Consciousness Studies Article Recommends “Avoid terms such as ‘ego dissolution’, they are too vague”
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/26/the-risks-of-vague-abstract-descriptors-like-mystical-supernaturalism-vs-scientific-naturalism/#JCS-avoid-ego-dissolution-too-vague

The stupidest and least insightful debate is “Does God exist, yes or no?”

My approach instead is to ask:

To what does ‘God’ refer, in altered-state phenomenology?

Letheby literally pits “belief in God”(?) (a word which he probably neglects to even define, using terms in a lay fashion) against his commitment to his “naturalism” commitment-programme.

Letheby STRIVES to assert an extreme conception of ‘naturalism’, while also claiming to try to compromise.

I can relate, in some ways; see my praise for Moving Past Mysticism, by Sanders & Zijlmans.

Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework

See my enthusiastic cheerleading for STEM as the opposite of a mysticism stylistic approach to explanation — as far as explanatory styles are concerned (vs. epistemology ideology).

Through the Psychedelic Looking-Glass: The Importance of Phenomenal Transparency in Psychedelic Transformation
Aidan Lyon, Anya Farennikova
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9323 – Abstract:

“What makes psychedelic psychotherapy work?

Is it the induction of psychedelic experience, with its distinct patterns of hallucinations and insights,

or is it the neural ‘shakeup’ that moves the brain out of its regular mode of functioning and into a more disordered state?

“We consider the role that attention-related phenomenological changes play in psychedelic transformation and psychotherapy.

“We review Letheby’s account of psychedelic psychotherapy, which appeals to increases in phenomenal opacity [metaperception] as the central mechanism of psychotherapeutic transformation.

“We argue that there is an alternative vehicle of psychedelic transformation that this account overlooks, involving radically transparent experiences.

“We outline the common kinds of phenomenal transparency shifts typical of psychedelic experiences, and argue that in many cases, such shifts are responsible for the psychotherapeutic benefits.

“This argument motivates an alternative approach to possible mechanisms of psychedelic self-transformation, and opens up a new venue of empirical research into the role of attention and phenomenology in psychedelic psychotherapy.”

re: Cognitive article:

At ‘Cognitive’, read “Cognitive Neuroreductionism”. Also: non-branching world-conception -cm

/ end of Symposium commentaries under the influence of Psilocybin mixed wine

The Gods Bring Letheby & Metzinger to the Psilocybin Mixed-Wine Symposium Banquet

Photo: Cybermonk. Nov 29, 2013.
Douris kylix (Psilocybin mixed wine cup) of Jason, Ladon, Athena, golden fleece.

Figure 1. Jason, Ladon, Golden Fleece, & Athena (kylix by Douris)

Features:

  1. Snake body, human torso.
  2. Right hand touches non-branching spear.
  3. Non-branching spear separates mortal and immortal boundary.
  4. Owl of wisdom.
  5. Death-head gorgon medusa breastplate.
  6. A riddling Sphinx on the helmet, a gate guard.
  7. Serpents in Athena’s breastplate.
  8. Non-branching vine tree.
  9. Golden fleece of sacrificed ram blocks view of branching portion of tree.
  10. Ladon serpent/dragon.
  11. Jason dead and impotent in conjunction with non-branching serpent.

Poor Model: We Start as Materialist Physicalists, and then Psychedelics Give Delusion of Metaphysics Insight

Actually, the Mind Starts as Possibilism-Thinking in the Possibilism Experiential Mode, then Experiences Psychedelic Eternalism, Which Produces Eternalism Thinking

All Philosophers Are Limited to the Possibilism Framework, Including the Ordinary-State Based Misconception of Eternalism

The Limitations of the FAD-Plus Questionnaire’s Notion of “Determinism” Is the Limitation of Letheby’s Range of Thinking

Article title:
FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)
Section heading:
Fatalistic Determinism [5] (Egoic Domino-Chain Determinism)
Sec
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/03/fad-plus-free-will-and-determinism-questionnaire-paulhus-2011/#Fatalistic-Determinism

The 5 Ordinary-State, Classroom Philosophy Debate, Domino-Chain Determinism Questions that Make Up the “Fatalistic Determinism” Subscale

Remember, this questionnaire is NOT psychedelics-aware; it STRONGLY defaults to ordinary-state based conceptions.

  • My future has already been determined by fate.
  • No matter how hard you try, you can’t change your destiny.
  • Fate already has a plan for each of us.
  • What will be, will be-there’s not much you can do about it.
  • Whether we like it or not, mysterious forces seem to move our lives.

Why is Letheby using this non-psychedelic, ordinary-state-based instrument to construct his metaphysics options on top of?

What could possibly go wrong?

Reductionism like CEQ, reducing altered state realm to the ordinary state realm; omitting the only relevant metaphysics model.

Letheby’s Book Is Predictably 70% Bunk

Update [8:49 a.m. March 4, 2023] after I created this “70% Bunk” section last night: Letheby Overlaps (a lot) with the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence – see my section above, Letheby’s Focus Stops Short of Cybernetic Eternalism.

The Contributions & Shortcomings of Letheby

What Letheby Gets Right

What Letheby Gets Wrong

The Contributions & Shortcomings of Each Theorist or School

The wisdom & folly of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology

The wisdom & folly of Ramesh Balsekar (“enlightenment = no-free-will”)

The wisdom & folly of Bricklin (“enl = psychedelic eternalism)

My critique and reserved limited praise of Metzinger

My critique and reserved limited praise of Sanders (article Moving Past Mysticism).
Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework

The contributions & shortcomings of Carl Ruck

The contributions & shortcomings of Thomas Hatsis

The contributions & shortcomings of Irvin (gnostic media then logos media)

The contributions & shortcomings of John Rush

The contributions & shortcomings of Ken Wilber

The contributions & shortcomings of Alan Watts

The contributions & shortcomings of Thomas Metzinger (“the self/the ego tunnel is an illusion; puppet”)

The contributions & shortcomings of Ramesh Balsekar (enlightenment = no-free-will)

The contributions & shortcomings of Jonathan Bricklin (“enlightenment = psychedelic eternalism”)

The contributions & shortcomings of Manly Hall (Secret Teachings of All Ages)

The contributions & shortcomings of Jerry Brown & Julie “X-Ray Vision” Brown

The contributions & shortcomings of Sanders & Zijlmans (article: Moving Past Mysticism)
Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework

The contributions & shortcomings Matthew Johnson

The contributions & shortcomings of Gordon Wasson

The contributions & shortcomings of John Allegro

The contributions & shortcomings of the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology Jan. 1988, vs. my then breakthrough, the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence as block-universe eternalism in loose cognitive binding state to switch the mental mental worldmodel of control; summarized in 1997 at Principia Cybernetica website, then how myth describes that by analogy was added in my 2006 main article.

The Big Pharma Psychiatry Therapy Psychedelic-Industrial Complex Brings You a Buffet of Ordinary-State Based, Pro-Reductionism “Philosophy of Psychedelics” Options, after 50% Screwing up MEQ and 90% Screwing Up CEQ

What Metaphysical Psychedelic Enlightenment is Really About (According to the Psychedelic Industrial Complex)

4765.wav, 4764.wav

Wow, [9:34 p.m. March 3, 2023] I just recorded a couple great short voice recordings arguing that Letheby’s book is predicted to be 70% bunk (50%-90% bunk) given that MEQ is 50% bunk/ inadequate/ misrepresentative, and that CEQ is 90% bunk/ inadequate/ misrepresentative.

It is quite easy to explain MEQ as 50% bunk: Per Charles Stang, lacks negative mystic experiencing.

It is quite easy to explain CEQ as 90% bunk: Omits 18 of 21 OAV Dread effects, eg “I was afraid to lose my self-control”, and omits HRS’ “It was difficult to control my thoughts”, and omits SOCQ’s “Sense of being trapped and helpless”.

Average is 70% bunk. The Letheby book is for a psychiatry book series (ordinary-state based), for therapy — the very same paradigm & industry that brought you the 50% bunk MEQ and the 90% bunk CEQ.

The foundation of the buffet for Christopher & Chris Letheby’s 2021 article, which has a table of epistemology (not Phen’y) positions, all based in the ordinary state, is taken from the ordinary-state based FAD q’aire.

Just like CEQ, this is A MASSIVE REDUCTIONISM-AWAY OF ACTUAL PSYCHEDELIC EXPERIENCES.

Also in the voice recording, I recount how in a video, Letheby defines his extremist “naturalism” position by pitting it contrasting it against “belief in God” from psychedelics experiencing.

He didn’t there define “belief in God”, but acts in a naive lay style of presenting concepts, he acts like it’s self-evident what “belief in God” means, so that it’s a useful phrase to define his advocated position, hardcore materialist reductionist physicalist so-called “naturalism”.

Let me clarify: he means “Mystery Principle X” — I’m sure you’re interested in marrying & committing to that position.

Letheby says you should hold “naturalism”, which he defines as opposite of “belief in God”.

Good luck with that Shadow Dragon Monster infestation problem you’ve been pulled into lately.

url https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spm5-SXo4Do –

My Top 10 Critiques of Letheby (or Griftiths)

Letheby Overlaps (a lot) with the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence – see my section above, Letheby’s Focus Stops Short of Cybernetic Eternalism.

1 – Letheby sometimes seems to be doing general Philosophy, but it’s driven by and constrained to overemphasis on psychedelic “therapy” and “psychiatry”. It kind of flip flops confusingly between whether this book is intended as broad or narrow (it is committed to a narrow, therapy-specific function, not broad/open Philosophy as an end in itself). This is merely only Philosophy applied to psychedelic therapy in particular. Egodeath theory has the advantage, being pure science, pure theory, applied to “make an elegant useful explanatory model as Basic Science”. He’s doing Applied Science, for the Big Pharma Psychedelic Industrial Therapy complex, which has biff’d it really badly and been called out for lopsided notion of M.E., MEQ. [side note, it is striking how very different Johnson is from Griftiths the meditation-mystic]

2. Letheby doesn’t explicitly consider the Egodeath theory aka the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism, or Superdeterminism, or Reformed Theology, or the two sets of views per Elaine Pagels’ first 3 books about Gnosticism vs. Orthodox, or esotericism vs exotericism (my Nov. 14, 2001 great branching-option realization). You cannot “imagine” what the field “would” say about the Egodeath theory; the field needs to directly explicitly address my particular theory.

3. Complete Newbie Mystical Experience – this “science” is too driven by newbies, not advanced psychonauts.

4. Letheby puts too much emphasis on changing the mental model of self, fails to consider transformation of the model of [self in world].

5. Letheby reaches a definite commitment to the existence of the referent external world – I’m agnostic about that; all I’ve ever seen is mediated. He ought to be more agnostic.

6. Letheby takes seriously the MEQ and so-called “mystical experience”, but in fact what he’s referring to is the false, wrong, incomplete, particular, Walter Stace misconception of what mystic experience is. Stace’ book is 1960: 63 years outdated and out of print and Chs Stang says it’s very wrong for Stace to omit negative experiencing.

7. Letheby thinks he’s familiar with all the free will & determinism positions (eg “deterministic fatalism” – but he omits psychedelic eternalism, superdeterminism, hypercalvinism; and gnosticism per Pagels’ 1st 3 books (Pauline, Johannine, Gnostic G.).

8. Letheby puts too much emphasis on EPISTEMOLOGY rather than PHENOMENOLOGY.

9. Letheby constructs a crude, vague opposition between an extremist caricature of “scientific naturalism vs. supernatural mysticism”.

10. Neuroscience/ Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism is the wrong, ineffective level or domain in which to base an explanatory model. Mine is a truly Cognitive Phen’y approach, counter-tactic of strategic outright rejection of Neuroscience. Stop “explaining” things of the Cognitive domain, as if they are things of the Neuroscience domain. My {loose mental functioning binding; loose cognitive binding; loose cognition}, is way more relevant than neuroplasticity.

About the notion of ‘ineffable‘ – are Letheby and I in agreement? We might be in agreement here, so this complaint would go in a different list, my top 10 complaints against the mystic camp of psychedelic scientists. I cringe when Letheby talks about “ineffable” but his problem really is that he takes too seriously the Stace conception of M.E.

Another complaint that I’m not sure is against Letheby or rather Griftiths: nondual unity oneness is way overrated as if it’s the end achievement – really it’s in practice, a newbie beginner experience before discovering the control vortex seizure transgression and larger-scale mental worldmodel transformation, transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

See Also

The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment
Michael Hoffman, 1996
http://egodeath.com/BubbleOfSimulation.htm

Search the present website:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/?s=letheby

Page title:
Site Map
Section heading:
Psychedelics Questionnaires
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#Psychedelics-Questionnaires

Journal: Philosophy and the Mind Sciences (Metzinger 2020)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/29/journal-philosophy-and-the-mind-sciences-metzinger-2020/#Philosophy-Mind-Sciences

Relevant article by Metz: relevant to control of thinking:
Chapter 1: M-Autonomy
Metzinger, 2016
https://www.imprint.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/JCS-Open-Access-22-11-12-Metzinger-1.pdf


FAD-Plus – “Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire” (Paulhus 2011)

[11:54 p.m. March 2, 2023] Cybermonk

Site Map

Contents:

The FAD-Plus: Measuring Lay Beliefs Regarding Free Will and Related Constructs
Delroy Paulhus & Jasmine Carey
2011
Journal of Personality Assessment [assessment: does the person use possibilism-thinking, or eternalism-thinking? -cm]
Issue 93(1), 96–104 (2011)
Search:
FAD plus Measuring lay beliefs regarding free will and related constructs paulhus
https://www.google.com/search?q=FAD+plus+Measuring+lay+beliefs+regarding+free+will+and+related+constructs+paulhus
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.528483
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-26461-013
Full article, $50:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00223891.2010.528483

Abstract

“We describe the development of FAD–Plus, a 27-item measure of lay beliefs in free will and 3 closely related constructs: scientific determinism, fatalistic determinism, and unpredictability.

“Previously published measures included only a subset of these variables and tended to assume an a priori pattern of relations among these 4 beliefs.

“In Study 1, exploratory factor analyses suggested relatively independent factors.

“This independence was sustained in Study 2, using a confirmatory analysis.

“Each of the 4 subscales (Free Will, Scientific Determinism, Fatalistic Determinism, and Unpredictability) showed acceptable internal consistencies.”

  • Free Will
  • Scientific Determinism
  • Fatalistic Determinism
  • Unpredictability

“Study 2 also mapped out associations with the Big Five personality traits and showed that believing in free will is not synonymous with having an internal locus of control.

“Study 3 replicated the instrument’s structure and subscale reliabilities in a community sample.

“Preliminary applications are described.

(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)”

Intro

I finally figured out how to relate the 3 articles!

  1. FAD q’aire (1994 then 2011) is non-psychedelic.
  2. But Letheby & Timmermann 2021 is Psychedelic application of the non-psychedelic FAD (2011) q’aire.
  3. Finally, Matthew Johnson (2021) is a review of Letheby’s book, which both naturally incorp Letheby article.

All of it (2011 FAD q’air, Letheby’s 2021 article, Letheby’s 2021 book, Johnson’s 2021 review-of-book article) thoroughly drenched in possibilism-thinking, with nary a trace of eternalism-thinking (naturally & inherently, firmly predictably, as predictably as sin precedes redemption).

This is an important q’air b/c Matthew “Lose the Buddha statue” Johnson cites it and cites Timmermann (a 3-way article relation):

  • Paulhus’ FAD 1994 & FAD-Plus (2010) article/instrument.
  • Timmermann & Letheby’s article Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs (2021), cited by Johnson.
  • Johnson’s 2021 article “Introduction: Psychedelic Science Needs Philosophy” about Chris Letheby’s book Philosophy of Psychedelics, in Metzinger’s Journal of Philosophy and the Mind Sciences (which includes a Precis summary of the book).

Items

[IT’S AN INHERENT GIVEN THAT THESE ITEMS ALL ASSUME EGOIC OPEN-FUTURE DOMINO-CHAIN DETERMINISM (NOT ETERNALISM):]

“Items extracted from the Fatalistic Determinism subscale from the Free-Will and Determinism (FAD-plus) questionnaire1 used for this study.

  • My future has already been determined by fate
  • No matter how hard you try, you can’t change your destiny
  • Fate already has a plan for each of us
  • What will be, will be-there’s not much you can do about it
  • Whether we like it or not, mysterious forces seem to move our lives

“Items extracted from the Free-Will subscale from the FAD questionnaire1 used for this [Timmermann 2021] study:

  • People have complete control over the decisions they make
  • People can overcome obstacles if they truly want to
  • Criminals are totally responsible for the bad things they do
  • Strength of mind can always overcome the body’s desires

Why didn’t Timmermann use items from FAD-plus’s “Scientific Determinism” subscale? search: FAD-plus “Scientific Determinism” Paulhus
https://www.google.com/search?q=FAD-plus+%22Scientific+Determinism%22+Paulhus

Strange: Fino writes “Paulhus and Carey (2011) developed the Free Will and Scientific Determinism Questionnaire (FAD-Plus)”

You can get a glimpse/ peek at FAD in the Timmermann Supplement.

This PDF might provide a glimpse into an early, 1994 version of FAD:
Roczniki Psychologiczne
2018 | 21 | 4 | 345-364
The Free Will and Determinism Plus (FAD–Plus) scale: The validity and reliability of the Polish adaptation
Blanka Kondratowicz-Nowak , Joanna Duda , Jakub Wierzbicki , Anna Maria Zawadzka
Full texts: https://ojs.tnkul.pl/index.php/rpsych/article/view/7107/6966
http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-dd1029b7-a736-4d80-b647-0f4aa31e1ef4 – it cites “Paulhus, D. L., & Margesson, A. (1994). Free will and scientific determinism (FAD-4) scale. Unpublished instrument, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.” –

“The FAD-Plus by Paulhus and Carey (2011) consists of 27 items, making up four scales: Free Will, Fatalistic Determinism, Scientific Determinism, and Un-predictability.

“Seven items refer to belief in free will (e.g., “People have complete control over the decisions they make”).

“Seven other items make up the Scientific Determinism scale (e.g., “People’s biological makeup determines their talents and personality”).

“Further five [all are listed above] items concern fatalistic determinism (e.g., “I believe that the future has already been determined by fate”). [read: egoic-conceptualized, ordinary-state based, domino-chain causality] [“fatalistic determinism” is entirely different than eternalism!]

“The last scale, measuring belief in the unpredictability of events, consists of eight items (e.g., “No one can predict what will happen in this world”).

“Subjects respond to each item on a five-point scale (from 1 – strongly disagree, to 5 – strongly agree).”

Reference #4 in Timmermann: Paulhus, D. L. & Carey, J. M. The FAD-plus: Measuring lay beliefs regarding free will and related constructs. J. Pers. Assess. 93, 96–104 (2011).

The 4 Scales and Their 27 Items, of the FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire Cited in Timmermann [in Polish btw 😊👍]

You can view all the FAD-Plus items in plain Polish: 🤖 robota:

Free Will [7]

  • 1) People’s decisions are up to them.
  • People must take full responsibility for all the bad choices they make.
  • 2) People can overcome any obstacle if they really want to.
  • 3) Criminals are fully responsible for the bad things they do.
  • People have complete free will.
  • People are always to blame for their evil deeds.
  • 4) The power of the mind can always subdue the desires of the body.

The items Timmermann used in English are numbered. Four of those items, in presumably the original English, for checking round-trip accuracy of the above wording:

  • 1) People have complete control over the decisions they make
  • 2) People can overcome obstacles if they truly want to
  • 3) Criminals are totally responsible for the bad things they do
  • 4) Strength of mind can always overcome the body’s desires

Fatalistic Determinism [5] (Egoic Domino-Chain Determinism)

  • I believe that the future has already been determined by fate.
  • No matter how hard you try, you cannot change your destiny.
  • Fate already has a plan for everyone.
  • What will be, will be – there’s not much you can do about it.
  • Whether people like it or not, their lives seem to be run by mysterious forces.

Original English per Timmermann’s Supplement doc:

  • My future has already been determined by fate
  • No matter how hard you try, you can’t change your destiny
  • Fate already has a plan for each of us
  • What will be, will be-there’s not much you can do about it
  • Whether we like it or not, mysterious forces seem to move our lives

Scientific Determinism [7]

  • Talents and personality depend on the biological nature of a person.
  • Psychologists and psychiatrists will one day figure out all human behavior.
  • Your future depends on your genes.
  • Science shows how the environment you grew up in shaped your current intelligence and personality.
  • Human behavior is always in accordance with the laws of nature, just like the behavior of animals.
  • The character of children depends on the character of their parents.
  • The environment from childhood determines a person’s success in adulthood.

Unpredictability [8]

  • The history of mankind seems to be influenced mainly by random events.
  • No one can predict what will happen in the world.
  • Life seems unpredictable – like rolling a dice or a coin.
  • People are unpredictable.
  • Life is difficult to predict because it is almost always driven by chance.
  • Whether people are lucky or not has a big impact on their lives.
  • What happens to people is a matter of chance.
  • The future of people cannot be predicted.

Fundamental Limitations of the Attempted List of Different Philosophies

Timmermann’s article about applying FAD-Plus questionnaire makes the primary axis or concern, Materialism vs. Idealism — instead of making it, more appropriately, Possibilism vs. Eternalism.

They misunderstand, LETHEBY’S CONCEPTION OF “PHILOSOPHY” IS MIS-FOUNDED FROM THE START, probably.

That’s like the huge, widely made mistake of making not Phenomenology the main concern, but making Epistem/Ontology the main central concern and division.

The right type of main axis on which to draw a contrast that matters, is Phenomenology: the two opposed experiential modes (this is a good train of analysis): the possibilism experiential mode vs. the eternalism experiential mode.

To all these various writers (ie everyone; the human mind before transformation), everything revolves around “Materialism vs. Idealism” (various ordinary-state-based classroom debate positions about Epistemology/Ontology).

But instead, everything in fact — across the two states of consciousness — revolves around Possibilism vs. Eternalism, two models of control and time and the existence of future control-thoughts, and whether possibilities really branch or only faintly appear to, like wispy, perishable feather branching.

I have read Letheby’s Precis summary of the book in full, but need to double-check that point/realization.

The Stanford Philosophy site articles – cited by me & Johnson – are same: they fail to grasp and comprehend which of the 3 models of time are the contrasted two, that are contrasted across the ordinary state of consciousness vs. ASC.

All of the “different positions” that are listed in Timmermann & Letheby’s article “Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs” (2021) are drenched in egoic possibilism-thinking.

All these allegedly contrasting positions are ordinary state of consciousness-based.

NONE OF THESE WIDELY DIFFERING POSITIONS ARE ETERNALISM, and even if one were, it would still be a Possibilism-premised, possibilism-drenched version (misconception, misrepresentation) of eternalism.

There’s a table of “different” philosophies in Letheby & Timmermann’s article.

To what extent is Timmermann’s article about FAD, 100%??

Motivation for this Article

I am breaking out this page from page “Rejecting Confused, Unhelpful Explanatory Constructs: Naturalism, Ego Dissolution, Neuroplasticity, Unity, Default Mode Network” because I struck ore – Matthew Johnson’s introduction article for the Metzinger special issue on Chris Letheby’s book Psychedelics of Philosophy cites this FAD-Plus questionnaire.

The first version of this FAD q’air was 1994, and focused more on scientific determinism (my genes made me do it) than on later-called / later-differentiated “fatalistic determinism“, which was added in the 2011 v2, FAD-Plus, by Paulhus.

Don’t Be Fooled: “Fatalistic Determinism” is ENTIRELY Different than Eternalism, and Is a Version of Egoic Open-Future Possibilism-Thinking

This point is so important, I’m keeping this heading in a couple articles.

See also:

Article title:
Rejecting Confused, Unhelpful Explanatory Constructs: Naturalism, Ego Dissolution, Neuroplasticity, Unity, Default Mode Network
Section heading:
Irony: All Scientific Questionnaires on Philosophy Positions Forcefully Default to Possibilism
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/02/rejecting-confused-unhelpful-explanatory-constructs-naturalism-ego-dissolution-neuroplasticity-unity-default-mode-network/#Default-to-Possibilism

See Also

To find any of these citations of any books & journals & articles that my articles mention, either:

  • Use the Find text box in this WordPress site. eg this will find subheadings within a long page.
  • Go to my Site Map & then (if you know key words that are in the title of my article/page) Find in the Site Map page.
    Site Map
    https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/

Rejecting Confused, Unhelpful Explanatory Constructs: Naturalism, Ego Dissolution, Neuroplasticity, Unity, Default Mode Network
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/02/rejecting-confused-unhelpful-explanatory-constructs-naturalism-ego-dissolution-neuroplasticity-unity-default-mode-network/

Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs
Christopher Timmermann & Chris Letheby
2021
Cited by Johnson’s review of Letheby’s book.
https://www.google.com/search?q=timmermann+%22psychedelics+alter+metaphysical+beliefs%22
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34815421/
Open-access .pdf
Auto citation:
Timmermann C, Kettner H, Letheby C, Roseman L, Rosas FE, Carhart-Harris RL. Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs. Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 23;11(1):22166. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2. PMID: 34815421; PMCID: PMC8611059.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2
Direct link to Supplement:
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https:// doi. org/10. 1038/ s41598- 021- 01209-2.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-01209-2
That’s a landing page where you can download the PDF of the Supplement:
https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-021-01209-2/MediaObjects/41598_2021_1209_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
10 pages.
The browser tab says Microsoft Word. Top of page says:
Supplementary Information for
Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs
“This PDF contains:
Supplementary Methods
Supplementary Results
Supplementary Tables S1 to S2
Supplementary Figures S1 to S4″
I dl’d it and named it:
“Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs – Supplement.pdf”
Printed and stapled to the article.

Rejecting Confused, Unhelpful Explanatory Constructs: Naturalism, Ego Dissolution, Neuroplasticity, Unity, Default Mode Network

March 2, 2023, Cybermonk

Why Cite the Failed, Competing, Less-than-Theory? Feyerabend: Under No Obligation

In a science article, cite all the previous good articles, and have it peer-reviewed.

These notions are problematic for new theories.

These notions only make sense WITHIN a paradigm, not for bringing a new paradigm.

Use confusion as the basis for clarity?

Rejecting Clueless Pseudo-Science Lexicon Terms and Pseudo-Explanatory Constructs Such as ‘Naturalism’, ‘Ego Dissolution’, ‘Neuroplasticity’, ‘Nondual Unity Connectedness’, & ‘Default Mode Network’

I wanted to work-up the “why branching is central” idea (in Physics/Time & in myth) in a voice recording tonight (March 1, 2023), but am behind schedule tonight due to cross-linking my expose of Matthew Johnson pushing hardcore physicalism & materialism & reductionism under the guise of “naturalism”, which is every bit as much an undefined, quicksand lay term as “mysticism”.

I read Chris Letheby’s Precis summary article that summarizes his book Philosophy of Psychedelics, in Metzinger’s journal Philosophy and the Mind Sciences. I read most of his meta-reply article at the end of that issue.

I probably agree with Letheby’s definition of ‘naturalism’ more than with Matthew Johnson’s definition of ‘naturalism’, but you can already see the problem: who gets to (re-) define the charged, emotion-laden word ‘naturalism’ during the doctrine-war of the “naturalistic” vs. “mystical” scientists in the field of Psychedelic Science?

It is frightening, Johnson’s point that the word ‘spiritual’ has (passive voice) changed its connotations so that NOW, we “naturalist scientists” can embrace a form of “spirituality”, whereas before, we could not embrace the word ‘spirituality’ because “it is a lay, undefined term”.

My worries and objections multiply, as quickly as Johnson can reassure us that spirituality CAN mean — and has shifted to be able to mean — “naturalism”, which word means “physicalism” and “materialism”.

The problem is not merely that I am against “physicalism” and “materialism” or that I am for or against “naturalism” or “spirituality” or “mysticism” or “supernaturalism” — WHAT THE F DO ALL THESE WORDS MEAN?!

  • physicalism
  • materialism
  • naturalism
  • spirituality
  • mysticism
  • supernaturalism

We DO need Philosophy, well done, like more like Letheby does than Johnson, but we can see how these multiple writers expose the problem, and Johnson points out that the word “spirituality” has (passive tense) shifted in connotations. Big problem.

Is Chris Letheby’s Philosophy adequate to deal with the problem of shifting, “lay terminonology usage”?

Problematic lay terminology such as “naturalism” (against Johnson’s magical assumption that somehow, “mysticism” is lay & vague & undefined, but “naturalism” is professional, scientific, specific, and not just a cloudy puff of ideology in the war of junk “science” vs. junk “religion” (3rd option: junk “esotericism”).

Hey Johnson do you ever — you who lecture us against sloppy use of ‘consciousness’ — do you ever define your pet, loaded word “naturalism”, vs. “supernaturalism”?

Do you ever define “spirituality”, “materialism”, “physicalism”?

The “naturalism” side of the battle DOES NOT magically get a pass.

Does Letheby define all of these terms, as Johnson acts like?

Do Johnson & Letheby share the same , allegedly professional scientially determinate defintions as against “lay language of mysticism”?

What about 10 days from now?

This is largely empty posturing by those who call themselves “naturalists” against those who defend “mystic experiencing”: pretending that the word “mysticism” is undefined but the word “naturalism” is defined.

Ok, Johnson: IF the word ‘naturalism’ is defined (unlike ‘mystiicm’, or “cosmic consciousness”, or “fatalism”) — then tell me:

Is naturalism hardcore extremist materialism and physicalism and cognitive neuro-reductionism, like the replies against Sanders & Zijlmans’ article “Moving Past Mysticism” charge?

Johnson, does the word ‘naturalism’ mean denial that consciousness exists?

Does everyone who advocates the word ‘naturalism’ agree with your answers?

And will they continue to agree, 10 days from now?

Are the just sloppy lay terms you are advocating, or are they scientifically determinate, and if determinate, do these terms mean extremist physicalist reductionism from Cognitive Phen’y to mere Neuroscience?

A giant reductionism project, just like the CEQ is a giant bait-and-switch reductionism project.

THE CREATORS OF THE CEQ DISASTER, REDUCTIONISM, ADVOCATE “NATURALISM” BECAUSE IT USES WORDS IN A DETERMINATE WAY

How about defining the word ‘Dread’ in OAV: or “Unpleasant Experiences” 21-item high-level category in Studerus 2010’s 11-Factors questionnaire:

JOHNSON, PLEASE DEFINE ‘DREAD’ SO AS TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU DELETED 18 OF 21 (86%) OF DREAD PSYCHEDELIC EFFECTS ITEMS, WHILE BRAGGING ABOUT BROADENING THE DREAD CATEGORY.

And then explain how “naturalism” is scientifically determinate use of terms, unlike lay terms such as “cosmic consciousness”.

We are not approaching clarity by following Matthew “Lose the Buddha statue” Johnson; we are increasing confusion and pseudo-explanation.

Matthew Johnson (with Roland Griftiths) is the same guy who brought us the DISASTER that is the CEQ, Challenging Experiences Questionnaire, which summarily, anti-scientifically deletes 18 of 21 = 86% of Dittrich’s OAV Dread questions without any explanation, while claiming to be broadening the defective OAV’s Dread category, PROVING THAT JOHNSON (Mr. “Scientific Naturalism”) UNDERSTANDS NOTHING ABOUT PSYCHEDELIC FREAKOUT.

Evidence that Psychedelic Science (other than the Egodeath theory) understands nothing about Dread experiencing:

Petter Johnstad’s article Day Trip to Hell
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/idea-development-page-18/#Day-Trip-to-Hell –

Johnstad, Petter (2021). Day trip to hell: A mixed methods study of challenging psychedelic experiences, Journal of Psychedelic Studies, 5(2), 114-127. doi: https://doi.org/10.1556/2054.2021.00155
https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2054/5/2/article-p114.xml#B32

My articles on the CEQ Disaster: Site Nav:
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#Psychedelics-Questionnaires

My article “folk crude rough knowledge of Surrenderism” compiling quotes from Michelle Janikian’s book Your Psilocybin Mushroom Companion:
Standard Hazy Trip Advice on Surrender to the Shadow, Trust, Submit, and Let Go of Control (Your Psilocybin Mushroom Companion, Janikian 2018)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/07/standard-hazy-trip-advice-on-surrender-to-shadow-trust-submit-and-let-go-of-control/

Houot’s dissertation critical of the Mystics’ Surrenderism model:
Toward a Philosophy of Psychedelic Technology: An Exploration of Fear, Otherness, and Control (Houot 2019)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/22/toward-a-philosophy-of-psychedelic-technology-an-exploration-of-fear-otherness-and-control-houot-2019/

Erik Davis “Stace’s book vouchsafes what ‘mystical’ means? That book is over 50 years old!” 2023-1960 = 63 years old, and it is treated as the lone, single book that’s the foundation of psychedelic science of mystic experience, and it’s out of print, and to bolster that book, see James 1902.

As sound a scholarship base as Brinckmann’s “little” (Panof.) 1906 book, which was 1952-1906 = 46 years out of date then, and is 2023-1906 = 117 years old, 86-page book.

BECAUSE OF THE “ACCIDENTAL DEVELOPMENT FROM PINE” ALLEGEDLY SHOWN IN A SINGLE, 117-YEAR-OLD, 86-PAGE BOOK, NOT TRANSLATED TO ENGLISH FROM GERMAN, THAT CONTAINS THE WORD ‘PILZBAUM’ 5 TIMES, WE KNOW THAT MUSHROOM TREES DON’T MEAN MUSHROOMS.

Plus, they have at least traces of branching, so clearly, the non-naturalist medieval artists didn’t mean mushrooms, or they would have naturalistically omitted the branches.

Plus, there’s TOO MANY MUSHROOM TREES for this one mushroom tree to mean mushrooms.

Plus, medieval religious artists had no reason to think of mushrooms.

Crop by Cybermonk, from: Letter of Erwin Panofsky to R. Gordon Wasson, May 2, 1952. Wasson Archives, Harvard University Herbarium, Cambridge, Mass. Published by Brown 2019: https://www.academia.edu/40412411/Entheogens_in_Christian_art_Wasson_Allegro_and_the_Psychedelic_Gospels

I wonder why scholarship-obstructionist con artist Gordon “Conflict of Interest” Wasson blocked and censored the letters containing suggested ploys by con artist Erwin “Conflict of Interest” Panofsky? 🤔 🤷‍♂️


https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#Davis-Criticizes-Staces-Mysticism —

“Within the official clinical discourse, at least in America, the key
to individual healing is largely tied to the capacity of psychedelics to trigger
transcendental unitive and ecstatic experiences whose “mystical” character is
vouchsafed, it must be said, by scholarship that is over half a century old.” – Davis.

My great exclamation about all of these shifting terms of confusion-multiplication:

WHAT’S THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN?!

I cannot build my theory on some COMMUNITY OF CONFUSION lexicon like “neuroplasticity” and “ego dissolution” and “default mode network” and “nondual unity connectedness”.

I’ve seen what you scientists have done with these “explanatory” terms.

I’ve watched rebuttal videos that reveal these to be pseudo-explanations.

I could cobble those bunk terms together to demonstrate a mock-explanation.

Add everyone else’s explanatory terms to my Forbidden Words list. Not Invented Here.

How Psychedelic Scientists in Their Sawdust Articles & Pop Books Explain Ego Transcendence

wrong url https://picryl.com/media/moses-and-the-burning-bush-2dfbd1

You don’t know anything about myth (or direct description of altered-state mental model transformation) unless you know about branching vs. non-branching, which is the main foundation of revelation.

But here’s the inept, ineffective conceptual lexicon put forth by pop sci as a substitute for explanation and comprehension, to shut out & prevent comprehension:

Per naturalism (which is materialist physicalist reductionism & neuroscience), classic psychedelics produce Ego Dissolution, Neuroplasticity, Nondual Unity Connectedness, Default Mode Network.

There, consider ego transcendence explained.

This scientistic explanation is as effective, useful, and relevant as (& explains religious myth as well as) the explanatory framework/model that’s provided by Wilber’s Integral Theory, or the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, or Alan Watts re: Zen (Zen Master Brad hits you with stick; gives mental model transformation).

What Psychedelic Science’s Pseudo-Explanation, Advanced Meditation, and Psychedelic Psychotherapy Accomplishes: Avoiding Ego Death and Transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

Like Wasson, I once asserted something that was wrong: I said that 30 to 90 years of meditation accomplishes nothing.

Actually, psychedelic science’s practice of nondual unity connectedness through neuroplasticity suspending the default mode network, through the practice of meditation therapy for 30-90 years, is highly effective at avoiding the threat of ego death and transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

If your goal is to avoid the shadow dragon monster threat of control transgression and instability, and you want to retreat, avoid, replace, and substitute and prevent mental worldmodel transformation, I highly recommend psychedelic meditation therapy for 30 to 90 years.

Advanced psychedelic meditation therapy is the best, most effective method of avoiding ego transcendence and the threat of control instability.

Voice Recording Against Pseudoexplanatory Psychedelic Science Terms

4759.wav (Feb 27 according to deck) is a good roast/critique of “naturalism” and pseudo-explanation by Psychedelic scientists. 33:48 Pretty funny; neutral mood, well delivered, but funny theory-points.

Theorists & Scientists, You Need to Cite & Adopt Our Shifting, Mystery Principle X, that We Each Understand Differently (Good Thing We Avoid Undefined Lay Terms, Unlike the Mystics)

Feb. 26, 2023, 4762.wav, 40 minutes. Not produced or uploaded.

A few snippets transcribed/summarized here:

… You present them as if they are explanatory constructs, but they are MORE misleading, more a detriment than a help, they are what’s blocking comprehension.

The lexicon put forth by the psychedelic scientists are actually hindrances, misleading, SUBSTITUTES for explanation.

COUNT ME OUT.

I have a better explanatory model than all of that, including your confused “naturalism”: the Egodeath theory; the cybernetic theory of ego transcendence; the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism.

What passes for “explanation” by psychedelic scientists is 2/3 preventing comprehension, wrong, harmful , misleading; and is only 1/3 helpful, true , enlightening, explanation-delivering.

Irony: All Scientific Questionnaires on Philosophy Positions Forcefully Default to Possibilism

Given that the mind starts possibilism and only adult completion of initiation ends in eternalism, means that all of the unenlightened, unreconstructed scientists and philosophers and all of their writings are all firmly, thoroughly biased and saturated in possibilism-thinking, inherently.

Non-enlightened people (psychedelic scientists) don’t realize that the altered state is the eternalism state of consciousness, the eternalism experiential mode.

Timmermann reports that (essentially) people have eternalism-thinking after the trip, and then revert to possibilism-thinking – which firmly fits how the mind works/ transforms; because in the ordinary state, that’s the possibilism experiential mode, which produces possibilism-thinking.

It totally makes sense that an altered state session initially produces eternalism-thinking but that quickly is forgotten, reverting to childhood familiar possibilism-thinking.

Even when they (very rarely) mention eternalism, it’s bound to be a thoroughly possibilism-soaked misconception of eternalism.

eg Timmermann 2021 and the FAD scale article, bandy-about the term “deterministic fatalism”, but, they are bound to think in a thoroughly possibilism-thinking way, even when writing about their fine shades of:

  • Scientific Determinism (translation: possibilism-thinking discussing determinism)
  • Fatalistic Determinism (translation: possibilism-thinking discussing determinism – confirmed below, find “domino”).

FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/03/fad-plus-free-will-and-determinism-questionnaire-paulhus-2011/

Don’t Be Fooled: “Fatalistic Determinism” is ENTIRELY Different than Eternalism, and Is a Version of Egoic Open-Future Possibilism-Thinking

find “domino” in present article. This point is so important, I’m keeping this heading in present article and new FAD q’aire breakout article.

See Also for Bad Explanatory Theories

Quote of Johnson: “physicalism = naturalism; fatalism = supernaturalism”:
Article title:
Idea Development page 16
Section heading:
Johnson Falsely Says Fatalism Is a Supernatural Belief
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#Johnson-Falsely-Says-Fatalism-Is-a-Supernatural-Belief

Surprisingly [why “surprisingly”? telling of Johnson’s presuppositions!], the [Timmermann 2021] study found that after a psychedelic experience, on average people shifted away from physicalist and materialist views (both consistent with naturalism) and toward panpsychism and fatalism (which can be seen as deviations from naturalism).

Matthew Johnson, review of Letheby’s book Philosophy of Psychedelics in Metzinger’s Journal of Philosophy and the Mind Sciences

Introduction: Psychedelic Science Needs Philosophy
Matthew Johnson
2022
PDF:
https://philosophymindscience.org/index.php/phimisci/article/view/9452/9159– “”

The Risks of Vague, Abstract Descriptors Like “Mystical Supernaturalism vs. Scientific Naturalism”
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/26/the-risks-of-vague-abstract-descriptors-like-mystical-supernaturalism-vs-scientific-naturalism/

FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/03/fad-plus-free-will-and-determinism-questionnaire-paulhus-2011/

Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs
Chris Letheby & Christopher Timmermann et al.
2021
Cited by Johnson’s review of Letheby’s book.
https://www.google.com/search?q=timmermann+%22psychedelics+alter+metaphysical+beliefs%22
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34815421/
free pdf
Auto citation:
Timmermann C, Kettner H, Letheby C, Roseman L, Rosas FE, Carhart-Harris RL. Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs. Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 23;11(1):22166. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2. PMID: 34815421; PMCID: PMC8611059.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01209-2 –

See Supplementary Materials, “items extracted from the Free Will and Fatalistic
Determinism subscales (containing nine items in total) of the FAD-Plus questionnaire, a validated measure of
lay views on free will and determinism4
(see “Supplementary Methods” for the items used).” =
Supplementary Methods pdf:
https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-021-01209-2/MediaObjects/41598_2021_1209_MOESM1_ESM.pdf, = “Microsoft Word – Psychedelics_alter metaphysical_beliefs_RevisedSI.docx”
You can get a glimpse / peek at FAD in that Timmermann Supplement: see my breakout page “FAD-Plus: Free Will and Determinism Questionnaire (Paulhus 2011)”, I moved info from below to there instead.

Abstract of Timmermann Article

“Abstract [of Timmermann article]:

“Can the use of psychedelic drugs induce lasting changes in metaphysical beliefs?

“While it is popularly believed that they can, this question has never been formally tested.

“Here we exploited a large sample derived from prospective online surveying to determine whether and how beliefs concerning the nature of reality, consciousness, and free-will, change after psychedelic use.

“Results revealed significant shifts away from ‘physicalist‘ or ‘materialist‘ [OH NOES!, says Johnson] views, and towards panpsychism and fatalism, post use.

“With the exception of fatalism, these changes endured for at least 6 months, and were positively correlated with the extent of past psychedelic-use and improved mental-health outcomes.

“Path modelling suggested that the belief-shifts were moderated by impressionability at baseline and mediated by perceived emotional synchrony with others during the psychedelic experience.

“The observed belief-shifts post-psychedelic-use were consolidated by data from an independent controlled clinical trial.

“Together, these findings imply that psychedelic-use may causally influence metaphysical beliefs–shifting them away from ‘hard materialism‘. [Johnson: 😭 😱 🤯 😵]

“We discuss whether these apparent effects are contextually independent.”

This is a fkking smoking gun! (the fact that Johnson wants, and even expects (“Surprisingly, …”), psychedelics to result in belief in hard materialism, which he calls “naturalism” in Science)

The mysticism advocates are right: the “naturalistic science” advocates are caricature-degree EXTREMIST HARD MATERIALISTS and likely to go so far as HARDCORE REDUCTIONISTS from Cognitive Phen’y to brain science (Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism) – I’m thinking of deniers of conscious experiencing.

Clear Description of the Explanatory Paradigm of Transpersonal Psychology

Good description by Winkelman & Roberts of the worldview explanatory paradigm of “Transpersonal Psychology“:

Psychedelic Induced Transpersonal Experiences, Therapies, and Their Implications for Transpersonal Psychology
Thomas Roberts & Michael Winkelman
in book:
The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Transpersonal Psychology
2013
https://www.academia.edu/4674528/Psychedelic_Induced_Transpersonal_Experiences_Therapies_and_Their_Implications_for_Transpersonal_Psychology

Why My January 1988 Non-Branching Block Universe Ego Transcendence Realization Was Slam-Dunk Certain

Initial page content posted 10:49 p.m. March 1, 2023, Cybermonk

Contents:

Intro

The merit of ‘branching’ in explanatory theory in Physics/Time & in Myth/Art motifs.

I’m talking-through and writing-out my history of writing or explaining ego transcendence in terms of ‘branching’ and block-universe “non-branching”.

I have to do a good job of explaining why branch, branching, tree, egoic thinking, possibilism-thinking; non-branching = eternalism-thinking. My 2006 article omits non-branching (unlike 1997 summary).

{non-branching} (in Physics, in myth) is the main thing lacking or weak or not pointed enough.

I have to explain now the under-covered topic, of why non-branching summarizes the 2007 article and completes it, for closure of theory.

My 1997 myth-excluding, Core theory writeup has more on non-branching than my 2006 myth article.

Recent Voice Recordings Have Direct Good Discussion of Merit of Branching

Feb 26-28 2023 voice recordings eg 4759.wav have direct on-topic treatment.

todo: transcribe/summarize here, or produce & upload recordings as an Egodeath Mystery Show episode.

todo: copy early strong the Egodeath Yahoo Group posts to here though they are at egodeath.com, paragraphs gather about non-branching in Physics models of time, around 2001.

Why My January 1988 Non-Branching Block Universe Ego Transcendence Realization Was Slam-Dunk Certain

The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology & what became Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory as of 1988, put forth a weak hazy concept of the nature of ego transcendence.

Their grammar-challenged titled chapter in the new book Handbook of Transpersonal Psychology, by Thomas Roberts & Michael Winkelman do a good job, a clear writeup, of confirming my withering suspicions/ characterizations of why I reject the explanatory paradigm of Transpersonal Psychology.

Article title:
Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework
Section heading:
Psychedelic Induced Transpersonal Experiences, Therapies, and Their Implications for Transpersonal Psychology (Roberts, 2013)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/#Psychedelic-Induced-Transpersonal-Experiences

I agreed with Alan Watt’s model of sudden transformation of mental worldmodel, against Wilber’s SLOW (= never) model of 30 to 100 years of Advaita Meditation to accomplish nothing.

According to Wilber & Transpersonal Psychology, how ego transcendence works is that you do Advaita Meditation + Couch Psychotheraphy to recover trauma memories and process them, for 30 to 100 years, in order to accomplish nothing. And you should retain but reject and incorp into your new self … you should identify with and subsume your earlier developmental structures.

I agree with 1% of that.

According to Alan Watts, how ego transcendence works is, you meditate for indeterminate time until Zen Master Brad magically hits you with a stick and thus magically, suddenly for no reason, transmits a sudden change of your mental worldmodel from egoic thinking to transcendent thinking.

I agree with 1% of that.

In January 1988, in the window-walled, ivy-covered computer lab across the yard from my brick university dorm building, I managed to successfully explain ego transcendence in agreement with such confused thinking that Watts, Wilber, & the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology put forward 1957-1988, by a FAR SIMPLER, FAR MORE POTENT explanatory model: block-universe eternalism completely cancels out egoic thinking and supplants it, moving wholesale from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking.

It was night & day difference: my tiny, elegant, clear, potent model, vs. tons and tons of confusion and ineffective sawdust about reducing the size of your ego through 30-60-100 years of meditation to accomplish nothing.

This was not a moderate difference; this was night vs. day: endless heaps of noise and ineffective practice & explanations, OR, my tiny, elegant, successful model.

My only challenge at the point was not how to make my explnation successful, but merely, how to communicate clarity and a new technology to a backwards, confused world packed full with pseudo-explanations, like in 2023 we have the Amanita Primacy Fallacy, we have entheogen scholarship gone off the rails generally like Letcher Hatsis complains about, we have substitute for explanation, such as Clueless Pseudo-Science Lexicon Terms and Pseudo-Explanatory Constructs Such as ‘Naturalism’, ‘Ego Dissolution’, ‘Neuroplasticity’, ‘Nondual Unity Connectedness’, & ‘Default Mode Network’.

I wish to photograph and transcribe my earliest, August 1988 draft article as a point of reference, but really no need; it’s represented perfectly in my 1997 theory summary spec, and since Mr. Historical Jesus & Mr. Historical Paul both refused to reify and corroborate my theory, I instead added myth & esoteric art in the (lacking {handedness} & {non-branching}) great 2006 / 2007 main article.

Instead of in, say, November 14, 2001 (key date) writing that the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology article, I instead jumped from the short 1997 summary-spec outline, to the myth-connected 2006/2007 main article.

I have to double-check, but a day ago, when finding when I wrote about branching and snake, I rediscovered a milestone date, November 14, 2001, when on a grand scale, I realized there is a branch option: EITHER freewill fog and nothing is explicable, OR, myth is description of eternalism in the altered state.

url for the Egodeath Yahoo Group by find: branch and view first posts, 2001, archive 1: tbd, I briefly skimmed the hits the other night, it was striking how strongly I wrote (not about myth) in terms of non-branching, re: two competing models in Physics (and in Philosophy of Time, and in Reformed Theology).

Why Medieval Artists Are Completely Correct in Making {branching} Their Main Motif to Represent Transformation from Possibilism to Eternalism

‘branching’ is discussed twice in my 1997 summary theory spec; find ‘branch’: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/30/self-control-cybernetics-dissociative-cognition-mystic-ego-death/#budaac

Site Map section
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#flagship-articles

Find ‘branch’ in page https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-1/

“Erik Davis, author of TechGnosis,
http://www.levity.com/techgnosis/tgtoc.html – 404, so see:
https://web.archive.org/web/20011116031148/http://www.levity.com/techgnosis/tgtoc.html [poor/vague, need proper reference]
asked the following. Michael Anderson [member #1 of the Egodeath community, ie the first post’er, & guitar amp’ist] asked the same question.”

Find “14” in archive 5:
https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-6-2001-11-11/ – found it, a post about the Nov. 14, 2001, a branching choice between two worldmodels.

Insanely long epic (probably good) post. It is strangely rooted in like Freke & Gandy’s book The Jesus Mysteries, which is somewhat founded on Elaine Pagels’ first 3 books including The Gnostic Gospels.

Because posted prior to Valentine’s 2004, therefore it’s at Egodeath.com too.

Suitable post Subject:

Subject: The Revelation, Apocalypse, and Last Judgement
November 15, 2001 (about a November 14, 2001 milestone realization)
https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-6-2001-11-11/#message285 –

“A couple years ago [referring to ~1995 salvation experience of repudiating possibilism-thinking, probably], the Holy Spirit revealed two paths open to me: The Branch appeared — two ways appeared before me which I didn’t then identify with the Christian hell and heaven as deliberately designed, opposing systems of thinking. I chose determinism and knew I had entered heaven, I knew my sin was in principle cancelled and rooted out, but still didn’t know how this deterministic sin-cancellation connected with 2-level original Christianity.”

… goes on for hundreds of pages

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/#Accommodation-to-Everything-Being-Pre-set
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/#Vertical-Atonement-for-Rebellion-Guilt

Planned Topic: Appreciation of the Egodeath Community

Your posts are alive immortalized and imperishable for eternity in the Max Freakout Archives of the Egodeath Yahoo Group.

The Kafei Distinction, Between Determinism vs. Eternalism

Though Kafei used term “the absolute”, it is the Kafei distinction — between “determinism” vs. “eternalism” (which Kafei calls “the absolute”).

Kafei essentially pointed out that it doesn’t work, the 2006 main article’s redefinition of determinism to mean eternalism rather than in-time domino-chain determinism w/ non-existing future.

Recently I discovered very interesting date coincidences: including: the final day of finalizing the main, 2006/2007 article, Sep 12, 2007, interleaved with that announcement post, were/are posts (good posts) about Eternalism & Superdeterminism. At the Egodeath Yahoo Group archive.

IOW When I finalized my 2006 main article, I should have search/replaced determinism by eternalism.

But was drowning in death at the time, and then took hiatus from public posting 3.75 years starting 2008.

YI Tree Pairs: Why Short Tree Is Truth

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/06/golden-munich-psalter-mushroom-trees/#Image-24-top –

“Image 24 Enoch carried up.png” 4 MB, stamp: [6:57 p.m. February 13, 2023]
https://www.loc.gov/resource/gdcwdl.wdl_08939/?sp=24&r=0.156,0.175,0.855,0.448,0

[11:40 p.m. March 1, 2023] why in a YI tree pair in this genre, the short little tree is considered truth, but the tall, serpent filled, multi-cap branching big tree is considered false:

Given a standard tree:

Closer to the ground = non-branching trunk = truth.

High branches = more branching = less true.

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/11/brinckmann-mushroom-trees-asymmetrical-branching/#Plate-9 –

Plate 9A
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_8AgwAAAAYAAJ/page/n79/mode/2up
https://www.facsimiles.com/fileadmin/processed/wmimages/hildegard-gebetbuch_012330_10-5a69b4c158.jpg
https://www.facsimiles.com/facsimiles/book-of-hours-of-hildegard-von-bingen

Holding Branch Stem Higher Up with Left Hand than Right

First posted at 8:49 p.m. February 28, 2023, Cybermonk

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Contents:

Intro

Initially authored on mobile with some voice dictation.

Feb 20, 8 days ago 2023, I solved/ perceived/ comprehended this morphology motif-variant, see near https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/idea-development-page-18/#Left-Hand-High-in-Tree-More-Branching

This motif-decoding deserves a post: the very subtlety of it makes it that much more of a … breakthrough, or hit, decoding; achievement in comprehension.

Hard to type on a mobile device to describe the subjective emotions/feelings that were involved.

I’d need to talk through in a voice recording for Egodeath Mystery Show.

This was a significant frustration for a moment, and almost as soon as I perceived the size / reality/ significance of the problem, I quickly realized the solution, immediately followed by that feeling of release of cognitive dissonance — that feeling of “Eureka I solved it”; solved something that I had not even perceived as a problem a day previously, like eg February ~19.

A new paradigm, a new explanatory framework has that character of exposing new types of problems, as well as then being able to solve that newly discovered/ newly identified type of problem.

Lorenzetti: Entry into Jerusalem

My problem that I experienced, or one of my problems, was that his his left hand is not supposed to be breaking off a branch, it is supposed to be his right hand that is breaking off a branch – according to my overly limited motif vocabulary catalog that I had.

I was still underestimating the artists and the nature of all the ways that it is possible to represent or implement an abstract idea of {favoring right} and {favoring non-branching}.

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Lorenzetti: Entry into Jerusalem: legs = red guy’s in Golden; arms match Blue’s.

Golden Psalter: Entry into Jerusalem: Red Legs + Blue Arms Match Lorenzetti

Crop by Michael Hoffman

For now, ignore the red guy’s arms, and imagine combining the blue guy’s arms with the red guy’s legs.

The resulting morphology matches Lorenzetti tree climbing guy , who I was initially disappointed that he was not removing a branch with his right hand.

He was failing — because of my too-specific of looking for a specific motif.

My error was that I latched on too specifically, I latched on to the idea that the right hand must avoid being near a branch–

I just had too narrow and limited of a motif vocabulary, until I figured out this, and added it to the motif vocabulary, as fitting the high-level pattern, of {favorable of right-hand} and {favorable of non-branching}.

There are many flexible ways the artist can accomplish innovative expression that they comprehend the main– that the true idea of the high-level idea is to be favorable to this , and favorable to that, in combination.

Crop by Michael Hoffman

I remember a few days ago what it was like to look at the blue guy’s arms and say “I can’t do anything with this, he is wasting his arms, he’s not doing anything productive with his arms; this does not reify and corroborate my interpretation theory.” 😞

And on a completely unrelated topic: ditto, same thing for the Lorenzetti tree climbing guy.

“These artists are failing to confirm my theory! they’re failing left and right. here’s 2 different examples of how these artists are failing– but wait a minute!! Their arms are both failing in the exact same way — and now everything makes sense!” 🤯

Prince Absalom Hung from Tree Branch De-Donkeyed (Golden Psalter)

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Eadwine Canterbury Pink & Red Guys Dread Handedness Balancing Acrobatics

Right foot in God’s cloud, higher controller source of control-thoughts, left foot far from ground; far from relying on left leg.

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Entry into Jerusalem (Gospel of Emperor Otto), Plate in Brinckmann’s “Little” Book that Panofsky Doubly Recommended to Scholarship-Obstructionist Wasson

https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/11/brinckmann-mushroom-trees-asymmetrical-branching/#Plate-7

This discovery a few days ago was really experienced as a pretty big surprise and relief and resolving of a dissonance.

See Idea Dev p 18 where I described the situation.

The subtlety of the image and the problem… it’s so hidden, so subtle, I must not forget what it was like before comprehending– it’s brilliant, elegant, so subtle! so low-key!

Phase 1: Look at pictures w dull incomprehension, not even able to see a problem.

Phase 2: This guy is a problem! He’s not fitting the 1 or 2 patterns and hypoth readings I have gathered, he is not fitting my explanatory model/ theory of interp!

Separate image problem: other guy is not fitting. Im accumulating failures.

Phase 3: OMG both guys in both trees are failing in same way but OF COURSE it TOTALLY FITS the pattern when developed appropriately flexibly/ intelligently!!

A funny thing about the trajectory history of solving these two trees was that at first, I celebrated the legs — I figured out and recognized the legs were exactly isomorphic in the two trees in the perfect way: standing on cut trunk with right leg straight.

and that was about the same time a few days ago that I figured out {bent left leg vs. straight right leg} (weight on right means relying on the “right-hand” mental model ie eternalism-thinking not possibilism-thinking.

re: viable personal control stability & altered-state revelatory/ transformative model revision, rely on the non-branching model (per my 2001 the Egodeath Yahoo Group posts contrasting Quantum Physics’ “branching” vs. Relativity’s Minkowski block-univ. “non-branching”).

but although I was very much celebrating figuring out the legs in Lorenzetti match legs in tree in Golden Psalter, yet I was still failing to comprehend the arms, which were not fitting.

(I had yet to compare his arms with the blue guy’s arms of Golden!)

this cascading “DOH! 🤦‍♂️” sequence does remind me of ~April 2022 when I was celebrating one realization and perception, while still failing to perceive another important aspect of the same image.

I’m not even done saying “how did I not perceive this before, this element A; how did I not perceive this element A before??” — and I’m exclaiming about that, and I’m not even finished exclaiming about that, when I didn’t realize oh my God also element B — how did I not just five minutes ago how did I perceive element A, yet fail to perceive the related element B ?? 🤯😵

although in the Lorenzetti image of entry into Jerusalem I was celebrating recognizing the legs of the tree climbing guy and yet his arms were still disappointing they were failing to match my expectation.

but it’s funny how his legs (Lorenzetti) match the legs of the red guy in the Golden psalter tree but conversely, his ARMS – Turned out a day later I realized that his (Lorenzetti) arms match the arms of the other guy in the golden tree — the blue guy.

so everything ended up perfectly making sense and being awesomely elegantly consistent after I slightly broadened the motif pattern.

it is so crucial to be driven by the high-level abstract principle — do not be literally attached to individual instances of implementing that pattern.

have to keep your eye on the overall abstract a pattern or principle which employs variants of motifs in a flexible, fluid, intelligent way.

and above all , — damn you Panofsky, you crime against art, insulting artists in order to shield them from meaning mushrooms

if you insult and underestimate these artists, you are wrong, and you are a disgrace to the field of scholarship and theory of art, Mr. Panofsky!

we must assume the presence of mushrooms; do not assume the absence of mushrooms, like every single entheogen scholar wants to do and tries to do in their cover-up operation.

we must assume that the artists are highly intelligent and intending not only merely the stupid infantile physical presence of the mushroom but something infinitely more profound and on the exact opposite extreme end of the spectrum

instead of treating these artists as if they are completely unintelligent as Erwin Panofsky does when it suits his ideology, instead of debating whether these artists mean the Mushroom where you conceptualize it in the most crude primitive and unintelligent way,

We must do the exact opposite of what everyone does and this includes entheogen scholars: assume that these artists are operating at the most sophisticated end of the intelligence spectrum rather than assuming that they’re operating at your unintelligent, unComprehending, primitive, crude, physical form of the mushroom — that’s not what they are interested in depicting, but the very opposite.

These artists are endeavoring to depict two different mental world models and modes of experiencing, covered by the stupid Stanford artist who are too dumb to draw a tree on the diagram that they labeled as “tree”, and too uninspired to write the word ‘snake’ or even — come on — write your word “worm theory” , which is their technical term for block universe worldlines , which is what the medieval artists are depicting, like I posted about QM vs Relativity/ Minkowski time models very much in terms of “non-branching” in 2001 in the Egodeath Yahoo Group. 

The philosophy of time is the very opposite of new, as I realized November 29, 2013 eve tempted by the serpent, (Lucas Cranach) and the Jason kylix by Douris

This mistake is the same order of error as 1960 they say we have invented a brand new thing for the first time ever our new invention of psychedelics and Wasson is the first person ever to ingest the first person in the west ever to ingest Psilocybe and they said foolishly foolishly how ignorant can you be how wrong can you be ! how far can you underestimate our betters!

Whig history theory: all of history leads up to wonderful us and our brand new ideas that no one ever thought of before.

Tree of Knowledge – Great Canterbury Psalter

I aim to write explicitly and clearly What smart people have been aware of since forever, since Genesis Eden.

Crop by Michael Hoffman

They Understood Eternalism Ever Since the Burning Bush

Crop by Michael Hoffman
more on this image below

Tree Guy 2: Left Hand Higher = Relatively Branching, Right Hand Lower = Non-Branching, in Semi-Lance-ata Mushroom Tree

donkey rider throwing the same gang signs as the tree guy above! — same gang?!

Rush’s online Brown-certified Blurry Internet Image:

John Rush book body text: here we are shown mushrooms clearly depicted being handed out [sticks & feathers] — though to see them, you need Julie “x-ray vision” Brown to “report seeing that the tops above the stems of the plant-like gifts have been covered over or somehow obscured” lol

Both Brown & Brown are always seeing mushrooms everywhere; they are too much ardent advocates; you should be middling & moderate & REASONABLE like Cybermonk instead.

Look at me throw 🍄 tapestry in river to prove the Irvin Rush galleries are all false finds (while still proudly displaying it in my gallery of msh imagery).

Browns’ tally:

Curved sword: quantity 1 (tree guy 2 right hand)

Curved pruning knife: quantity 0 (tree guy 3 right hand)

Eve’s Right Heel on Stable Column Base (Golden)

Crop by Michael Hoffman
right heel on stable column base = eternalism-thinking

tree vs. snake = transformation from possibilism to eternalism

{left hand higher than right hand}

9:51 pm Feb 28 2023 discovery:

{left hand higher than right hand} means/because a tree has more branching higher, less branching lower.

Crop by Michael Hoffman

As I start to post this conjecture, I’m In the midst of bringing this idea possibly home/ to fruition:

I have written before, maybe April 2022 , that all throughout the Eidwine F134 image initiation tree balancing guys, it is “good” to have the right hand lower and the left hand higher — why is that?

I believe I posted a partial incomplete explanation, and I think that maybe now I have the rest of the successful explanation, as I read the present posting and look at the pictures.

where did they get this idea, this motif that your left hand should be high, and your right hand should be lower?

yes, being close to the ground is may be good in some general way, but I think, more specifically:

imagine a tree: take any one of these figures with their two arms, and then imagine a tree placed behind them

The higher the point in a tree, the more that it branches ( generally), and the lower the point in a tree, the less that it branches (generally); so:

high equals more branching, and low equals less branching

For example, the trunk has no branching.

It’s funny, but after all my expertise in analyzing this main image, I cannot tell you how many figures there are in it! 😞

I can tell you that almost all of them have the {left hand higher than the right hand},

but what is the exact number of conformant vs deviant figures?

give me the simple number for simple number question what is the number

link to egodeath com Rush clip that says “backwards”

Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman
Crop by Michael Hoffman

🤔 Left Hand Higher (Fingers Splayed) at Branching Part of Tree, Right Hand Lower, at Trunk (Fingers Together)

Tell me people, am I going insane

Sabbath

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/blacksabbath/sabotage.html#7

Crop by Michael Hoffman (Golden; Jonah)
🦶🦶🔬🔍🧐

lol 10:31 p.m. February 28, 2023 —

Me two minutes ago: “Too bad that the lying down figure doesn’t fit the pattern in any useful way

but let’s inspect the fingers of the left figure

well that left hand is not branching very much, so we’ll go back to looking at the useless right-hand figure, who doesn’t fit the pattern in any useful way– oh what have we here: gang signs (again)”

oh look here I just saw the snake 😱 the worm!

proof that they knew block universe worm theory!! https://www.bing.com/search?q=block+universe+worm+theory

God vs. Backwards Moses

url https://www.messianic-kabbalah.com/2017/01/20/name-moses-is-hashem-backwards/

link to article’s picture – mirror shows word God vs word Moses

Moses is consistently backwards in this image

left leg straight, right leg bent

right hand fingers splayed, left held together

right hand higher than left

branching horn pair, like donkey ears pair

Crop by Michael Hoffman

Disappointed Prophet: Worm Ate Vinous Gourd Plant’s Branches

aggh another decoding

10:43 p.m. February 28, 2023 Cybermonk:

Jonah was disappointed because the worm ate the shade gourd plant.

Here is the 1-dimensional worm at the 1-dimensional trunk of the gourd plant, and the snake, the non-branching snake is going to eat all of the branches, leaving only the non-branching trunk.

The prophet Jonah was disappointed because instead of a branching tree giving ego shade of the freewill fog, the worm snake came along and got rid of all of that branching, got rid of all the branching freewill fog.

Eadwine Horses Looking Smiling at Non-Branching Cap and God Holding Up Guy by Right Hand (Great Canterbury Psalter f177)

posted 9:10 a.m. February 28, 2023 Cybermonk

Site Map

Contents:

Crop by Cybermonk
“canterbury-f177-horses-mushrooms-held-up-right-limb-looking-lines.jpg” 510 KB [12:07 a.m. Feb 27, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Crop by Cybermonk
“canterbury-f177-horses-mushrooms-held-up-right-limb-looking-lines.jpg” 510 KB [12:07 a.m. Feb 27, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Intro

This page is the first page I made that’s dedicated to f177 image of Great Canterbury Psalter. Presently p.m. March 11, 2023 there is a lot of decoding of this image in the two other pages plus the section about this image in the branching-message mushroom trees article.

All 3 Trees in the Entire Image Have a YI Morphology (2 Are Non-Mushroom Trees)

[11:13 a.m. March 4, 2023] ANNOUNCEMENT: Looking at the entire image, I just noticed all 3 trees (2 are dud non-mushroom trees) are YI type; I need to re-inventory all the trees in this psalter!

Dark 2020 Capture
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Entire Image, with Looking-Lines and Boxed Target-Features

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-whole-image-looking-lines.jpg” 509 KB [11:08 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Features:

  • row 1 right: cut right trunk. It is possible I could have mentioned this tree, b/c such a major cut. But I highly doubt — it’s unlikely — that I ever noticed the row 2 tree’s subtle YI before now.
  • row 2 left: subtle YI morphology – not cut right trunk but rather, single cap on right split of lowest (first) split. Start from ground, move up: first split has 1 cap on right, move up along left path, splits into two thus the left is branching, right is non-branching.
  • row 1 left, already announced: horses look at the right-hand blue cap nonbranching and they also look at guy’s right hand keeping him control-stable.

Maybe I will have to publish in my branching-message mushroom trees article the entire image, after all.
found it at
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/canterbury-psalter-mushroom-inventory/#f177 – copied to below:
Is this a dull older version, have they brightened it? Click image to check.

It is possible I may have mentioned 1-2 separate points about the two dud trees (vine-leaf trees), but now, I am issuing and recognizing for the first time, all together:

It still feels like a fresh new realization / decoding, that I’m still integrating and digesting, this equivalence principle: 1 cap on the right and 2 on the left, is equivalent to {cut right trunk}.

It’s about relative branching vs. non-branching. eg Eadwine drew a bunch of branches under the big blue cap, but it still continues to represent {non-branching}, vs. the other caps.

This principle bolsters my assertion, based on Dancing Man (bestiary salamander), that {cap} = {a non-branching part of a msh tree}.

And I’ve also noted that usually, generally, {cap} doesn’t contain branching – it’s hard/rare to find branching drawn within the cap of a mushroom tree, in this genre.

The exceptions are so rare as to prove the rule.

In a pilzbaum, a cap is considered non-branching, and doesn’t contain branching imagery.

Errata

It was a mistake to at all short-change the dud trees.

Todo: I definitely need to make a page not merely of all MUSHROOM trees, but all the dud trees, too!

What Other MAJOR Images/ Jackpots am I Still Blind To?

Notes a few days later, 10:45 p.m. March 3, 2023:

It’s slightly concerning that I had left so big a jackpot on the table, unrecognized, late 2020 to early 2023.

What other major images am I failing to see?

This particular image — the right-leg standing guy, was of very great value to me because so very explicitly right-limb relying.

I never thought to look at the left and right panel together.

So much depends on the crop.

I failed to look at the branching morphology — what did I say about this tree in my page 75 msh trees of the psalter?

Ans: I wrote the heading (no notes):

Mushroom tree #73: 7 caps, pink panaeolus, veil branches, 2 pink leaves, 1 red leaves, 2 blue fans

That heading fails to describe the branching architecture.

I inventoried all 75 msh trees using this approach, so I need to re-look at the branching morphology.

This crop is too tight; by design, excludes the surroundings — so, it excludes the blue horse making it hard to see that both horses are looking at the blue cap, and excludes the heads & eyes of the other two horses, looking at God’s right hand and the mystic’s right hand.

I wonder which crop I was looking at the other day – do my notes say?

I know I looked at a bigger panel crop — and then created a better crop.

It was the entire panel which I had added to my article on branching-message mushroom trees, after looking at the YI branching morphology in a new set of Van Der Foo images.

Likely a couple different pages/crops of this image, it took several little breakthroughs before I finally SAW the WHOLE elegant 2-panel message.

This tight crop of the tree has value, but fails to deliver the many-times-greater value of the full two panels, left & right. That’s pretty much by design, deliberately omitting the context, as ONE of the crop views; this crop was never intended to replace the bigger fuller scene. It possibly could have been this crop that I looked at to ask whether — at the time, I was surveying various images to try to argue that the YI morphology is commonplace, and wow I really proved that in this case, AWESOME outstanding example of YI morphology and proof that it’s expressed by right-limb, standing on right leg.

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Commentary, Historical Report of Trajectory of Discovery

Crop by Cybermonk
“canterbury-f177-horses-mushrooms-held-up-right-limb-looking-lines.jpg” 510 KB [12:07 a.m. Feb 27, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Crop by Cybermonk
“canterbury-f177-horses-mushrooms-held-up-right-limb-looking-lines.jpg” 510 KB [12:07 a.m. Feb 27, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

I discovered this Feb 26 2023. Very helpful to show decoding date in image.

See https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/idea-development-page-18/#Trajectory-of-Solving-Horse

Principle of Equivalence of Cut Branch = Single Cap = Less Branching = holding closer to trunk; 
non-cut branch = multiple caps = more branching = holding further from trunk.

right = relatively less branching = non-branching, = right hand, = eternalism

rather than:

left = possibilism = branching = relatively more branching = holding far from trunk.

No other of the 75 mushroom trees have botched alignment of stem under-crossing, this looks deliberate, as if to make puzzle harder – strange.

Very botched alignment, yet definitely is the key stem.

Posting this using mobile Jetpack WordPress app. I wish I had created a post immediately with date url. In evenings, date is off by 1 , (subtract 1 from url day) so see manually written date.

Found a forgotten key date in the Egodeath Yahoo Group Nov. 14, 2001 during “branch” research – either magical thinking or no-free-will , are the two options — which sounds like the Superdeterminism post of Sep 12 2007 i think it was , where article says either Physics makes sense and is superdet else doesn’t make sense.

I wrote intensely about non-branching in 2001, not re: myth & motifs but re: Physics & Phil o Time [& control].

I was glad to find out that last night- proving that Medieval art is right; non-branching is a great, maximally relevant, appropriate way to contrast possibilism vs eternalism experiential modes/ world models of self-in-world.

I guess the first time I wrote (at length pointedly) about “branch” & non-branching in myth rather than in Physics/Time was upon return from my 3.75 year posting hiatus: Sep 2011.

Around 2001-2002 I posted several times about prince Absalom riding donkey hung in a tree branch and then javelined.

So you see the ideas connections bubbling, very early on, but not fully fruiting bodies yet.

To connect the two models of physics/time, to the contrasted art myth motifs eg antlers & vines, which I really GOT in Nov 29 2013, which is why I was so shaken for weeks then.

Bunch of things, at least 4, have to come together, else u dont rly get it.

Recognizing tree vs snake ideas as pointedly contrasted, is really the test of whether I grokked yet.

The change is NOT, like psychedelic scientists falsely say, just a change of model of self; they forget “in world”, though sometimes they are warm, when they mis-state “embodied” , when they should say “in world”.

Deserving of announcement posts: the previous breakthrough (re: a particular motif; narrow) – guy in tree holding stem higher with left hand than right hand which is closer to trunk.

Wasn’t there another motif-breakthrough before that too?

Check below https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/idea-development-page-18/#Trajectory-of-Solving-Horse

Check in https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/24/the-art-breakthrough-is-now-not-just-november-2020/ – im probably thinking of when I got confirmation of splayed fingers by two images: Golden Psalter Entry into Jerusalem mirroring of Peter

van der borch Burning Bush splayed fingers confirming St Martin church Entry: Jesus finger shapes decoding of about April 2022.

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/24/the-art-breakthrough-is-now-not-just-november-2020/#Splayed-vs-Held-Together-Fingers

left leg bent was another recent motif discovery conjectured then confirmed by multiple art pieces. Deserving of a post with url that day, not made.

Why didn’t i post a date-url dedicated post about Enoch re the two celestial erections (John Rush’s dubious term ) are selecting the non-branching trees of the TWO, mirrored Y I tree pairs – i noticed perhaps the 3rd-4th time i saw this image – this was a big one, big realization/ discovery, highly valuable to confirm the theory of art & the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism.

Interesting that Isaac in golden Psalter versus in Canterbury Psalter has left or right leg straight or bent the opposite demonstrating the principle of artist choice against numbskull art historian Erwin Panofsky, who in 1952 two letters to Wasson attempts to rob artists of all initiative and freedom and consciousness and intention, in order to shield them from meaning mushrooms: they are just helpless slaves; the prototype made me do it; I had no intention of depicting Mushrooms; the Distortion just decided to make it look like mushrooms, is his stupid, insulting cover story.

THE PROTOTYPES DEVELOPED THEMSELVES FROM PINES TO MUSHROOMS, BECAUSE SLOPPY INEPT RANDOM MEANINGLESS DISTORTION DEGRADATION, and then THE ART WORLD [not indiv artists w intent] CAME TO ACCEPT THIS DEVELOPMENT — his insane total insult of art & artists, to protect mushroom imagery (artists) from meaning mushrooms.

I wish to post a dedicated announce post with url date, as soon as I get confirmation of discovering a motif.

I did a pretty good job of that during jackpot two months like March 21 2022 into May.

Designating Main Article about f177

Notes March 11, 2023

Wrote up the following in Site Map when creating a Horses f177 section

Which of these shall be the main article about f177? the oldest? it would be the official place to copy crops from. Maybe have 1 formal, structured article w/ the crops neatly available, & then casual posts about it.

Poor URLs for All 3 Pages about Horses f177

Finding: these urls suck! No appropriate general-purpose key words! opinons: “catalan” is stupid, uninspired. “anglo” is attached to that, so ditto. Canterbury is good.

What Should I Call the Great Canterbury Psalter, Latin MS 8846

Wiki seems very clear: it is Great Canterbury Psalter. Other attempts are inconclusive so far. Suggests a URL title like:
xyz (Great Canterbury Psalter f177)

What are the 3 names and technical number of Ms per Lash? “Latin MS 8846, the Paris Eadwine Psalter. ”
https://web.archive.org/web/20111019022553/http://metahistory.org/psychonautics/Wasson/Discovery.php –
“the naming of Latin MS 8846, called the Anglo-Catalan Psalter. Because it was made in Canterbury, England, around 1180 CE, it is sometimes called the Canterbury Psalter. It was left unfinished and taken to Spain for completion, hence the odd name Anglo-Catalan.” “mushrooms of the Genus psilocybe are known to grow prolifically in Catalonia, on the southfacing slopes of the Pyrenees. But of course they also grow prolifically all over England, Wales, and Ireland.”

thats it, I AM OFFICIALLY CALLING TOTAL B.S. ON THE FOLK MYTH STORYTELLING THAT AMANITA = EUROPE, PSILOCYBIN = AMERICAS. TOTAL BS.

Paul Stamets’ book Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World[ignoring Europe] is nothing but an info blackout on the topic, he avoids & steers around the relevant topic/questions, is the bottom line true characterization of his IMPRESSIONISTIC NARRATIVE DOMINANT DISCOURSE picture-painting sleight of hand, smoke & mirrors illusion, mis-perception. iow THE MISSING CHAPTER OF ALL THE BOOKS: A Forthright Explicit Focused Discussion of Psilocybin in Europe. Hell, WE NEED SUCH A BOOK!!! LOT of catchup to do. You just have to WANT it, I proved that.

You all need to stop wanting Psilocybin to be absent from Europe.

You “entheogen scholar” dipshts all WANT Psilocybin to be absent from Europe, to have your fantasy infantile Amanita story instead, and your addicted-to-defeatedness, crybaby narrative of Big Bad Church.

This isn’t History, this isn’t Science; this is Folk Myth Storytelling Narrative.

Horsing Around But I Think I Just Scored a Hit(?!)

wouldn’t it be funny if I claim his crop of big brain = my self portrait, maybe put next to the low-iq grain-sower of f134 at Hatsis portrait.

Then I noticed his eyes [which I had carelessly repeatedly semi-noticed, but dismissed/suppressed before] – WHAT IS HE LOOKING AT?? 🤔 🤔

It finally ROSE TO CONSCIOUSNESS, “his eyes have been bugging me. wtf are you looking at, dude? 🤨 🤨 your eyes are bugging me! 😣 “

[what happened next:]

“At library hi-res site, zoom out… the tree is awful far away.

“What are the candidate targets on this bottom row…

“But why the odd jog in the floor & ceiling between rows??

“What could… could he be looking like… at foot??? !!!

“Because we already know that the guy in the Egodeath community is looking down at the right foot, so the right foot of the rightly standing balancing-by-God guy is already established as a target of looking.”

[Actually, of Eadwine the artist himself who is pointing to features in his painting to us, through painting a figure/character with eyes aimed precisely.]

!!!

!!! [that’s my 8:13 pm thought / scientific hypothesis]

8:20 as I type-up the above test to run, it occurs to me, there would then be TWO guys looking at right foot.

My over-tight crops keep messing me up, because Eadwine CROSSES NOT ONLY HORIZONTAL PANELS, BUT ACROSS THE FLOOR & CEILING TOO??!!

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-whole-image.jpg” 529 KB [11:56 March 4, 2023]
https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/canterbury-f177-whole-image.jpg
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

Well obviously I NEED TO DRW A DRAW A SHT-TONNE OF LOOKING-LINES ALL OVER THE PLACE.

Or, easy: make a text list of a full inventory of cast of characters, what is every set of eyes looking at in this entire image?? I need to just get to it and stop putting that off.

Didn’t I start doing that last night??

NEED FULL INVENTORY OF LOOKING (then eliminate eyes/people/horses, and draw lines among the target objects).

It then occurs to me: IF MY SELF-PORTRAIT BIG BRAIN GUUY IS LOOKING AT RIGHT FOOT ROW 1, THAT WOULD THEN MEAN TWO GUYS ARE LOOKING AT THE RIGHT FOOT, ….

I haven’t mentioned, the TRIANGULATION corroboration effect — I may have hinted at it:

Multiple indicators of– Multiple parity-check indicators of a communication message transmission, greatly amplifies the degree of certainty.

Also, symmetry accomplishes similar corroboration/ increase in provability/ certainty.

Announcement: I Decoded My Big Brain Problem

decoding: big brain: god i still been putting off announcing this idea all day: f177 in Great Canterbury Psalter:

Lame-left-leg guy [holding up the balance[8:41 p.m. March 11, 2023] that there is another network connection!!]

His big brain IQ is required to explain how left heel can be stable on column base, when crutch lame left leg is factored in – that’s my insta-anouncement of [8:13 p.m. March 11, 2023]

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain.jpg” 76 KB [8:13 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain.jpg” 76 KB [8:13 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Cybermonk 🙃 😄

[but…wait– what is he looking at?? 🤔 😳 could it be? 😲 … 🧐 ?!! … !!! 🤯 ]

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain-looking-target.jpg” 437 KB [9:10 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain-looking-target.jpg” 437 KB [9:10 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Confirmed: Big Brain Is Looking at Right Foot in Row 1

wow, i foolishly thought that I had mapped out the important connections.

Scientific hypothesis tested and confirmed at [9:12 p.m. March 11, 2023]: there are no other candidate looking-targets. right eye horizontal, left eye looking steeply up, average is exactly aimed at right foot in Row 1. I examined at various zooms, full screen, at the high-res library original site.

I have been recording a ton of solid spoken content today. I should not type too much.

You know– rather than drawing looking-lines, I would rather draw lines connecting the targets of looking. done: both.

Project: In Full f177 Image, Draw Lines Connecting All Looked-At Features

white line = looking-line

blue line = targets of looking, connected together

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-whole-image-looking-lines.jpg” 494 KB [10:03 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-whole-image-looking-lines.jpg” 494 KB [10:03 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Big Brain Commentary

This section moved from new clean gallery page, added to this first Horses page 6:09 p.m. March 12, 2023.

f177 Middle, with Looking-Line

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain-looking-target.jpg” 437 KB [9:10 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row2-big-brain-looking-target.jpg” 437 KB [9:10 p.m. March 11, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Middle: Right Foot and Crutch Left Foot, with Looking-Lines

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-lame-left-foot-stand-right-foot-looking-line.jpg” 324 KB [12:42 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom

It’s no coincidence his head is exactly under a column, as if he is a column [4:14 p.m. March 12, 2023] articulating idea from earlier today during the recording-stop.

4781.wav – here i am tracking “how did I come back to saying “my half-baked “EXPLANATION” of big brain guy’s left heel” – and that got me to make more connections and have insights connecting {bad left heel} –> crutch & big brain –> {good right foot} for {balance}.

I jump from idea of hazy pseudo explanation, to “like my atempts to discuss crutch guy” – and I made the connection. 35:00.

“Here is further proof, I just got further proof, and his head presses up against the ceiling – a new network connection.

“I officially here make a position statement that I employ the Paul Thagard book Conceptual Revolutions.”

31:50 “everyone cites each other [ABOUT SAYING NO PSILOCYBIN IN ENGLAND BEFORE 1976] OR WASSON RUMORED IMPRESSION that HE RETRACTED “no mushrooms in Christianity ]

[SO #1 THING OF SCIENCE IS USEFULLY CLEAR & UNAMBIG POSITION STATEMENTS LIKE… in hazy confusion. increase the freewill fog haze… multiply that freewill fog. ” silence.

32:35: “I want to corroborate, this Day Trip to Hell, summary: bad trips not caused by set/setting, but by resisting ego dissolution.”

so here’ we’re going to build up a heap of pseudo explanation built on modules of science certainty article citations repeating “DMN, ego dissolution, resisting, neuroplasticity…. bad trips are [funny passage 33:40]

those components aren’t wrong, but don’t add up to an actual explanation either, like I was not managing to explain crutch guy in f177 there’s the “jump” topic connection where I realize… 10:29 am March 12 2023..then I do station ID / intro clip, then a bit more on “big brain guy”, then I come to type in pages.

“Another network connection!” ie I officially employ Paul Thagard’s book: 35:20 “I cite Thagard better than Kuhn.” “Theory revision” — Thagard.

4781.wav 55:00 long voice talking ends near 30:00 when thought of this; last night [Mar 11 2023] I connected his eyes to right foot, but didn’t connect his left foot directly to big brain looking at right foot conjoining right foot, big brain, left foot, and crutch.

How Is Understanding Left Foot Needing Crutch Stable?

{mytheme} = [referent] notation

{mytheme/motif} = [referent effect aspect in loosecog state]

Solution to the Problem Statement that Eadwine Presents

Solution Equations: How These Motifs Assert Cybernetic Eternalism

{left heel on tower base} + {crutch} + {big brain} = {stand right foot}

{left heel on tower base} + {crutch} + {big brain} = [(knowledge that left leg is unstable) is stable] AND [right leg is stable]

{stand right foot} = [knowledge that right leg is stable]

Most-Basic Equations

{right leg/foot/heel} = relying on eternalism-thinking

{left leg/heel/hip/foot} = relying on possibilism-thinking

eternalism-thinking = qualified possibilism-thinking

(having eternalism-thinking is tantamount to having qualified possibilism-thinking)

Solution

knowledge that left heel is unstable =
knowledge that right heel is stable

knowledge that possibilism-thinking is unstable =
knowledge that eternalism-thinking is stable

or equivalently (i don’t consider this relation to be directly depicted in the image):

knowledge that possibilism-thinking is unstable =
knowledge that qualified possibilism-thinking is stable

{left heel on tower base} is not asserting [left leg is stable] AND [right leg is stable].

That would be self-contradictory.

You get the mis-impression of the above contradiction being asserted, only if you ignore the crutch, which indicates “left leg is unstable“.

{left heel on tower base} with {crutch} and {big brain} is asserting [(knowledge that left leg is unstable) is stable] AND [right leg is stable], which is consistent.

[12:05 p.m. March 12, 2023]: the crutch is a bit weak to complete the equation, so “big brain” motif is added, saying to go a bit meta. We are not saying “left heel is stable”, we are like saying “unstable left heel is stable”.

Crutch Negating Asserting Left Heel

Do Not Read “Crutch” in any Positive Sense, it Here Means {left} [ie, possibilism-thinking] = Failure, Broken, Collapse, Incapacitated

It’s the profound difference between …. see pre/trans fallacy, ken wilber. between naive possibilism-thinking vs. qualified possibilism-thinking.

They APPEAR to be the same, but:
possibilism-thinking is opposite of eternalism-thinking.
whereas in sharp contrast,
qualified possibilism-thinking is equivalent to eternalism-thinking.

So, naive possibilism-thinking != qualified possibilism-thinking;

naive possibilism-thinking = -(qualified possibilism-thinking)
qualified possibilism-thinking = -(naive possibilism-thinking)

which brings me back to saying past cpl days, “the crutch is like a negative sign”; “left heel is not viable”. “left heel is unstable”.

[12:17 p.m. March 12, 2023]: crutch here means purely negative; lame; broken, doesn’t-work, incapable, disability. Now you appreciate why {big brain} needs to be added to the formula. “left heel made viable by the crutch” does not work, cannot be made to work! wrong reading!

Eadwine says: left heel is utterly hopeless, it is inherently the very definition of failure, doesn’t work, cannot work, beyond all repair, it’s been thrown in the furnace of descrtruction. left heel is TOTALLY ACCURSED.

No crutch can “supplement” and “repair” the phantom-power left heel. Such misuse of “crutch” motif is a wrong reading. “Wrong Answer; Try harder, big-brained viewer.”

Santa Claus doesn’t exist, but if you add a crutch, then he totally exists? No! Doesn’t work! try harder to interpret, with crutch solely indicating “LEFT IS IMPOTENT”.

Apply your big brain so as to avoid misreading “crutch makes the impossible possible, to stand on a phantom that’s designed to utterly fail.”

The crutch is a red X drawn on left heel. It says “No left heel”.

Left heel cannot support any weight, it gives freakout control fighting against itself escalating to disaster/ catastrophic loss of any effective control stability.

Adding a crutch does not change that.

Left heel on column base is a severe 100% problem and you cannot make left heel support you by adding a crutch.

We’re shown an unredeemable, incorrigible left heel, like it’s not there, ; the left heel is no heel at all; it cannot … it doesn’t exist, it’s not there, you cannot “fix” it.

See f134 image, pink guy in tree, FLOATING LEFT FOOT & HAND.

The left heel inherently floats powerless, no crutch can change or “fix” the phantom power of left heel.

Notes

He’s asserting that {big-brain knowledge that left leg is unstable} is stable.

bad crop fails toshow – yesterday I failed to comprehend connect the two feet, poor crop: valuable focus, but inadequate/ incomplete. Eadwine didn’t want me to just stop there.

Big Brain’s “looking” connects his left foot to upper level’s right foot. remember how i promised but failed, to draw lines connecting the looked-at things? Maybe I better do that, THERE IS LOT OF JUICE STILL LEFT TO SQUEEZE i am shamed / humiliated by :

yesterday I still failed to get the all most-main messages from this cybernetic communication message image.

ah well that leaves this profound network-connection idea, as a genuine major contribution that this* brand new page (with good URL) delivers! 😊 🎉

*The above big-brain sections were originally worked-up in the below page, on Mar 12 2023, then immediately moved to the present page, to keep the new crop page clean:

4-Horses Mushroom Tree Right-Foot Balancing (Great Canterbury Psalter f177)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/12/4-horses-mushroom-tree-right-foot-balancing-great-canterbury-psalter-f177/#Row-2-Left-Panel-2-3-Looking-Lines
Main page containing all the crops.

Hatsis Portrait

Crop by Cybermonk
“Hatsis.jpg” 36 KB [4:40 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom#

[10:29 a.m. March 12, 2023] Big Brain looking at right foot means his left heel is directly taunting us, posing a puzzle interp problem to us (a problem of Eadwine is challenging the viewer:

“Question: Identifiy the referent: what aspect of high dose Psilocybin effect is analogous to this imagery motif combination?

How can I be asserting both, right leg stable, left leg unstable in Row 1, yet in Row 2, I appear to assert left leg stable (detail: crutch)”

[ans: he is not asserting left leg stable; he’s asserting that {big-brain knowledge that left leg is unstable} is stable]

… as “you guys got a big problem, requiring big brain to solve”,

throws down gauntlet at us, b/c he is looking at row 1 foot that says “only right foot is viable”, yet he’s left foot relying on stable column base. (and has crutch for left leg, btw detail).

his brain so big pressing AGAINST THE row 2 CEILING = row 1 FLOOR.

Jerry Brown is right – you MUST have hi-res images here to determine / prove what eyes are looking at.

Blurry is usually very misleading (whites/pupils of eyes distorted).

Cybermonk looking at right foot (= eternalism-thinking) while relying on left foot (= qualified possibilism-thinking)

from naive possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking which includes qualified possibilism-thinking such that eternalism-thinking is equivalent to qualified possibilism-thinking;

eternalism-thinking = qualified possibilism-thinking

right foot = crutch + left foot = stable control in high dose Psilocybin state = eternalism experiential mode

Spoken Idea Development Insight Connecting Big Brain Right Foot & Left Foot

wow! unexpected. figured out glimmer of this seed of this realization while voice recording reading about Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell where he says:

IT’S A MYTH THAT BAD TRIPS ARE DUE TO SET & SETTING; THEY ARE DUE TO RESISTING EGO DISSOLUTION

but that is not the idea that made me realize this big brain guy interpretation – I’ll have to replay voice recording to see my sequence of thoughts, tape rolling on that recording 4781.wav.

What sequence of topics was I ranting on, that led …

28:00 – Paul Stamets NEVER DISCUSSES THE TOPIC AS A SCOPED TOPIC, OF PSILOCYBIN IN EUROPE ENGLAND (or w Religion).

Don’t b.s. me, a couple fragmented half-sentences where *I* have to do the authoring work to REWRITE STAMETS BOOK to forcibly pin him down and FORCE him to discuss the TOPIC, as a topic, grab his head and FORCE him to ADDRESS THE DAMNED TOPIC: WHAT *IS* YOUR POSITION STATEMENT ON THIS *TOPIC* of Psilocybin in europe?

Why is Letcher & Hatsis & Stamets in cahoots to IMPRESSIONISTIC NARRATIVE FOLK CRUDE MYTH-TELLING STORYTELLING PICTURE-PAINTING of Amanita = Europe, Psilocybin = Americas.

Instead of #1 quality of “Science” is CLEAR TREATMENTS OF TOPICS (not “experiments”).

Why is Staments AS UNCLEAR AS HE COULD POSSIBLY BE on the topic of Psilocybin in Europe/England(/W religion)?

He is constinutionally incapble of thinking that topic.

Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell: “Bad trips are not caused by set and setting. Bad trips are caused by resisting ego dissolution.” (

A heap of groupthink pseudo-explanation = “psychedelic science”, a foundation of mud.

We know this, as Science building-blocks that are certain, because of our circle-journal citation fest — “Everyone else says “default mode network = unity nondual complete mystical esxpeirence ego dissolution resistance set and setting causes bad trips”, SO IT MUST BE TRUE.”

DON’T ROCK THE BOAT. PLAY ALONG, pretending this dust-and-smoke activity constitutes “the light of science”, brick building blocks constructing our towering sky-castle

Articles cite each other and spew and regurgitate the same Science Folk Fairytale Pretended Explanations.

Every tenth article warns that the articles citing each other are all wrong:

“My group’s research article proves that it’s a myth that DMN reduces cognitive activity.”

“My group’s research article proves that it’s a myth that set and setting is the cause of bad trips.”

“My group’s research article proves that there is no determinate relation between cognitive experiencing and brain scans.”

“My group’s research article proves that PSYCHEDELIC SCIENCE IS PSEUDO-EXPLANATION.”

But they have no idea what to do to ground their sky-castle of circle-journal citation fest, floating off on a cloud of unicorn gas, so they just ignore the articles that say emperor no clothes, and keep churning out –

They cite each other twice as much to compensate for the erroneous nature of all the articles.

“Since the articles are known to be wrong, we’ll compensate by citing more of them.“

I call for a Complete Reset in my end of my 2006 Plainc aritcle: I call for “STOP DISCUSSING WASSON AND ALLEGRO; MOTHBALL ALL OF THAT, stop making that our “foundation”

TAKE A COMPLETELY FRESH START in asking: Extent Psilocybin Western history/ Europe/England?

Force Paul Stamets to talk about that topic-scope as such!

Stamets has said NOTHING on this topic, don’t B.S. me:

If I have to rewrite his book to glean & extract & gather a proper section on this topic, then that just proves my point:

STAMETS (OR GUZMAN) HAS NEVER WRITTEN ANY REAL SECTION ABOUT THE EXTENT OF PSILOCYBIN IN EUROPE/ENGLAND/WESTERN HISTORY.

HE HAS NEVER DELIVERED ANY POSITION STATEMENT SUMMARY ON THIS TOPIC.

Scattered CARELESS fragments that somehow it falls of ME to gather and glean, just proves my point.

It is a myth that Western religion lacks Psilocybin, and we need to stop avoiding the topic – that is my message in my article on branching-message mushroom trees.

We don’t know anything.

We have never asked the question.

We have never made proper position staetments on this matter.

What we have is folk crude rough myth-level narrative impressionistic picture-painting

We do not have any …

“See Brinckmann’s little 1906 book in German“, a quote echoing from Panofsky, 46 years out of date in 1952, now 117 years out of date, 86 pages, NOTHING!

WE HAVE NO SCHOLARSHIP ON PSILOCYBIN IN W RELIGION – why not??

And why does no one have ANY interest at all, on this topic?

Why are everyone, re: entheogen scholarship, CRAZED about AMANITA madness enthusiasm (as Hatsis rightly condemns), yet no one has even the slightest interest in ingesting Amanita?! or doing any Musicmol research, WTFF!! Something is very, entirely out of joint here!!

What we have like Hatsis says, is MYTH.

Folk myth taken as if scientific position statements.

Cite the entire body of scholarship on Psilocybin in Europe/England/Western religion in my branching-message mushroom trees article. Cite M Hoffman 2015 toxicology “Someone oughta consider Psilocybin in mystery religions [because our theory that Amanita was the engine of mystery religions has proven so sound and rewarding and has caused so much vigorous, engaged research into musicmol, and people using and tying ingesting it] 😵

Every entheogen scholar is fanatical and madly obsessed (per Hatsis) about storytelling about how Amanita is the source of all myth and religion and gnosis and everything…. yet no one has even the tiniest interest in any actual investigation. It’s strictly about a narrative dominant discourse; impressionistic story-painting, only – not seriously intended scholarship and vigorous, sincere investigation.

Letcher Hatis and Stamets paint an impressionist painting narrative, THERE WAS NO PSILOCYBIN IN ENGLAND BEFORE 1976.

I’m sure, it’s a sure-bet prediction: if you pin them down & interrogate them, they’ll flip the football field so as to flip the goalpost, and claim: “I never asserted there was no [whatever, fill in the blank with fog, oatmeal-mouthed, prevarication, double-talk]…

… like Wasson writing: “I once said no msh in bible, I retract what I said.” Ppl then read the impressionistic painting and claim: “Wasson retracted his denial of Plaincourault. 😑 ” (see my 2006 Plainc article Egodeath.com, see Irvin book the Holy Msh).

What the f exactly are you and are you not, asserting??!! BE CLEAR. BE SPECIFIC. WHAT ARE YOU ASSERTING, EXACTLY? WHAT ARE YOU NOT ASSERTING, EXACTLY?

This is not scholarship! This is bluster & story-repeating; meme propagation!

Clouds of dust & smoke, passing for “entheogen scholarship”.

Due to Default Mode Network, neuroplasticity, ego dissolution, nondual unity oneness, Complete [Newbie] Mystical Experience[TM], blah blah

Resisting ego dissolution causes bad trips, as validated by CEQ’s psychometics science, per the solid foundation of Walter Stace out of print 1960 book, if you are skeptical about this “scientific basis foundation”[per Studerus 2010], then I will throw William James at you to shut you up.

btw not in recording, I might cite Society of Mind 1985, to spite latecomer Metzinger. SoM says in one page what Metz says in 300 pages, without Metz’ dubious take on “so here’s what we need to do to revise society”.

Jonathan Bricklin’s good book title asserts that eternalism = enlightenment in altered state;

per Bricklin, James’ “Pragmatism” means, like I say, favor the OSC over ASC …

I do not advocate eternalism as conduct of life in mundane state.

I advocate qualified possibilism-thinking for mundane daily life conduct of life state.

I DIDN’T SAY THESE POINTS IN THE RECORDING, BUT IT’S THE CLUSTER OF TOPICS LIKE THIS THAT PRODUCED THE JUMP TO MR BIG BRAIN DECODING]

oh good I remember what I was going to type in Idea Dev p:

Cite Paul Thagaard’s awesome useful book in my branching-message mushroom trees article.
[THEN MY VOICE RECORDING LEAPS FROM THIS TOPIC TO: THEN THE MUSE MAGICALLY STRIKES ME FOR NO REASON:]

suddenly i leap to big brain topic 35:12

oh I was rushing to open for editing, my Idea Dev p 18, to make a couple idea announcements including Big Brain decoding, and I had forgotten that I had started this page to correct the poor URLs about image f177.

I sure wish I would just keep Idea Dev page open for editing for realtime announcements.

What crop… i need a new custom crop for this mytheme decoding breakthrough (sorry I need to define scopes of the word “breakthrough” – this might be a very important but very narrow-scoped “breakthrough”, how can I know when I haven’t made the crop to meditate on it yet??)

The Specialness of the Ram Is Its Ability to Get Itself Caught in a Thicket Helplessly

Ram Seizure: Ram Thicket Seizure Trap Ego Death & Rebirth

Each image describes by analogy, how it is analogous to transformation from possibilism to eternalism by driving that by control-instability like three thicket-caught rams.

The harder the ram struggles in the thicket trap, the worse the practical control effective control power; the worse/ the more the control seizure.

Panic tightening, inherently not a mellow but a tense thing, the control self-conflict is the teaching/ reshaping fire.

History of Development of My {ram caught helplessly in branching thicket} Explanation

That’s my big deepening of insight, around [6:00 p.m. March 12, 2023].

I can’t say that this is a wholly new idea, been writing about “ram caught in bush” for many years.

Search-link format: scroll to bottommost, oldest search hit archive page first: deluge of false hits on “bush”:
https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/page/7/?s=ram+bush — I found a fair first mention of “ram caught by its own power”:

June 25, 2003 (< Valentines 2004, therefore it’s copied to Egodeath.com)
Subject: To regain stable self-control, accept covenant/deal
https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-38/#message1910 —

Entire message copy: starts by quoting my 1908# post:

Post 1908 excerpt within Post 1910

“When your usual accustomed freewill-oriented ways of thinking utterly fail
you and self-control goes profoundly unstable, because you see the truth —
the gorgon-like, soul-demolishing “face of God” — what is the viable way to
conceive of one’s relationship as illusory, secondary-only control-agent with
respect to the primary, transcendent, uncontrollable controller? …

“The long, subtle, advanced answer is

“Acknowledge the uncontrollable transcendent controller and relate to it in a way that is largely isomorphic with an infant’s relation to its nurturing mother, but realize that the Godhead transcends such personal archetypes.”

/ end of my 1908 excerpt; my post 1910 expands, adding “bush-tangled ram”:

“Another standard metaphor or archetype — missed by Metzner — is covenant or bargain.

The Unfolding Self: Varieties of Transformative Experience
Ralph Metzner
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/textbooks/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?isbn=1579830005

“God brings the mystic to truth, and makes a covenant, deal, or bargain with
the mystic: the mystic sacrifices to God, and in return, God gives enduring
stable self-controllership to the mystic.

“The mystic gets to retain stable, viable, practical self-control even though the mystic knows that their controllership is merely a virtual power of self-direction from a merely conventional but logically flawed perspective — secondary controllership only.

The mystic is made by God to sacrifice to God, where the sacrifice is a kind
of human sacrifice, a self-sacrifice of one’s lower self, or egoic mental
worldmodel about self, will, time, world, and control.

“In this sacrifice, the mystic is the priest who offers the human sacrifice, and is the sacrificial victim.

“That’s the real, original, direct and underlying sacrifice — sacrificing a sheep [ram caught in thicket -cm Mar 12 2023], goat, child, or human is merely a symbol of the real sacrifice, which is the sacrifice of one’s own freewill thinking.

The sacrifice of animals [ram caught in thicket] represents the sacrifice of the delusion of prime-mover, self-directing, freewill agency.

The mythic-only figure of Jesus willingly and obediently giving himself as a
sacrifice on the cross is a fully adequate symbol for any intelligent being to
use, if they desire a symbol.

“No symbolic action is needed to “use” this symbol, other than the action of understanding and recognizing the meaning of the symbol of the king on the cross.

“To “use” the symbol and “participate in it”, you don’t need to kneel, pray, or say anything, just recognize and comprehend the meaning.

“Other mythic figures also express this meaning, such as Abraham’s sacrifice of the bush-tangled ram in place of his son [a bit literal – cm] through whom Abraham’s “branch” or blessed line of viable continued future existence continues.

“Abraham essentially was brought by God into a covenental, bargain, or deal arrangement with God:

“Abraham is made to sacrifice animals [ram more caught helplessly in thicket the more the effort] to God and in return God preserves Abraham’s future, where the person “Abraham” includes all of Abraham’s future (spiritual) offspring.

“From a practical point of view, what should you do [rewrite in passive voice] when you realize the terrible truth that you are totally vulnerable to the mysterious hidden alien uncontrollable transcendent controller?

“Mentally accept the covenant or deal offered to you by the transcendent controller: you will sacrifice your freewill delusion to the transcendent controller, and in return, the transcendent controller will return stable self-control to you.

“The cybernetic theory of ego death is an important contribution because all
the mythicists and entheogenists and determinists and no-historical-Jesus
scholars and mysticism scholars are failing to see what is closest to them:
myth-mysticism-religion is centrally a matter of discovering, coping with, and
responding to no-free-will.

“What are the terms of the [1-way] covenant of the gods or of God?

“Repudiate the freewill delusion, and get stable and robustly enduring self-control.

“All other covenantal terms are merely indirect, metaphorical symbols of this
relationship.”

“— Michael Hoffman
Egodeath.com”

[6:49 pm p.m. March 12, 2023] there are three pointless loiterers, feed them to the furnace monster.

FEET INVENTORY TIME 🖼🔬🔍🧐

[6:53 p.m. March 12, 2023] what WHAT ABOUT 🙃 [discovery micro-log: why did i think of that? b/c I zoomed the hi-res site, looking at the 3 feet of the pointless loiterers, and the feet of the rams, then I puzzled for a minute WHY ARE THE RAMS’ FEET TOUCHING RED BAR DIVIDER CEILING LIKE BIG BRAIN’S HEAD TOUCHES CEILING?? 🤔 🤔 Well from their pov it’s the floor, see if you imaging flip 180 degress, … .. … .. … AM I INSANE? WHICH LEG? and f134 has UPSIDE DOWN guy in tree. And the crowd has no feet.

THIS IS NO This is not the first time I ever looked at/ thought about their feet, but that’s how it typically works:

I first consider a problem, scratch my head for two days a day or two about that specific problem and a bunch of others, and then I look again in some context for some reason or other, and THEN it comes to me.

I have been working (a few cpu cycles) on the {ram feet} problem for some 5 days maybe. A few cycles a day.

Forgot about that issue/question.

Now it comes back, that i been wondering what to make of their feet.

How I came to the above a few minutes ago –

Here’s the lead-in events:

At top of my new page, I wrote “Todo: 100 words max about each crop, telling how it describes by analogy, how it is analogous to transformation from possibilism to eternalism by driving that by control-instability like three thicket-caught rams.

Then I searched the Egodeath Yahoo Group to see when I posted “a ram gets caught in a thicket”. June 25, 2003 (only a mention, there, not deep).

I looked a few minutes ago before resorting to the the Egodeath Yahoo Group search: I have written not (alas) in 2006 main article about ram caught in thicket/bush by its own power.

Today, the past past hour or two, I’m thinking more and more that “ram caught in thicket” is very special and powerful and needs heavy spotlight attention during explaining control stability.

That’s why I was inclined to look more at the feet…. I *HAVE* been working hard, consciously/deliberately, on Pointless Loiterers’ feet interpretation …. not QUITE going to the extreme of listing a list of their feet positions.

Society of Mind — it’s not like I used my hardcore reading techniques in 1985 and read it cover to cover — but, it was welcome & green light, supportive.

d/k how much i dabbled in flipping through Minsky’s book in 1985-1989, def’ly in there somewhere I felt supported “Marvin Minsky actually agrees supports me!” “So, keep going in this direction.”

🙃🐏🐏🐏🙃🖼🔬🔍🧐

Touching Floor/Ceiling

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling.jpg” 174 KB [7:04 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling.jpg” 174 KB [7:04 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Touching Floor/Ceiling Upside Down

oh shit 7:37 pm p.m. March 12, 2023] I JUST consciously fully NOTICED THE EXACT SYMMETRY OF centerpoint red peak omg !!

🤯

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling-upside-down.jpg” 173 KB [7:33 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling-upside-down.jpg” 173 KB [7:33 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

also ~7:00 pm 40 min ago, i CONSCIOUSLY NOTICED FOR FIRST TIME, THAT THER. ARE 3 RAMS AND 3 POINTLESS LOITERERS and been son wondering “why 3 rams”. “ON A TOTALLY SEP TOPIC, why 3 loiterers??” Only finally today (day 8??) i said HEY WHAT ABOUT 3 RAMS = 3 LOITERERS? “silly idea”

Then I see the red cap symmetry in the … when i made that crop 5 min ago, i thought “this will be low-value crop”. But I DIDN’T NOTICE SYMMETRY to back up my silly conjecture 3 loiters = 3 rams, until i flipped it.

SO GLAD I WENT AHEAD W/ FLIPPING THAT center-STRIP! Notice how I decided (on previous nonn-fllipped crop of ceiling/floor) to include big Brain.

oh fck 7:45 I JUST NOW — STUPID!!! I JUST NOW NOTICED THE ultra-obvious, that right-balancing guy is standing on the stable tower. 😵 OMG

Row 2 Left, Upside Down

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-row-2-left-upside-down.jpg” 189 KB [7:12 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Upside Down Left-Foot Standing Rams – OMFG 🤯 Realtime Discoveries

OMFG over in the original Horses page i’m putting BREAKING NEWS AMAZING DECODINGS!

The 3 pointless loiterers are generally symmetric with 3 rams flipped upside down!!

The rams are standing on left leg!!

beyond confirmation of my theory, i’m getting a deep, deep comprehension and corroboration of all my most difficult-to-articulate about self-battling, rams caught in thicket the more they struggle by employing possibilism-thinking.

My most advanced speculations / descriptions of cybernetic dynamics are actually being confirmed by Eadwine!

You’d NEVER think it possible to communicate!

Eadwine is directly depicting and communicating my most difficult-to-espress cognitive control dynamics.

I was amazed in Nov 2020 about his doing that, and SAME AMAZED FEELING AGAIN!

Standing Balancing on the Stable Ego-Dead Tower

todo: crop that!! (!!) i am SCRAMBLING to discover, and to document my discovery process at same time, crazy!

I have a backlog of mind-blowing crops i’m trying to do while typing up my train of thought/ discovery-process log at the same time! crazy

And, also, in the literally middle/midst of looking at that symmetry, I saw that the right-leg-balancing guy is standing on stable tower! which gives it more of a function appropriate to its size!

I’m actually successfully grasping (deeper than ~2003 or whenever I wrote on ram how ram is like cyber-panic struggle) that THE RAM IS THE GOOD SACRIFICE B/C ISOMORPHIC CAUGHT IN BUSH JUST LIKE CONTROL VORTEX EXPERIENCE PANIC escalation of testing your power to death to cancel control by increasing control until it cancels and fails.

[6pm – 8:13 p.m. March 12, 2023] I’m realtime working in: (but maybe I should work here in Idea Dev page 18):

Section headings:

a little copypaste to here:

Touching Floor/Ceiling Upside Down

oh sht [7:37 p.m. March 12, 2023] I JUST consciously fully NOTICED THE EXACT SYMMETRY OF centerpoint red peak omg !! [and, he’s right-foot standing on stable tower, and etc!]

from now on, i’m doing all my art analysis upside down

🤯 🙃 😲 😵 ⚰️ 🌪🐏🔥🐉 😇

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling-upside-down.jpg” 173 KB [7:33 p.m. March 12, 2023]
https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f177.item.zoom#

Crop by Cybermonk
“Canterbury-f177-touching-floor-ceiling-upside-down.jpg” 173 KB

Notes

Not sure if I will add compact explanatory decoding / interpretation summaries at the new crop-catalog page, or keep it a utiliarian focused gallery catalog. Tiny nutshell hints would be good IF I cap eg 100 words max per crop.

– not nece. all decodings of them, see my 3 Horse pages + branching-message mushroom trees section about f177.

Why the Effective and Best Title Is Great Canterbury Psalter

People Rightly Rejected the Titles “Anglo-Catalan, Paris Eadwine, Latin MS 8846”

For my high-commitment URL decision, I am going against John Lash and following Wikipedia instead, in calling it the “Great Canterbury Psalter“.

Due-diligence sufficient research suggests that if I say “Great Canterbury Psalter” everyone correctly understands what I’m referring to.

If I say another of the other 3 titles, everyone is confused.

And like everyone else, I have reasons to like “Great Canterbury Psalter” better than the other 3 titles.

This psalter:

  • It is Great.
  • It is from Canterbury.
    • Everyone knows what “Canterbury” means.
    • The Catalan art was added later and is worthless.
    • Paris is irrelevant.
    • No one knows “Eadwine”.
    • No one knows the MS number, 8846.
  • It is a Psalter.

I’ve spent hours researching Lash’s claims about 4-5 titles of conflated psalters, and an hour discussing the results in voice recordings potentially for Egodeath Mystery Show; IT’S A FKKING MESS! exactly as Lash says — but like most people, I reject his solution, “the Paris Eadwine psalter”.

Lash doesn’t help his case by suddenly, silently switching to calling it “the Paris psalter” 3-4 times in one section, then switching back (silently) to acting as if the title is “the Paris Eadwine psalter”.

LASH HIMSELF USES INDETERMINATE, PREVARICATING TITLING! HE CAN’T EVEN MAKE UP HIS OWN MIND but he switchES SILENTLY between 2-3 different titles, and he makes various mistakes too, interwoven with such usage, saying eg “Jesus is shown inviting mushrooms”, in the scene God Creates Plants.

Lash is great in that he rejects Amanita and advocates Psilocybin strongly. He even criticizes his idol Wasson re: “Wasson’s specific theory” that all religion spread from a single, Ural mountains Amanita cult”.

This tells you how very, very strongly Lash rejects Amanita and advocates Psilocybin, because Lash is in love with Wasson and would only with great reluctance say anything about his love-interest who he obsequiously fawns over and glorifies as if Wasson is the Creator of Mushrooms.

Lash literally says Wasson is the creator of the word ‘entheogen’ and of the entheogen theory, etc.

Sure, hidden in his error-filled, misleading end notes (eg “psychomimetics … mind mimicking”, “Wasson coined ‘entheogens’), 1 time out of 10, Lash corrects his misrepresentation — then goes right back to spreading his misrepresentation 10 more times — typical narrativizing dynamics.

His outright GLORIFICATION of Wasson *THE* Great man is nauseating, and thank God no one else goes this over-the-top in Wasson-worship as John Lash – yet he criticizes and rejects “Wasson’s specific theory” – basically, the very Pop Amanita theory that Hatsis rightly attacks.

Thomas Hatsis severely overcorrects, hard-conflating “mushrooms” and “Amanita”, and says no Christian ever used The Mushroom (🍄).

Along with Paul “refuse to consider it” Stamets and Andy Letcher, Hatsis spreads the very FALSE MYTH of “no Psilocybin in Europe or W religion”.

Hatsis bizarrely fails to attack Wasson and Ruck and Heinrich who are at least as guilty of the Amanita Primacy Fallacy as Hatsis’ closeted-worshipped love-interest Allegro).

Hatsis rejects both “Wasson’s specific theory” and what Lash labels as “Wasson’s general theory” (well it gets complicated, re: Wasson’s self contradiction about entheogens in Christianity.

People can’t even agree whether Wasson asserts entheogens in Christianity or not (he doesn’t — though he does, or appears to, or says he does, but vaguely, prevaricating, etc etc ….)

Lash is proven highly untrustworthy, and highly deviant from everyone else: he is the ONLY person to say “psychomimetics, mimic the mind”; he is the ONLY person to put Wasson worship above the field: every time he mentions psycehdelics in religion, his main concern is to hand 100% of ownership of the idea to Wasson.

John Lash is more interested in handing over 100% ownership of “psychedelics in religion” to Wasson, than he is in the topic of psychedelics of religion.

Carl Ruck is more interested in fetishizing “secrecy”, “elite”, “suppression”, and doing theoretical academic Anthropology, than he is in Amanita.

Terence McKenna is more interested in self-aggrandizing defeatism crybabying about the Big Bad Church, than in 1) strategy to repeal Prohibition, or 2) striving to find Psilocybin in Christianity.

More hours of strained and strenuous re-titling activism or research is not going to change that fact.

Great news is, Wiki has gone with “Great Canterbury Psalter”, which is the pleasant, practical, … and it nicely throws the uninspired, unworthy, worthless Catalan art in the trashcan.

The title “Great Canterbury Psalter” is FAR better and more pleasant and on-topic than the poor, confusing, noxious, technical alternatives, which explains why people — against Lash — have committed to this meaning-definition of the titles of psalters.

Given that, per Lash, there is massive ubiquitous confusion, the upside is, we get to pick what title definitions we want, since THERE IS NO CONSENSUS from a technical POV.

The lack of consensus technically, frees us up to DO THE SENSIBLE PLEASANT AMENABLE smooth-sailing choice.

I support the direction that Wiki takes it, among the LACK OF EXPERTS CONSENSUS.

Given that (as usual) the experts f’d up in their titling, as Lash reports, then it defaults to PRACTICALITY and EASE OF USE and RELEVANCE, which means that the title “Great Canterbury Psalter” wins hands-down — the naive popular wording that’s easy and clear and commonly understood, is objectively superior to the confused, contradictory, indeterminate non-titling, THE FAILURE OF THE EXPERTS TO ESTABLISH ANY DETERMINATE TITLES.

See Also

Site Map > Great Canterbury Psalter > Horses & Right-Leg Balancing (Image f177)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#f177

Welcome and Intro to the Egodeath Theory; the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism

Under construction, in that I’m still differentiating what needs to be covered in this type of page, vs. eg in a short About page (About This Website 1-pager).

Cybermonk 10:21 p.m. February 27, 2023

Contents:

  • Possibly See the To-Be-Repaired “About” Page Instead
  • Motivation for Creating this Page
  • Just the Basic FAQs

Possible Breakout of Related Pages

  • Welcome/Intro: The broadest, shallowest page of the bunch. A little intro, a little history, a little explanation of content, a little About Me, etc. A few of the main articles described.
  • About: Short. 1-pager. About the website, more than about the Theory. You Are Here at this site instead of somewhere else. This site contains 2020-2023 content; in contrast, see Egodeath.com for content written 1988-2007, and see the Egodeath Yahoo Group for 2001-2019 content.
  • History: Formatted / arranged by date.
  • Summary: A heap of competing nutshell summaries.
  • Possibilism vs Eternalism – summarize per field of Philosophy, point out the obvious tree vs. snake contrast, and add Control but state that Control (autonomous/monolithic vs. dependent/ 2-level) must be distinctly highlighted and (at a more detailed level) cannot be adequately covered under the umbrella of “Philosophy of Time: Eternalism”.

Just the Basic FAQs

Publications: Egodeath.com 1995-2007, the Egodeath Yahoo Group 2001-2019, EgodeathTheory.WordPress.com 2020-2023.

Topics: religious mythology as description of classic psychedelics (especially Psilocybin) experiencing, especially the main “effect” which is transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Character of the body of knowledge: the Egodeath theory is a structured theory, explicit, very summary-driven.

The Egodeath theory aka the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism is a revolutionary new explanatory framework paradigm.

If a theory is not usefully summarizable, it’s baloney and a put-on and isn’t really a theory.

Creator; brains behind the op: Michael Hoffman / Cybermonk.

How long been working on: 37 years. October 26 or 27, 1985. Back to the Future day. 2023/02 – 1985/10 = 2022/14 – 1985/10 = 37 years 4 mo = 37 1/3 years; 37 years.

Motivation for creating the Egodeath theory: 1985-1987 answer: I need to repair my control malfunction per Self Help New Age Humanistic/Transpersonal Psychology, and Ego transcendence will be a needed component, and mystics SUCK at expressing ego transcendence / Transcendent Knowledge (they LIKE being inarticulate, foggy, poetic, beyond comprehension),

so I will raid and invade their area and strip gnosis out of their undeserving hands and show them how it’s done effectively, per STEM approach of figure sht out and explain it effectively, directly, and efficiently.

I expect a kind of posi-control (I don’t think I was necessarily being extremist or perfectionist, but I may well have been, in lots of ways). Expect non-dysfunctional cross-time control.

January 1988 answer: It turns out, the nature of Transcendent Knowledge and ego transcendence is drastically different than the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology or Wilber’s engine-missing complicated Integral Theory.

Turns out, “reducing the size of your ego” is entirely confused, and ego transcendence is actually a matter of absolutely totally cancelling out the ego entirely by switching to a different, block universe worldmodel.

My project switched from focusing on trying to get a kind of control, to focusing on documenting the real nature of ego transcendence: communicating a technical, cognitive-experiential theory.

The engine is missing from Integral Theory b/c Wilber provides Advaita meditation as if it’s an effective engine, which it isn’t at all — pretty much the exact opposite; the best way of preventing enlightenment is meditation, or what passes for “meditation”).

Thomas Robts and Michael Winkelman have a good summary article in book Handbook of Transpersonal Psychology which confirms my recent suspiciions of why Transpersonal Psychology is bunk, including Stan Grof (psychedelics in service of the “personal trauma remembering and processsing” paradigm).

If you’re looking for ways to avoid enlightenment, and prevent it through the ploy of inert substitute replacement, I give top recommendation to Transpersonal Psychology. Guaranteed no threat to egoic delusion.

Background qualifications: Religiously diverse childhood upbringing: Jewish, Christian, Occult/Esoteric, Restorationist Christian (missing is Catholic), also unavoidable Buddhist aspects, early Ken Wilber, then mid-period Wilber; Alan Watts: Way of Zen (article: Zen and the Problem of Control, in 1960 book This Is It).

Childhood/high school: Possessed & crazed by music, Rock, electric guitar, Beatles (childhood picks: the Psychedelic albums), Animals (childhood track picks: Sandoz).

Motivation for Creating this Page

50% chance I’ll abandon this new page and repair the About page instead. Unless it makes sense to have both an About page and an Intro/ Orientation/ Welcome Mat / “What the F Is This” page.

For my 2023 article, I need to NOT make the same mistake I made for 2006 article, of failing to have an intro summary.

I recently assessed this website for Intro perspective eg for Matthew Johnson scoping this site. It failed. I have like 6 Intro pages, none of them meet elementary basic requirements for About/ Welcome Mat / Where Am I & What’s The Deal?

List of Failed Intro Pages

The About Page

  • Fails to have a date.
  • It just skips intro, just like so many product guides – so hard for people to take a “first day kindergarten welcome introduction”.
  • My lack of Intro reflects my lack of social niceties.
  • Remember that although I’m proud of the Intro of my main 2006 article, I failed to have it IN the article until a YEAR later! (Sep 12 2007 vs Oct 2 2006 IIRC.)
Mechanical webpage type: – A Wide “Page”, Not a “Post” with Date URL

As I recall, the closest I have to the elementary basic welcome mat orientation is the About page, https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/about/ which is in the banner at top of site consistently.

What’s lacking / failing in the About page: tbd

Examples of Sensible Welcome Mat/ About/ Initial Orientation Pages

Wikipedia Entry About Wikipedia

Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page – the very first words are:

Welcome to Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
6,624,710 articles in English

and the word “Wikipedia” is linked, to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia – “This article is about the online encyclopedia.”

Paragraph 1:

“Wikipedia[note 3] is a multilingual free online encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteers, known as Wikipedians, through open collaboration and using a wiki-based editing system called MediaWiki.

“Wikipedia is the largest and most-read reference work in history.[3]

“It is consistently one of the 10 most popular websites ranked by Similarweb and formerly Alexa; as of 2022, Wikipedia was ranked the 5th most popular site in the world.[4]

“It is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, an American non-profit organization funded mainly through donations.[5]”

I would start off instead talking about the really great sentence 1 & Paragraph 1 style of approach:

Sentence 1 = the very first most elementary thing you need to know, in plain language.

Paragraph 1 = Same: The very first most elementary things you need to know, in plain language. If nothing else, know these 2-3 points about the topic.

Page: “History of Developing the Egodeath Theory”

Again, a bona fide Intro/Welcome / About page would have a SECTION about history of devmt, but would not be EXCLUSIVELY framed & focused that way.

Sure, this page is RELEVANT and is an ASPECT of Welcome Mat / Initial Orientation, “Where Am I?”

History of Developing the Egodeath Theory
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/12/history-of-developing-the-egodeath-theory/

About the Egodeath Theory, Including the Cybernetic Theory & the Mytheme Theory
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/29/about-the-egodeath-theory-the-cybernetic-theory-the-mytheme-theory/

Page: “Summary of the Egodeath theory” (and Why It’s Not a Suitable Intro Page)

This page is actually a heap of summaries competing against each other.

A real bona fide Welcome/ About/ Intro/ Orientation page would have SOME summary, a summary SECTION, but would not just be a bare heap of summaries competing against each other.

This didn’t intend to end up so rough, so lacking a lead-in: because I put all focus on multiple summaries, there is no intro.

Summary of the Egodeath theory
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2016/10/07/first-blog-post/

Page: “Possibilism vs. Eternalism: Two Models of Time and Control” (and Why It’s Not a Suitable Intro Page)

Too in-depth.

The Welcome About article should have a nutshell summary section, not be entirely focused on transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

This is set up to dive into this particular key topic — un-framed.

I doubt this page can serve as the needed kind of welcome mat/ orientation welcome session/ invitation:

Possibilism vs. Eternalism: Two Models of Time and Control
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/12/possibilism-vs-eternalism-2-models-of-time-and-control/

No Entheogen Article Says What Date Pahnke Good Friday Experiment: April 20, 1962

posted 9:30 p.m. February 27, 2023, Cybermonk

Contents:

  • Motivation of Post
  • Hilarious: My Wikipedia edit description: “Added the date of the experiment” 🤦‍♂️
  • The Date
  • Elementary Info No Entheogen Scholar Will Tell You

Motivation of Post

Resolved: I edited wikipedia to add the damn date. Insanity!

“Added the date of the experiment”

yelling to the sky: HOW COULD YOU WRITE AN ENCYCLOPEDIA ARTICLE ABOUT A HISTORICAL EVENT AND FAIL TO STATE THE DATE?!

“Encyclopedia article: Good Friday Experiment: The Good Friday Experiment is an experiment that took place on Good Friday.” no way, really?! thx for the informative information!

The Date: APRIL 20, 1962

motivation of post: mind completely blown 🤯 by the fact that NO ARTICLE ABOUT PAHNKE EXPERIMENT STATES WHAT DATE.

I cannot BELIEVE how many searches I had to run SIMPLY to get a TRIVIAL statement of date. April 20 1962.

UNBELIEVABLY bad writing, even Wiki totally let me down, most astonishing of all.

The successful search finally was to DITCH ALL bad writings about entheogens, which just copypaste same bad writing, and take a purely non-entheogen approach:

search: Good Friday 1962

IMMEDIATELY it gave the answer which no entheogen scholar is capable of writing:

April 20, 1962 – confirming my memory.

This proves that everyone just copy-pastes each others’ hackneyed phrasing.

What tail-chasing runaround, simply to get a damn date!

i will add to my References page, which also FAILED to state this elementary milestone date.

Elementary Info No Entheogen Scholar Will Tell You

Entry: The experiment date. APRIL 20, 1962

How many escaped (2 ppl).

How many mg: 30, synthetic psil.

How good safety scuba diving record? Not very.

What did they listen? Sermon live via spks, in basement.

How many basement doors unlocked? 1, the main doors.

Who was escapee going to see? Dean.

Why did they keep him from seeing Dean? Toast; burnt.

Which escapee alerted Pahnke? Houston Smith.

The Risks of Vague, Abstract Descriptors Like “Mystical Supernaturalism vs. Scientific Naturalism”

Cybermonk, 8:24 a.m. February 26, 2023

Contents:

Journal of Consciousness Studies Article Recommends “Avoid terms such as ‘ego dissolution’, they are too vague”

March 4, 2023 update:

Dissolution of What? The Self Lost in Self-transcendent Experiences
44 citations
Authors: Lindström, Lena; Kajonius, Petri; Cardeña, Etzel
Source: Journal of Consciousness Studies, Volume 29, Numbers 5-6, June 2022, pp. 75-101(27)
Publisher: Imprint Academic
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53765/20512201.29.5.075 – Abstract:

“In this study, we investigate the phenomenology of self-transcendent experiences, in which the usual sense of self is lost.

“Based on a taxonomy of nine aspects of self and three types of content of consciousness, we compare ten accounts of such experiences acquired through in-depth interviews.

“Sense of separateness and identification with body and narrative self were reported as lost in all of these.

“However, bodily awareness, spatial self-location, sense of agency, perspectival ownership of experience, thoughts, emotions, sensory impressions, metacognition, and personal identity were variously reported as lost or retained.

“Individual participants emphasized the absence of either of these ‘optional’ aspects as crucial for their judgment that the experience was without self.

“We conclude that there is a large variety in what is felt as being lost in self-transcendent experiences, and we recommend that research and theory avoid general terms such as ‘ego-dissolution’ and instead probe more precisely the different aspects of self.”

In Praise of “Not Invented Here” Rejection of Pre-fab Lexicon Terms that I Didn’t Create

I have decided that in my 2023 article I will not approve, reify, and employ anyone else’s lexicon/ concept labels/ explanatory constructs, such as:

  • mystical supernaturalism
  • scientific naturalism
  • default mode network
  • neuroplasticity
  • ego dissolution
  • unity connectedness

Yesterday (Feb. 25, 2023) was a long day of spoken/ recorded idea development: I read aloud my draft sections (but not art features) and I criticized these pseudo-explanation terms that shut out adequate relevant comprehension.

Key strategic mindset: I have to draw a sharp dichotomy between:

  • Terms that I use; things that I would write
  • Terms that other ppl use/ made/ define/ employ.

eg Brown asked us a question about how to explain mushroom imagery — but his question was LOADED with three distinct, extra, added specifiers that were unnecessary narrowing presuppositions, implying the elaborate, dubious, confused paradigm of “elite, secret, hidden, heretical, deviant” mushroom use.

See Cyberdisciple’s page: “Rejecting the premise of suppression” — or at least, rejecting all of our conceptions/ assumptions/ presuppositions about the nature of “suppression” (or better, more neutrally and agnostically, the forgetting to some degree) of psychedelics in Western religious/ cultural history.

Why were psychedelics forgotten to some degree at some point? To what extent, when? Was it “suppression”, but we’d have to define this “suppression”.

Before even before we can ask that superior-framed question, we must first ask:

To what extent psychedelics in Western history?

We have presupposed wrongly!

Before we ask “why did the Bible eliminate psychedelics?”, we must first ask IF the Bible eliminated or sought to suppress psychedelics.

We CANNOT just take anything for granted!

We tried doing that (eg book Food of the Gods by McKenna) and we were very wrong and we blinded ourselves and falsely claim and cried that “there are no psychedelics in the Bible or chapels or cathedrals or psalters”.

I CANNOT employ any of YOUR explanatory-construct terms, because they are LOADED/ freighted with YOUR confusions.

Like Letcher Hatsis’ term “secret Christian Amanita mushroom cult” that HE invented, that HE bandies about & relies on, that HE tilts at windmills of his own construction, and that HE uses for the result of just confusing himself.

I reject the usefulness of terms like “the Holy Mushroom theory” or speaking in terms of “whether Jesus was a mushroom or not”.

I even have to avoid the great acronym ‘DED’ from Dittrich’s OAV psychedelics psychometrics questionnaire, because DED expands to Angst/Dread “of Ego Dissolution“, and I definitely (and also potentially) disagree with various specified (& under-specified) conceptions around the explanatory construct/ concept/ label “ego dissolution”.

Ego dissolution is not, in fact, what dread is of.

The DED dimension’s name contains a false — as just as bad, a VAGUE — theory assertion.

Dread is not of “ego dissolution”; Dread is of control instability; dread of catastrophic loss of control.

(This is speaking at a zoom-out level, that must be accompanied by detailed zoom-in specifics.)

Remember, ‘EGO DISSOLUTION’ is not my term, and therefore I must treat it as contaminated and part of the problem, CREATING incomprehension & confusion; PREVENTING successful explanation.

Remember, ‘neuroplasticity’ is not my term; it’s not what I would write; that term is part of YOUR failed, wrong, comprehension-blocking, less-than-“theory”.

Were I to use your terms from your bad, old, wrong, failed theory, I would then be preventing and working against my new, good, correct, true theory, that is successful.

See section “forbidden words” in my page Idea Dev p 18: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/14/idea-development-page-18/#Forbidden-word-list

Exhibit A: Matthew Johnson Labels Fatalism as Being Opposed to Naturalism

Page title:
Idea Development page 16
Section heading:
Johnson Falsely Says Fatalism Is a Supernatural Belief
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#Johnson-Falsely-Says-Fatalism-Is-a-Supernatural-Belief

Find key word “fatalism” in these various pages.

url https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#the-Problem-is-Vagueness

Sections there:

  • Johnson Falsely Says Fatalism Is a Supernatural Belief
  • Johnson comments on Letheby’s Redefinition of Pop Word ‘Spiritual’ to Be Naturalistic Instead

The easiest thing in the world would be for Matthew Johnson to write:

“after a psychedelic experience, on average people shifted away from physicalist and materialist views (both consistent with naturalism) and toward eternalism, superdeterminism, no-free-will, double predestination, and hyper-Calvinism (which can be seen as deviations from naturalism).”

These abstract concept labels are arbitrary, so there is nothing stopping some people from claiming that eternalism is opposed to naturalism.

I also note, like the mostly bunk (strawman) pseudo-“replies” to Sanders & Zijlmans claimed, the anti-mystic camp of psychedelic scientists here is, in fact, pushing materialism and physicalism, equating them or at least strongly aligning them with so-called “naturalism”.

The Naturalist scientists, who are starting to advocate a “naturalistic”(???) brand of “spirituality”(???) are:

  • Matthew “Lose the Buddha statue” Johnson
  • Sanders & Zijlmans (Moving Past Mysticism article)
  • Chris Letheby

This decision is just like deciding whether my Theory should embrace and take on Amanita as a passenger to defend and carry. I’ve listed the many problems with doing so.

Amanita doesn’t want to be a passenger; it wants to be the sole pilot and kick the passengers out the door. Amanita doesn’t want to politely share the throne, it wants to be all-dominant, alone on the throne, stealing it from Psilocybin.

Amanita is nothing but the most wild and indeterminate of wildcards. You might as well tell me to marry my theory to an undefined Substance X about which nothing is known. Worse than useless; this dilutes and confuses everything; “why not add Chaos to the theory?”

Amanita represents the Completely Unknown.

Amanita is as purely unknown and indeterminate as, What does Mystery Person X mean by the word “Naturalism”? Johnson defines ‘naturalism’ as the opposite of ‘fatalism’.

Is ‘fatalism’ the same as ‘eternalism’?

I do not agree to this indeterminate, changeable, unsteady marriage of the Egodeath theory (the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism) to these materialist, physicalist, reductionist, Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism advocates!

“Naturalism” Means Physicalism, Materialism, & Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism

and some Mystery Brand of “Atheism”(???) that’s subject to redefinition every 15 minutes.

The Ugly Truth: the Detractors Are Right: by “Naturalism” — Warning! — Johnson & Letheby Half the Time Push Physicalism, Materialism, & Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism!

What exact load of worse-than-dubious package deal are you trying to trick us into, when selling your so-called, continuously redefinable “naturalism“?

Taken-for-Granted Abstract Labels Freighted with Confusions

It was a big realization for Chris Letheby (https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/23/idea-development-page-16/#the-Problem-is-Vagueness)
that “spirituality” doesn’t necessarily mean supernaturalism; there can be defined such a thing as naturalistic spirituality.

That seems obvious to me and he should have always known that, it’s a matter of definitions; “mere semantics”.

I’ll think twice before framing my successful explanatory theories as “naturalism”, eg the standoff between the mystical psychedelic scientists (Walter Pahnke, Wm Richards, Roland Griffiths) vs. the naturalistic psychedelic scientists (Matthew Johnson, Sanders & Zijlmans) rests on undefined-by-them vague terms such as ‘naturalistic spirituality’ and ‘supernatural’.

These descriptors that are employed by the battling parties are taken for granted and undefined by them, so I should avoid attaching these hazy words and aligning my theory with ‘naturalism’ or “mystical supernaturalism”.

Also remember that the pseudo-“replies” to Sanders & Zijlmans’ article Moving Past Mysticism demonstrate & prove that no one (especially not the mystical scientists camp in this “exchange”) cares about real actual positions; the parties just want to fight between a junk extremist caricature of “naturalism science” (eg hardcore materialist reductionism; consciousness doesn’t exist) vs. a junk extremist caricature of “supernaturalism mysticism” (dogmatic ineffabilism; words cannot explain anything, & we’re happy about that).

Sanders & Zijlmans were relatively clear communicators; the mystical scientists were a disgrace, absolutely strawmanning Sanders, who made many great, quotable points.

I was psyched to see someone, at last, clearly making these points: eg that the mystics are too eager to anti-scientifically revel in & celebrate the alleged inability to explain; the alleged inexplicability of what some people label as “mystical experiencing”.

I definitely am a cheerleader for the STEM manner of explanation & explanatory communication, but this standoff between the mystics vs. the anti-mystic “naturalists” rests on too many dubious dichotomies & undefined abstract labels, to attach their confused dichotomies to my well-defined explanatory model & theory.

Psychedelic Eternalism: Mystical Supernaturalism or Scientific Naturalism?

The Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism:

Call my theory STEM, ok, but careful about calling my explanatory model of mystical transformation “naturalistic” — that term is loaded with undefined dubious dichotomies & connotations.

Which side are you on: a junk definition of ‘religious supernaturalism’, or a junk definition of “scientific naturalism”?

The dichotomy is unhelpful.

Sam Harris assumes no-free-will is pitted against religion, but actually, when you pursue the full advanced experience of no-free-will, it is the heart of religious revelation, cancelling the immature mental model of autonomous control agency that creates the future by steering through time selecting among branching open possibilities.

Van der Borch Miniatures

Balaam, highly underrated story:

Y/I tree pair: Absalom hung on tree

Saint-Sauvin has a possible Y/I tree pair covered by Samorini, Brown, etc: https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/mushroom-trees-in-christian-art-samorini/#Figure-9

John Rush gallery of cat-shaped mushrooms:

doubt this is Van der Borch

This seems the best gallery of images found so far:
https://picryl.com/topics/michiel+van+der+borch

I haven’t found a good book link that simply lists a gallery of all the pages of this psalter – or maybe I need to re-find it:
url https://picryl.com/media/abraham-sacrifices-isaac-an-angel-restrains-his-sword-1f23d5

Search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22michiel+Van+der+Borch%22

Not very good search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Van+der+Borch+psalter

See Also

Moving Past Mysticism: Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism Provides Scientific Basis, Superseding “Mysticism, Meditation, & Psychotherapy” Framework
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/15/the-theory-of-psychedelic-eternalism-provides-a-scientific-explanatory-basis-for-mystic-state-experiencing/

Outtakes from Branching-Message Mushroom Trees Article

Cybermonk 9:06 p.m. February 24, 2023, support page for article:
Branching-Message Mushroom Trees: Psychedelic Eternalism Depicted in Medieval Art as Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching

Crop by Cybermonk

Article Overflow for Psychedelic Eternalism, Mushroom Trees, Non-Branching, and Handedness

Dragon Fire Dump

Eustace

[content that had been added to branching-message mushroom trees article, not in “Snapshot of Verbose Draft”]

Lion’s right paw touches the right-hand branch of the branching cubensis tree. — ~May 21, 2023: problem encountered recently prior to, and solved very recently after the recent “fractal scope” discovery: Lion’s right paw touches the “bad” branching tree but actually touches the relatively/ locally-scoped “good” right-hand branch of that mushroom tree. Announced in a recording ~May 21 for Egodeath Mystery Show.

Trees 1 & 2 form a YI pair. Trees 3 & 4 form an IY pair, or YI pair from Eustace’ point of view. Tree 4 is a YI. Trees 2, 3, and 4 on a micro scale (inner detail) have a {cut right trunk} thus are YI. Eustace’ left hand gestures affirming non-branching crown branch of tree 4. No branching in tree crowns. Clover YI pairs are only on the mountain, not on the plain. 3 YI clover pairs and 1 IY clover pair.

Eustace’ weight on right leg. Lion’s right heels down, left heels up.

Heading

YI / IY pair. left is trident/trident pair. Blue is favored, YI, the only 1 of the 4 to lack left branch. On Dec 13 2020, I id’d correctly for first time, against Brown: Pan; Lib; Cub; Ama. (Arthur 2000 tried for a Soma recipe; not relevant; “opium, rue, psil, ama, cann river”)

YI / IY pair. left is trident/trident pair. Blue is favored, YI, the only 1 of the 4 to lack left branch. On Dec 13 2020, I id’d correctly for first time, against Brown: Pan; Lib; Cub; Ama. (Arthur 2000 tried for a Soma recipe; not relevant; “opium, rue, psil, ama, cann river”)

Status of Draft April 23, 2023

Found a ton more top-tier mushroom evidence (added to article), and the {stability} motif (adjusted title), and have a pretty firm idea now of what to cram into the Intro and Conclusion.

It’s too important of an article to not tackle the responsibility of reflecting the state of play and future direction.

Subtitle Keywords: Design/Breakout of Motifs

  • {mushrooms} & {branching} proved distinct.
  • Adds {stability}.
  • Places motifs in standard order from door to climactic revelation/ transformation:

Mushrooms [Analogy, Psychedelics, Mental Construct Processing]
Branching [Eternalism]
Handedness [World models]
Stability [Self-Control Cybernetics]

The Focus of this Writing in this Article: Explain Art in Terms of Psychedelic Eternalism Theory

This article is merely nothing more than a patch/update/extension of my 2007 main article to fill a gap in it.

The focus in on the art through bold vigorous natural (w/o affectation) demonstration of application of the Theory.

The focus is not on the Theory.

I do clarify the theory as I go along applying it, just as with 2020b.
Proof that the Canterbury Psalter’s Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree Is Psilocybe

MISSION: PRI 0: EXPLAIN PSYCHEDELIC ETERNALISM IN MEDIEVAL ART.

HAVE I COMPLETED THAT? IF SO, AFTER THAT, DO THE FOLLOWING — OR NOT: PRI 5: cover OTHER SHIITE.

First, hit the smallest, easiest, minimal viable product: just do nothing but explain — meet just the minimal requirements, the easiest way and fastest way.

No stylizing. Just give the correct analysis.

Just plain efficient effective explain the art, utilizing the theory.

The article is just the solution sheet.

Just meet the requirement: did you explain the art, or not?

Don’t do anything except explain the art by using the theory to explain the art.

This doesn’t mean suppressing the theory; it means openly loudly applying the Theory, to explain the art.

Not to explain the theory, — just like 2020b article.

I clarify the theory in the course of explaining / decoding the art.

Relevance Test

  • Eval each topic to see if it’s Core or mere Periphery; More Core, Less Periphery. More Me, Less Them. People aren’t here to read about Same Old BS; they’re here for the New Stuff.

For such topics, maybe have 1 sent. in Conclusions briefly giving direction, but have no topic section in article body:

Is this topic directly embodying the new body of knowledge, or making the old confusions the topic of attention?

Am i presenting th new theory/parad/ expl fwk directly, or showing the new in terms of th old? Am I inviting in the old into my living room, why? Am I platforming and spotlighting error?

HEY ERROR, COME INTO THE SPOTLIGHT IN CENTER STAGE, SOME MORE — (LIKE YOU ALREADY ARE)

EVERY SENTENCE I’M TALKING ABOUT THE WRONG/IMPOSTER THEORY, IS A SENTENCE NOT CONVEYING THE REAL THEORY

  • Is this the last topic I’d remove?
  • Is this topic in the Inner Core, Outer Core, Inner Periphery, or Outer Periphery?
  • Am I only including this topic b/c everyone else is confused and barking up the wrong tree?
  • Am I focusing on my theory and the art and their amazing concurrence, or am I giving the spotlight to talking about clueless people’s misguided ideas?
  • Am I pointing the way fwd by example, or looking backwards and discussing unprofitable concepts and mindsets?
  • Am I opening the door letting in dilution, adding in ideas that don’t contribute but drag down.
  • Imagine I figured this out Jan 1988, or Jan 1997 before I heard of entheogen scholarship. Would I be mentioning the bad old wrong paradigm and the Amanita primacy fallacy,
  • Cast to the Outer Periphery the missteps of
  • The missteps of Jerry Brown
  • The missteps of Thomas Hatsis,
  • The missteps of Georgio Samorini,
  • The missteps of Carl Ruck,
  • The missteps of Gordon Wasson
  • The missteps of Erwin Panofsky
  • The missteps of John Allegro,
  • The missteps of Jan Irvin,
  • The missteps of John Lash,
  • The missteps of John Rush,
  • The missteps of evil M Hoffman,
  • The missteps of Wouter Hanegraaff,
  • The missteps of Robert Price,
  • The missteps of Andy Letcher,
  • The missteps of Paul “asleep at the wheel of Psilocybin in Europe” Stamets
  • The missteps of Frank Barrett, Matthew Bradstreet, Leoutsakos, Matthew Johnson, & Roland Griffiths’ CEQ-POS
  • The missteps of Erich Studerus, Alex Gamma, & Franz Vollenweider’s 15 factor 11-Factors 11 Names,
  • The missteps of Timothy Leary’s MEQ 🦄💨🌈,
  • The missteps of Walter Stace.

“Spot the Mushroom” Game, Grown-up Version

Spot the Mushroom game: Deluxe Version,

The Mushroom Exception to Art Theory

An element in art can have multiple meanings — except for mushroom imagery, in which case, an element in art can only have a single meaning, which automatically must be the non-mushroom meaning.

YI/YO Morphology Replaces Samorini’s Figure 20, 2-Column Table

it’s such a pointless, loser table, fkking CRINGE af, —

Lash says “the Wasson theory” (barf), and likewise, Samo says “the Plaincourault tree type” (barf! EVERYTHING IS WRONG WITH THIS FRAMING!) — WHAT A TERRIBLE idea for classifn labels etc. and “the St Sauvin tree type” (barf!) —

b/c Plainc worked SO WELL.

we’ll just BUILD OUT the poison that is the Aman/Plainc paradigm TO DO THE SAME DISASTER THAT DIDN’T WORK FOR AMAN, NOW TO PSIL TOO!

What a fkking great idea Samo!

What the F is this table supposed to accomplish? Showing how to (try to, and fail) force everything into the Allegro/ Plainc/ Amanita mould that worked SO WELL.

The failure of the Old Theory, is represented by the following notable failures:

Brown and Brown both argued in 2016 and in 2019 [the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​] that St. Walburga cannot be holding an Amanita or a vial that looks like Amanita, because the vial has a serrated base.

And therefore, we should discount the Irvin and Rush art catalogs.

But in fact, per [Heinrich 1994] and [Schultes 1976], todo: cite Schultes 1976 and Heinrich 1994, Amanita has a distinctive serrated base.

In SMC [2009/1970] Ruck asserts “this one example should silence the art critics … Dancing man’s mushroom has red and white cap]”.

In fact Dancing Man’s mushroom tree with blue cap with white spots [Hatsis 2013] with green centers — and a {cut right trunk} touching his {right heel}, overlooked by entheogen scholars operating within the old, Amanita paradigm.

Ruck wrote: “One example alone should suffice to silence the argument of the art historians: … a typical mushroom-tree beside him. The mushroom has a red cap spotted with white, and similar mushrooms branch from its stipe-like trunk…″ — Fungus Redivivus: New Light on the Mushroom Controversy in John Marco Allegro, The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross, 40th Anniversary Edition (Gnostic Media, 2009), pg. 376.

Samo Figure 20 two-column table attempts to duplicate and extend the Amanita/Plainc paradigm to cover Psilocybin, by padding out the Column 1 category by placing Dancing Man there, when Dancing has both Amanita and Psil attributes and so fits in neither of Samo’s columns but breaks his attempted classn scheme entirely.

instead of the overly specific combinations of features, column 1 poorly classified as “Plaincourault tree type” vs. “St. Sauvin tree type” — a brittle, rigid, awk , unsuccessful classification approach that cannot account for the mushroom tree morphology in Golden Psalter or many other examples. Carl Ruck’s major error regarding “red and white cap” for Dancing Man represents the failure of Samorini’s Amanita-based art-classification attempt.

Using place names, modelled after the excessive attention to the deviant, overused popular Amanita instance of mushroom trees (Plaincourault), is far too inflexible. Plaincourault is not special and is merely one of many mushroom trees, per Panof in [Brown 2019].

The exaggerated popular attention to Plaincourault is merely due to lack of awareness of the many other instances.

YI and YO tree morph’y builds the science on a viable, more granular level, that successfully accommodates the countless thousands of instances of mushroom trees. in their rich, flexible variety. Do not treat Plaincourault’s deviant Amanita-based mushroom tree as the given paradigm to build out. The Amanita paradigm is replaced by, not bolstered by, the normal type, Psilocybin msh trees.

[Samo 1998]. Samorini makes mistake of trying to build out science on a false, ineffective, foundation: the Amanita paradigm. The field of entheogen scholarship must abandon the Amanita paradigm. [Lash 2008]

The Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism Has Replaced the Amanita Paradigm

strictly speaking, this is not purely on-topic. this does not explain how {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs works, or how mental model reconfig’n via Psil works.

this section is meta science; Phil o Sci. which could be maybe 1 short para in Concl section.

old: the Amanita Symbology paradigm

new: the Psilocybin Eternalism paradigm

this article is the official end of the Amanita Plaincourault paradigm, it’s officially dead. and the moderate aka minmal entheogens paradigm is officially dead. mention failure of Samo Figure 20 2-col table, trying to add Psil to Aman paradigm, result: Ruck quote “this one example silences art historrialns: Dancing Man is red /white cap. Not helping the dead Amanita paradigm is Brown x2 arguing “St Wal has serrated base, thus can’t be Amanita“. Aman paradigm has no credibiy, been compleetly replaced offiicaly now , so Lash and Letcher and Hatsis & me can celebrate the final Death of the Amanita paradigm, replaced here now officially by the Psilocybin Eternalism paradigm, expl fwk, the New Theory a la Paul Thagard. Samo fig 20 fails to break out , “Plainc Tree type” padded out w/ dancing man — FAIL. I recently … I’m still working out the YI & YO morphology which works, unlike Samo 1998 Fig 20 awful morphology 2-col table, forced, failed classif attempt based in the Amanita bunk & useless paradigm that’s nothing but impediment.

😵⚰️🍄–>🗑🔥

integrate Gen 2-3 interleaved with Rev 22. Vid YT “yesterday” Graham Hancock on Psychedelics Today podcast: in book Supernatural 2007, he asked Stamets, other famous mycolisgt claimed “no Psil in europe”, Stamets replied “impossible; nonsense!”, but this nonsense = the Amanita paradigm. But where was Stamets’ pointed, intentional coverage of Psilocybin in Europe in his 1996 book? ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL — act like you give a F , Stamets 1996!!! I was

I WASTED MY TIME SCOURING STAMETS BOOK 3 TIMES TO TRY TO EXTRACT FROM HIM WHAT HIS DAMN STORY IS — INARTICULATE brain gap.

The topic slightly leaks through. There’s just nothing there; he has zero consciousness of the topic, “psil in europe”. Then he exclaims in 2007 “why this folk rumor of no psil of europe?” ITS UR FAULT PAUL!

move

  • Maximum power of presentation is by multiplying both components together: the focus on Theory, multiplied by the focus on Art
  • Spot the Mushroom game: Deluxe Version, increased manyfold by adding Theory of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs.

end move

Heading

There is no way and no need to shield religious artists from meaning mushrooms, as Panofsky attempts to do by removing artistic intentionality, choice and agency from the artists to save them from meaning mushrooms.

This fabricated special exception is one of the many fallacious arguments to delete mushrooms.

Therefore an element that looks like a tree and mushroom must mean tree, and cannot also mean mushrooms.

To study fallacious argumentation, the best field is mushrooms in art.

Artists have choice, agency, and intentionality, and are in command of the impression they deliver — except for the special case of mushroom imagery, in which case, artists are helpless robots who slavishly follow meaningless prototypes, and “the art world came to accept this development”, per Erwin Panofsky in [Brown 2019].

Spot the Mushroom World Championship Turbo Boosted by Bite-Size Theory Trees – What I Objectively Report as Being the Motivating Fun/ Awesome

Just come through honestly/ simply, as I really do. What’s it like being on the leading edge with existing exciting discoveries? What’s the experience of making these kind of discoveries? “breakthroughs” all the time.

The “Image Decoding Breakthroughs” Experience: What’s It Like?

  • Seems like the 2007 article type of approach and 2020b is by interleaving art piece headings with theory headings. I sense reduced power when there is ONLY art piece headings, … MAX POWER IS BY SHOWING BOTH HANDS/ LEGS: THEORY / ART / THEORY / ART.
  • It’s so ironic: “It’s all about the art” yet the art ART WITHOUT THEORY IS WEAK (re: headings POV).
  • The problme with strategy “trojan horse fun Spot the Mushroom, hiding/ sneaking-in Transcendent Knowledge” is that Spot the Mushroom isn’t actually fulfilling or fun. Spot the Mushroom is most fun — MAXIMIZE FUN — by more explicitly presenting bite-size pieces of tk alternating with the Spot the Mushroom/
  • A series of “sidebar” headings/sections. Mini entries. See headings of 1997 & 2007.
    https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/30/self-control-cybernetics-dissociative-cognition-mystic-ego-death/
    https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/the-entheogen-theory-of-religion-and-ego-death-2006-main-article/
  • Topical Mini Nutshell Entry Bite-Size Summary:
  • Asserting possibilism-thinking causes loss of control.
  • The 4 Phases of mental model development. BUT the topics should be specific to this 2023 extension add-on to the 2007 article, not a replacement for it. Addl art and all topics added to the 2007.
  • Mini-Entry: Nutshell: Tpics Asserting possibilism-thinking causes loss of control.
  • This is not detracting from art piece headings, but cross-reflecting, illusminating them.
  • Topics:
  • Minified Topics:
  • Simplified Condensed Summarized Mini Topics:
  • Scaled to 280 words per mini-topic.

Heading

Samorini 1997. The Mushroom-Tree of Plaincourault (Samorini 1997)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/04/16/samorini-plaincourault-mushroom-trees-article/ Direct link to Samorini’s .PDF of 1997 article:
https://www.samorini.it/doc1/sam/sam%20plaincourault.pdf
7/10 – todo: do i have printout? to re-scope.
Jettison this Wasson & Allegro & Plaincourault backwards-pulling roadblock obstruction? more harm than good. more liability than boon. Am I recomm ppl read this — or ignore them?

v1 white boxes – fail b/c must contrast “contradictory” feet vs knees; must do separate boxes on knees vs feet

Figure 1. Canterbury Psalter image f134, “stand on right foot” translated to “hang upside down by right knee”. Crop and annotations by Michael Hoffman.
https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/canterbury-f134-hanging-inverted.jpg

done: …. draw white box on all msh in this Canterbury f134 image: tree, table bowls, 2 bins, bucket, 3 bags, blue krater, sower’s basket is sowing msh seeds. harvesting msh. cultivating msh.

todo: nuke from server, low res, probably didn’t zoom-then-cap)

todo: nuke from server, low res, probably didn’t zoom-then-cap)

url https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/last-supper.png

Heading

Find these images at https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com for more analysis and commentary.

Now I see limitation of this model (drawing below) and how I could elaborate it in fractal, horizontal & vertical YI build-out:

quiz: which of the two upper branches is good? Ans: right. imagine drawing…. remember how I wrote not long ago re: the “macro” vs “micro” scale of Eustace River in response to Panofsky’s claim “all msh trees have at least a trace of ramification” and I retorted: VAGUE! define “trace”, do the micro details count within my Eustace window?

Now 12:53 am p.m. March 19, 2023] it is looking even more likely that the artist is consciously employing here, the concept of macro vs micro SCALE. Do Zoom Crops of Eustace to internally analyse the clover -pair scale. FRACTAL YI morphology ANALYSIS.

Moses, Burning Bush, and Tablets (Ingeborg Psalter)

Figure 1. Moses, Burning Bush, and Tablets (Ingeborg Psalter, c. 1210). Aspect ratio restoration by Michael Hoffman.

Features:

  1. Cubensis or Panaeolus mushroom tree, left branching, right non-branching yet close to lifted garment.
  2. Creator’s fingers are held together in contrast to the branching Y tree.
  3. Aaron non-branching fingers held together touching cut branch.
  4. Diagrammatic Y-branching trees with two cut branches added.
  5. God as creator of Y-branching.
  6. Shepherd’s hook for directing sheep is touching cut branch.
  7. Neat row of 3 mushroom hems only on Moses next to the mushroom tree.

Stretched well-colored image presented by John Rush; aspect ratio corrected by Michael Hoffman.

Figure 1. Mâle, p. 3, The sky, water and trees. From the Legend of St. Eustace. Window at Chartres. Image sharpening by Michael Hoffman. YI theory morphology analysis by Michael Hoffman.

  1. 4 psilocybin mushroom trees. 4 , 4, 1, & 10 psilocybin caps.
  2. At least one cap is psilocybin, therefore every element in this image depicts analogy to peak psilocybin effect.

Owl Announce

The Day You Eat from the Tree of Knowledge, You Will Certainly Die (Golden Psalter)

Features:

  1. God points to a YI pair (blue cap is non-branching). [8:58 p.m. March 25, 2023]
  2. Lifted black-arrow mushroom hem.
  3. Upper level tree morphology: YIYY.
  4. God has a lifted mushroom garment, which the owl turns right and looks back at. [9:04 p.m. March 25, 2023]
  5. The message comes from God’s lifted mushroom garment.
  6. Adam’s right hand touches non-branching trunk.
  7. God’s right foot touches stable column base.
  8. Bird touches Adam’s right leg. Adam’s right hand touches the branching point of the tree and the message from God.
  9. God’s left foot touches animals; animal-like thinking.
  10. Mushroom hem.
  11. At least one cap is psilocybin, therefore count 7 psilocybin caps, and every element in this image depicts analogy to peak psilocybin effect.

Heading

tech note: i can’t get high res if i join panels. upper + lower in a single image.

maybe probably bail from showing two CONJOINED panels, the quality will suffere A LOT and it’s hard to handle commentary on two panels at once. DO try to include both panels (don’t show upper & omit lower).

Just TELL ppl the two are conjoined, and put the upper & lower images very close together.

 February 10, 2023 – Golden Gallery

todo: keep the list ultra streamlined, move explanations to the body instead.

The image has been covered by entheogen scholars Chris Bennett & _ 1995, Samorini 1998, Jan Irvin 2008, Thomas Hatsis 2013.

todo: cite / link Hatsis’ treatment that’s only of the of bottom panel as if no top panel. https://psychedelichistorian.com/the-mushroom-in-mommy-fortunas-midnight-carnival/
GOD! PAINFULLY AWFUL ARG’N; 1/10


THM 129 has Baby Moses in a basket in river https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/06/golden-munich-psalter-mushroom-trees/#Image-40-top , and Jacob’s Ladder https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/02/06/golden-munich-psalter-mushroom-trees/#Image-31-top

Heading

Eternalism, Eternity Non-Branching, Psychedelic Eternalism, the Eternalism Experiential Mode, Eternalism-Thinking, the Eternalism Mental Model; the Eternalism Mental Worldmodel

Eternalism: has 2-level dependent control, frozen pre-existing worldline of control-thoughts, awareness that you (as local control agent) don’t control the source of your control-thoughts.

The eternalism experiential mode is specific to the altered state, which is produced by Psilocybin. The way the mind experiences eternalism (the the eternalism experiential mode) is through psilocybin, which produces loose cognitive association binding, or loose cognition (loosecog).

When not on psilocybin, the mind has tight cognitive association binding, or tight cognition (tightcog), which produces the possibilism mental worldmodel; the possibilism experiential mode; possibilism-thinking (initially, naive possibilism-thinking; after psilocybin regeneration, qualified possibilism-thinking).

Possibilism, Possibility Branching, Ordinary-State Possibilism, the Possibilism Experiential Mode, Naive Possibilism-Thinking, Qualified Possibilism-Thinking; the Possibilism Mental Model, the Possibilism Mental Worldmodel

Possibilism, , Ordinary-State Possibilism, the Possibilism Mental Worldmodel, & Possibilism-Thinking

The possibilism mental worldmodel, autonomous monolithic control agency steering in a branching-possibilities world, creating the non-existent future.

The possibility branching model, when asserted and exerted in the psilocybin loose cognitive state, causes loss of control, represented by fire.

In the loose cognitive state from psilocybin, the mind changes from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking, through a destabilization, transformation, and re-stabilization of the mental model of control, time, and possibility.

The ordinary state of consciousness has tight cognitive binding, or tight cognition, and is the possibilism experiential mode, which produces the “possibilism” mental worldmodel of time, possibility, and control.

The “possibilism” mental worldmodel is structured as a control agent steering through a world of branching possibilities into an open future that doesn’t exist, but is created by steering power by an autonomous, monolithic control agent.

The psilocybin altered state of consciousness has loose cognitive binding, or loose cognition, and is the eternalism experiential mode, which produces the eternalism mental worldmodel of time, possibility, and control.

The “eternalism” mental worldmodel is structured with a 2-level control system frozen in a preexisting world, with control-thoughts pre-existing at each point in time along one’s worldline in the timeless block universe.

Transformation of the experiential mode from possibilism to eternalism causes the mental model of control and world shifting from relying on possibilism-thinking to relying on eternalism-thinking. Asserting and exerting possibilism-thinking, trying harder to control in the accustomed way by using the possibilism-thinking mental worldmodel of control and world causes control instability, loss of control in the psilocybin loose cognitive state.

{fire}, {shadow dragon monster}, {ram caught by its horns in a thicket}, {sword}, and {blade} are religious mythemes and motifs that describe by analogy and refer to experiencing the threat of loss of control due to asserting possibilism-thinking while in the eternalism experiential mode from psilocybin.

frozen snake-shaped worldline in rock-like block universe

Such art motifs are snapshots of mytheme story trajectories, such as:

{king steering in tree, drinks wine, becomes snake frozen in rock}

{shift from left leg to right leg, shed garment and display password, pass through fire-guarded gate, access the treasure of the tree of immortality revealing non-branching}

We have two legs holding us up, and there are also two contrasted mental world-models. The “possibilism” mental worldmodel is mapped to left limb, and the “eternalism” mental worldmodel is mapped to right limb.

To avoid control instability and loss of control, the mind is made to shift from relying on possibilism-thinking to relying on eternalism-thinking; shifting weight from left to right foot.

Religious mythology describes by analogies the eternalism experiential mode and the process of transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism. The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism provides a STEM-type, well-specified explanatory model of mental transformation from loose cognition from psilocybin that’s clear, relevant, and useful.

You don’t control the source of your control-thoughts. This is a fatal vulnerability, weakness, flaw, hole in the side.

Cybernetics is the field of control and communication theory. The name is formed from the Greek κυβερνήτης or steersman.[Wiener 1948]

The {shadow dragon monster} is the threat of loss of control caused by possibilism-thinking. Now this dynamic is directly, explicitly understood and emphatically accounted for and mapped out and clearly communicated per STEM standards.

Transforming to the Mature adult developmental form requires psilocybin Khamsezadeh 2022. Psychedelic eternalism is the gate; non shall come to the adult mature form except through ingesting psilocybin.

{handedness}

ultimate referent: relying on the eternalism mental worldmodel instead of the possibilism mental worldmodel.

A model of control agency steering in the branching possibilities world while moving forward into the future.

relying on right leg = standing on right leg / foot/heel, or hanging from right leg /knee.

Add a 2nd degree of analogy indirection: {left hand higher than right hand} refers to {right foot lower than left foot} refers to relying on the eternalism mental worldmodel.

1 degree of analogy distance: hanging from right leg to avoid losing balance & falling down (loss of control; control instability) = relying on the eternalism mental worldmodel for stable, viable control-in-world.

2 degrees of analogy distance: {holding left hand closer to ground than right hand} while hanging from right knee (left knee drooping) to avoid losing balance & falling down = relying on the eternalism mental worldmodel for stable, viable control-in-world, to avoid loss of control; control instability.

See

, and Hoffman 2022a for the Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ).

John Lash uploaded row 1 left in 2008.

todo: cite/link Hatsis.

Heading

psilocybin mushrooms: banded panaeolus, triangle thin-stem Liberty Cap, round-cap cubensis.

YI and YO Tree Morphology Analysis

Grid Analysis

The Four Phases of Well-Structured Mental Worldmodel Transformation

prefer “mental worldmodel” over “mental model” else assume:
mental model of “the self“

References

strategy: make 1 point below about each book, move into body text & cite

strategy: in article body, “Foo Psalter”. In References, “Foo Psalter” & full title & citation. Lay the groundwork optimized lexicon.

Barrett, Frederick; Matthew Bradstreet, Jeannie-Marie Leoutsakos, Matthew Johnson, and Roland Griffiths. 2016. The Challenging Experience Questionnaire: Characterization of challenging experiences with psilocybin mushrooms . Appendix: “Challenging Experience Questionnaire – Scoring Guide”. https://www.academia.edu/33760114/The_Challenging_Experience_Questionnaire_Characterization_of_challenging_experiences_with_psilocybin_mushrooms
3/10

Hatsis, Thomas 2013 – Archive.org, Roasting the Salamander. Accessed [date]. Includes appendixes, original title, full page photo, home page date [tbd]. Dancing man’s, brought to me by Hatsis in hi-res, has been with me since Dec. 24, 2015, https://egodeathyahoogroup.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/egodeath-yahoo-group-digest-144/#message7442 2 years after the Nov 2013 branching breakthrough, was directly key to decoding John Lash crop of leg-hanging mushroom tree, and later proved rich too.
9/10

Hoffman, Michael. 2020. Strict Requirements for Teachers, Initiation Guides, and Students, Prior to Initiation
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/24/strict-requirements-for-teachers-initiation-guides-and-students-prior-to-initiation/
drawing attention to the foreign unwashed pop masses’ way of thinking, that world of mental associations, isn’t insular and otherworld enough – BREAKS THE OTHERWORLD VIBE OF MY THEORY. furthurmore, it’s not part of my primary-articles series defining The Theory.
plus, Leg Hanging article already contains this, so, dup/redun.

Hoffman, Michael. 2023. Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ).
i dunno, opens up this article to the dirty outside world external downer topic of bunk q’airs; it changes the attunement, to other people’s outsider, misguided thinking

Hoffman, Michael. 2020b. Proof that the Canterbury Psalter’s Leg-Hanging Mushroom Tree Is Psilocybe. https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/proof-canterbury-psalters-mushroom-trees-are-psilocybe/
10/10 – it has become 2 yrs 4 mo out of date thus a snapshot to maybe preserve/ freeze for posterity / history. Interesting to see how big gaps. or off-pitch readings. eg i had no decoding of awkward back of right hand on table. i still thought “at table panel, no handedness”. failed to recognize blue krater Row 3 middle + cubensis dispensary bins /bucket; still misread as “dumb guy excited to receive grain”. Maybe freeze a copy of it and move fwd w/ this url.


10/10 – it has become 2 yrs 4 mo out of date thus a snapshot to maybe preserve/ freeze for posterity / history. Interesting to see how big gaps. or off-pitch readings. eg i had no decoding of awkward back of right hand on table. i still thought “at table panel, no handedness”. failed to recognize blue krater Row 3 middle + cubensis dispensary bins /bucket; still misread as “dumb guy excited to receive grain”. Maybe freeze a copy of it and move fwd w/ this url.

/h

Move

Move

https://www.canterbury-archaeology.org.uk/bible-windows

url https://www.canterbury-archaeology.org.uk/bible-windows

Irvin, Jan. 2022. God’s Flesh: Teonanácatl: The True History of the Sacred Mushroom.
NOT THE WHOLE STORY, IRVIN!! Where Logos comes from is Psilocybin

“The cause of bad trips is resisting ego dissolution; set & settings as the cause is a myth.” Wrong , vague, pseudo-explanation. On-topic.

Bulk & Cut 🏋️‍♂️

Body word count: 9245.
Target word count: 6500.
6500/9245 = 70%; delete 30% of words.

Priority 3: Explain transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Priority 1: Identify and directly explain the art motifs in terms of the art motifs. Insular, self-contained, self-centered, pull the reader into a self-centerd field

This Theory Is the Attractor Destination.

Everything about it should suck the reader in

Pull inward into the labyrinth of the theory, a 1-way trip

You might not come back from this article.

This article is ALL ABOUT THE ART breakthrough of Nov. 2020-March 2023, 2 years 4 months. we’ll say 2.5 years to ack the predecessor eg the artic t

This art (my Eustace image, Dionysus mosaic) has been sitting in the context of my self-contained 2006 main article for 17 years.

(albeit incomplete literate & mis-saying “determinism” not “eternalism”)

LET EADWINE’S IMAGES DO THE CYBERNETIC COMMUNICATING.

LET THE BRANCHING-MESSAGE MUSHROOM TREES DO THE CYBERNETIC COMMUNICATING.

PICTURE = 1000 WORDS

JUST MERELY SUPPLEMENT THE FEATURE LISTS BY MODICUM OF INTERESTING, TELL ME MORE, ANDRE

GIVE LOTS – BUT, LEAVE QUESTIONS OUT, FOR NEWBIE READERS

FOR FURTHUR READING

For Newbies to the Egodeath theory.

Filter By Internal Flavor; a Center-Outward Approach; Come from the Authentic Actual Center

Jettison everything external/ foreign/ alien to the core theory, which here means just the theory-extension relative to the 2006 main article; the core theory specifically of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs.

The purpose of article is narrow and specific: given the Egodeath theory[Hoffman 2007], this article is just an extension of the 2007 Egodeath theory to explain this set of motifs and my discoveries & theory developments of 2010-2023.

This article serves as a direct efficient working practical model/example to establish the conceptual vocabulary of the field.

Here is how we are to conduct the field.

Here are the sound FIELD-APPROPRIATE WAYS OF COMMUNICATING & CONSTRUCTING THE SOUND FIELD.

EXUDE AND DEMONSTRATE A UNIQUE DISTINCTIVE SCIENCE FIELD VIBE same as my distinctive guitar gear usage approach.

Be boldly proudly firmly insular; no compromise with other fields eg no neuroscience taint or opening.

Egodeath theory, be true to the Egodeath theory.

Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence, be true to the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

BE WHAT YOU ARE, FIELD.

Shut out other domains/approaches. Eject foreign alien approaches. Boot. SHOW SOME FKKIN LEADERSHIP!!

Introducing what the successful genuine authentic bona fide field/ mindset/ approach looks and feels like, its real center of spotlight-focus tone/ vocabulary, style of approach/ treatment — which 1988/ 1996/ 1997/ 2006 [my Plainc. article]/ 2007 [my main article containing these very art pieces] / 2020a / 2020b all very much did/ accomplished/ exemplified.

The prime example paradigmatic: ditching my 1986 notebooks with their “not found my voice yet” struggle of expression, and creating my grand April 1987 style of theory construction.

In that article-series lineage ([1988], 1996, 1997, 2007), the day I announced the final rev of the 2007 article (Sep. 12, 2007), interleaved I first posted about eternalism for the 1st time (& after, about superdeterminism). I didn’t fold “eternalism” into 2007 article.

What about my 2020 pair of articles: does that cover eternalism, in this series of theory-specification articles? Yes — which means, less pressure to cover eternalism here. It is covered to death already in Leg-Hanging article and also adeq’ly in article “compelling evidence & criteria of proof and for identifying mushroom imagery in Christian art”.

This article in my series of scientific papers as building blocks (not trick bricks/ collapsing foundation), also is the first to deliver this explanatory framework in terms of block-universe eternalism instead of “determinism”, which term (a concept-label) is incorrigibly saturated with egoic domino-chain causality thinking, as Kafei pointed out.

Heading X

Incoming Ideas

Why Doesn’t Article Body Use the Title’s Phrase “Branching Mushrooms”?

The Meaning of {branching-message mushroom trees}

The Meaning of {non-branching} and {cut branches} or {non-branching branch}

First part of title: Branching-Message Mushroom Trees

Awkward inconsis: 2nd part title lists motifs as:

Branching Mushrooms, Handedness, and Non-Branching

yet body lists as:

{branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs

GRID ANALYSIS IS AWESOME MANDATORY

The purpose of this article is to supplement and complete my 2007 article, along with 1997 core article and Bubble of Simulation article 1996. 2007 main article has pictures that were above my level, only later much later 2022 2023 was I able to read {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs in the images that I created (I produced Eustace crossing river) in my 2007 article.

This is not an intro or persuasion of the Egodeath theory . def’ly not a literature search; the opposite. It supplements, defines, remedies a gap in 2007 main article, which see.

I build on my in-house consistent helpful building blocks papers, not diluting with other incoherent failed papers/ ineffective/ irrelevant / non-useful conceptual lexicons/ vocabularies.

Irvin and Hatsis both halt prematurely, latching onto only one train of analysis or domain of analysis , the elementary “blind men describing the elephant” problem, ; Irvin reductionistically DELETES all other necessary dimensions/ domains of analysis.

psilobycin= eucharist = logos

Irvin denies in 2022 book: psilobycin= eucharist = logos. He denies psilocybin is an entheogen. He denies concept of entheogens. [I am not focusing on Irvin; that would dilute.] He falsely says “my expose is true THEREFORE it is ‘THE TRUE HISTORY OF PSILOCYBIN”. He only provides part of truth, and falsely deletes the rest of truth. Inadquate. WE MUST BE BROAD MINDED X-DISC’Y ANALYSIS, THE FULLNESS THERE IS SO MUCH TO SAY about nature of Psil and its role in mental development. Psil is the origin of religion even though abused.

Abuse of Psil — against Irvin’s reductionism — does not delete the fact that logos = euch = religious experience = psilocybin = transformation of the mental model of control-in-world.

Acting as if their typical stereotyped eisegesis of Eden Genesis “forbidden fruit” “original sin” “prohibition” “the fall” is forced upon us by the text.

Genesis 2:16-17 & Genesis 3 – “the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.””

An esoteric half-truth.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203 –

a rigid exoteric reading is a wrong, limited, reductionistic — ie non-esoteric, uninspired — reading.

A synagogue debate-type reading is required: broad open-minded, considering alternative breadths of readings.

Narrowing reductionism: Irvin 2022 book falsely says “the history”, narrowing/ reductionistically/ conflating one ASPECT or one DIMENSION , one PART of history, AS IF it is automatically THE ENTIRETY of the history.

EVERYONE eagerly rushes to commit the intellectually lazy, unimaginative error of latching onto a SINGLE view/reading, eg presentism projection of late 20th C Drug Prohibition reading, a Sunday School (rather than adult synagogue type) “received view”, narrow, excluding, rigid, prematurely settled the accounts , but that’s eisegesis [an interpretation of Scripture that expresses the interpreter’s own ideas rather than the meaning of the text]. reading into the text; a forced, imported reading; projection into the text what’s not there in the text, and failing to pull from the text the fullness of breadth of what’s in the text.

Like my reading Canterbury Ps Image f134 Row2 right as “dumb guy excited to get grain”, when that is plainly not what’s shown, if you look and read and receive.

Narrowing Reductionism and Premature Closing of the Accounts; Premature Halting and Latching onto a Single Domain of Consideration

The Genesis Eden must be read in a broad gnostic pro-Eve way which the text requires and allows.

God was right and the serpent was right: you die the day you ingest… you would die that day and you would not die that day; a broad sophisticated type esoteric reading is demanded.

Not the overeager lazy intellectually lazy premature leaping to conclusions of how we “must” read the text.

What Really Happened in the Garden of Eden? todo: add to References.

Heading Y

Hoffman, Michael (2023). Add the ‘Control’ Category to the Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ).
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/09/add-the-control-category-to-the-challenging-experiences-questionnaire-ceq-matthew-johnson-thread/ Accessed Feb. 19, 2023.

But ECQ is better than Dread (DED) bc focused on

H, D. Against the Suppression Premise.

Watts, Alan. 1957. The Way of Zen. [could just go with the essay – but you have to get entire book either way — essay is focused.

Hoffman, Michael. 2023. ECQ: Eternalism and Control Questionnaire. ECQ gathers standard psychedelic effects questions to provide an effective foundation for psychedelic psychometrics questionnaires based on this the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, where the {shadow dragon monster} (the threat of loss of control caused by possibilism-thinking) is understood and emphatically accounted for and mapped out and clearly communicated per STEM standards

“1948 through Wiener’s book Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine.[note 2] In the book, Wiener states:

“as happens so often to scientists, we have been forced to coin at least one artificial neo-Greek expression to fill the gap.

Cybernetics is the field of control and communication theory. The name is formed from the Greek κυβερνήτης or steersman.[Wiener 1948]

“Moreover, Wiener explains, the term was chosen to recognize James Clerk Maxwell’s 1868 publication on feedback mechanisms involving governors, noting that the term governor is also derived from κυβερνήτης (kubernḗtēs) via a Latin corruption gubernator.

“Finally, Wiener motivates the choice by steering engines of a ship being “one of the earliest and best-developed forms of feedback mechanisms”.”

/ wiener

Check my Refs in 2006 main article.

Brown rebuttal to Hatsis at Hancock site.
7/10

Dittrich: 1994 Dread OAV article
6.5/10

Timmermann, Kettner, Letheby, Roseman, et al Psychedelics alter metaphysical beliefs. 2021.
4/10

Stamets, Paul (1996). Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World: An Identification Guide.
3/10.

Kupfer, Marcia. (1993). Romanesque wall painting in Central France:
The politics of narrative.
3/10

Balsekar, Ramesh
8/10

Campbell, Joseph (1988). The Power of Myth, Illustrated edition.
4/10

Dittrich, for OAV/G v1: 1993 conf proceedings. 50 Years of Ergot:
Dittrich A
1994
Psychological aspects of altered states of consciousness of the LSD type: Measurement of their basic dimensions and prediction of individual differences
In:
Pletscher A, Ladewig D, eds.
50 Years of LSD: Current Status and Perspectives of Hallucinogens: A Symposium of the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences,  Lugano-Agno (Switzerland) October 21 and 22, 1993
New York NY: Parthenon. pp 101–118.
Readable at Google Books:
https://books.google.com/books?id=3s5vkfmXKNUC&pg=PA101

Wiseman, Howard; Cavalcanti, Eric (2016). “Causarum Investigatio and the Two Bell’s Theorems of John Bell”. In R. Bertlmann; A. Zeilinger (eds.). Quantum [Un]Speakables II. The Frontiers Collection. Springer. pp. 119–142. arXiv:1503.06413. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-38987-5_6. ISBN 978-3-319-38985-1.

Shannon, Claude
3/10

Letheby, Chris (2021). Philosophy of Psychedelics. Philosophy of Psychedelics (International Perspectives in Philosophy and Psychiatry).
Reductionism from cybernetic phenomenology to mere epistemology, stunted & falls short of relevance, same as Metz.
5/10

Hoffman, Michael (2023). The Egodeath theory (website). https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com. Accessed February 20, 2023. Find various cited works analyzed there. Backed up at Archive.org.

don’t waste wordcount on external wording coming in from outside my conceptual lexicon. I need everywordcount available for just for eg covering the images.

This is too much other people’s wording, not enough the Egodeath theory:

Control-Related Psychometrics Items

The Eternalism and Control Questionnaire (ECQ) (Hoffman 2023) includes these standard psychedelic psychometrics effects items:

  • I was afraid to lose my self-control.
  • I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.
  • I felt like a puppet or marionette.
  • I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
  • I felt threatened.
  • Sense of being trapped and helpless.
  • It was difficult to control my thoughts.
Block-Universe Spacetime Psychometrics Items
  • Experience of timelessness.
  • Feeling that you have been “outside of” history in a realm where time does not exist.
  • I experienced a touch of eternity.
  • I experienced past, present, and future as a oneness.
  • Feeling that you experienced eternity or infinity.
  • I felt that I was in a wonderful other world.
  • Everything seemed to unify into a oneness.
  • Feeling of oneness with universe.

Determined What f134 Row 2 Right Funnel Hat Limbless & Father Are Pointing at With Their Eyes: Maiden Non-Furrowed Forehead & God’s Hand Positions

We don’t know for sure if limbless… we do know he is a pointer-connector. BUT WHAT ABOUT TABLE FUNNEL HAT & FATHER why no limbs, what look at?

Answer: [10:48 p.m. March 20, 2023] – Determined What f134 Row 2 Right Funnel Hat Limbless & Father Are Pointing at With Their Eyes: Maiden Non-Furrowed Forehead & God’s Hand Positions

  • Row 2 Right: Funnel Hat is eye-pointing at maiden’s non-furrowed forehead.
  • Row 2 Right: Father is eye-pointing at God’s hand positions.

todo: i have to get to …. entire f134 draw looking-lines for draft article.

Heading

TOO FKKIN BAD for John Lash; YOU CHOSE to write garbage like “I cannot blieve that Jesus and Moses used psychedelics; they are evil Church so therefore, they cannot have used psychedelics.”

A blinding blast of prejudice from John Lash.

Jump off cliff, Lash and take your “psychomimetics” and “the Wasson theory” idol-worship with you, didn’t you say in your own voice (.mp3 url & timestamp is here) “possibly a double radioactive for the hurl odor”? Sort your shiite out Lash.

I saw every word you wrote about Mithraism, read all your articles and chapters about it.

Lash is an impediment to his own cause.

TYPICAL ENTHEOGEN SCHOLARSHIP; addicted to self-defeat.

jettison

Griffiths, Roland; Stang, Charles (2020). Psilocybin and Mystical Experience: Implications for Healthy Psychological Functioning, Spirituality, and Religion. https://cswr.hds.harvard.edu/news/2020/09/29/video-psilocybin-and-mystical-experience-implications-healthy-psychological
doubt. d/k if I even read this; not a “source”.

Hoffman – Egodeath.com.

Hoffman. Archive .org Feb 14 1997 – early snapshot of Egodeath site content.

Hoffman July 1988 – theory announcement video, 1 hour. alt: extant mp3 5-minute excerpt: upload to Egodeath.com, link.

Brinckmann (to spite Wasson & to mock the extent to which art historians have covered (up) pilzbaum).

Best relevant newer-paradigm writings

[todo: streamline captions] BnF Latin MS 8846 has been called the Paris Eadwine Psalter; the Anglo-Catalan Psalter; the Paris MS, or the Great Canterbury Psalter.

bricklin: Justification: equates enlightenment with eternalism, psychedelic eternalism, within the Journal of Transpersonal Psychology circles incl Shanon & Balsekar.

Shanon, Benny – doubt. beginner level Cog Pheny, overpromoted.
4/10

Metz – after citing my Crash Collusion article Bubble of Similation way before — 1996 vs Metz 2003 or 2004. Metaperception is intermediate/connector topic. Summarize Transcendent Knowledge podcast 28 moving from metaperception of table to personal control – see trajectory of 4 points there.

– read these 2 pages, skip everything metz wrote after it. todo: photo it. Upload photo of hand. Bubble of Sim’n.

Hoffman August 1988 – handwritten Ms, draft 1 of the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.
8/10

Hoffman, Michael (2007). Ego Death and Self-Control Cybernetics (website). http://egodeath.com. Accessed February 20, 2023. Backed up at Archive.org.

Hoffman, Michael. Key Mytheme catalog. 2020. Last accessed: date.

Hoffman, Michael. Core Concepts catalog. 2020. Last accessed: date.

The mystical worldview is a more or less garbled expression of the eternalism experiential mode.

Philosophy of References

extant cluster of books and authors and articles bound up in “the field”. If we plot books, what’s a set of books that are “near” the Egodeath theory even if they are a failure? DOES COPERNICUS CITE PTOLEMY? Probably. what’s in the library of someone who dev’d the Egodeath theory?

Griffiths. 2016. CEQ, appendix: “Challenging Experience Questionnaire – Scoring Guide”; see the 3 out of the 21 (14%) OAV Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED) dimension items retained in CEQ, there marked as “5DASC”.

just direct people to my verbose detailed writings elsewhere.

The dominant narratives are incorrect, especially in the charged field of Psychedelics.

Stamets 1996 aggravatingly lackadaisical about Europe & England.

Abstract

This set of medieval art images uses {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs to describe by analogy how the mind works in the loose cognitive state from Psilocybin. These are features to look for and recognize in each image. For details, see References.

Name of the Theory

The Egodeath theory; the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism; the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism. Includes the Mytheme theory, which covers art motifs as well as religious mythology, which describes, through analogy, Psilocybin effects.

The word ‘eternalism‘ is defined emphasizing control, ie control-transformation aspects, and cybernetics such as communication about control in the loose-cognitive state.

Transformation from Possibilism to the Eternalism Mental Worldmodel of Control

The word ‘control’ here means changing the model of the world, too, in which control agency operates or steers as a steersman/ helmsman/ governing agent. kubernetes: from a possibility branching model, or possibilism-thinking, to a non-branching model with 2-level dependent control and pre-existing future control-thoughts.

Possibilism vs. Eternalism: Two Models of Time and Control
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/12/possibilism-vs-eternalism-2-models-of-time-and-control/

The {shadow dragon monster} is the threat of loss of control caused by possibilism-thinking, which provides a whirlwind of circular instability as control increasingly struggles to control itself [Watts 1960].

Possibilism-thinking is the default mental worldmodel of self-steering-in-world that’s formed by the ordinary state of consciousness.

The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is a domain-appropriate, effective, relevant, supremely usefully relevant, purely Cognitive, experiential explanatory framework, to establish the sound foundation STEM field of Loose Cognitive Science.

This explanatory model enables Cognitive Scientists to enter into this domain of investigation (the loose cog state) with viable control stability without being ejected back through the loss-of-control gate due to holding a state-incompatible mental model.

As confirmed by legacy Psilocybin art, the eternalism mental model is required, to provide stable self-control and avoid loss of control while in the peak Psilocybin state, to equip Cognitive Scientists to enter the peak Psilocybin state and have stable self-control while in that state.

The ECQ Eternalism and Control Questionnaire brings Control challenges, in context of changing world-model, out in the open, mapped out ahead of time, aboveboard, clearly explained in the ordinary state, to meet STEM standards of open, public communication and teachability, avoiding tottering on a unstable basis.

This model matches the full breadth of the historical mystics’ reports addressing Charles Stang’s objections to the would-be “scientific foundation” (Studerus 2010 p. 2, citation 20) expressed to Roland Griffiths by Charles Stang (2021).

Stace 1960 is used as the lone foundation of what Studerus calls “the scientific literature” about mystical experiences, although we see — per Charles Stang’s objection against James & Stace — “mystical experience” is defined a priori as purely positive, against “the older historical archive” (Stang).

The Challenging Experiences Questionnaire (CEQ) omits 18 of Dittrich’s 21 (86%) Angst/Dread (DED) dimension’s items. But under optimal set & settings, Griffiths reports almost 40% [quote Houot] terror experiences during high-dose sessions.

A model of mystical experiencing that lacks a Control-challenges factor in fact ends up having a Shadow factor 13 (SHA), that, by not teaching about control stability eventually resulting from transformation of mental model from possibilism to eternalism, will cause continued panic terror, loss of control; and the would-be Psychedelic Scientists will continue to be ejected from the Psilocybin loose-cognitive domain and prevented from mapping it out.

With the coming full repeal of Psilocybin Prohibition, everyone’s going to be using high-dose Psilocybin, and inevitably discovering that possibilism-thinking causes loss of control as surely as a ram caught in a thicket by its own efforts and exertions of its power.

Figure 1. : Newbie psychonaut enthusiast relying on naive possibilism-thinking, a caricaturing self-portrait of the artist, Eadwine. Image f134 Row 2 Right, Canterbury Psalter. Crop by Michael Hoffman.

By first learning, in the ordinary state, about mental model re-configuration from possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking, it becomes as easy as possible to bring back the eternalism-thinking treasure through the Psilocybin loss-of-control, dragon-guarded gate, guarding it with the fire of the loss of control threat.

As medieval artists of this branching-message mushroom trees genre depicted and reported.

As they advise & depict through analogies, the mind is designed to transform from possibilism to eternalism when in the intense loose cognitive state from Psilocybin.

We need to teach everyone, in the OSC (per the lesser mysteries), how the mind re-stabilizes self-control in the peak Psilocybin state by mental model transformation, mental worldmodel transformation from possibilism to the eternalism model of control-in-world mental model of self as control steering agent steering (kubernetes) through a presumed world model of branching possibilities so as to create the non-existent future.

The mental model of self and world is transformed and moved to a new, adult, mature particular model of control.

This regeneration and transformation was the main paradigm of “healing”: exorcise animal childish thinking, for adult correctly functioning stability in the peak Psilocybin state so as to be able to thoroughly, relatively routinely explore high dose.

This article enables Cognitive Scientists to properly explore Psilocybin experiencing, suitably equipped.

How the Mind Works: Tightcog -> Loosecog drives transformation from possibilism to eternalism

Objective: Enable Cognitive Scientists to Enter Stably the Psilocybin State to Do Research Within It

The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism is designed to be a domain-appropriate, effective, relevant, supremely usefully relevant, purely Cognitive, experiential explanatory framework, to establish the sound foundation STEM field of Loose Cognitive Science, enabling Cognitive Scientists to enter into this domain of investigation (the loose cog state) with viable control stability without being ejected back through the loss-of-control gate due to holding a state-incompatible mental model.

Breadth: the 3 motifs and what they mean. 4K to tour the images, 4K to summarize Psychedelic Eternalism.

1-Paragraph Summary of the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism

Bad trips are caused by loss of control during mental model transformation from the branching possibilism to non-branching eternalism model.

The Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism is an explanatory model that explains the art motifs of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedeness}, & {non-branching}.

Provides the eternalism mental model, which is required, to provide stable self-control and avoid loss of control while in the peak Psilocybin state, to equip Cognitive Scientists to enter the peak Psilocybin state and have stable self-control while in that state.

Here’s the center of dragonland, the pregnant woman harassed by the dragon ready to swallow up egoic thinking agency demonstration observation of illusory boundaries of control and vulnerability to source of control when … and control stability drives transformation, system righted, to be made compatible with the eternalism experiential mode.

The control system and world model are observed as a mental construct world model of agency steering among branching possibilities.

To assert non-branching is to assert personal control nullity of a type, control instability when in the loose cognitive state, fatal non-viable control, then drives:

The Psychedelic Eternalism Experiential Mode

This article together w/ References provides a complete conceptual vocabulary for understanding this system and language of art motifs ({branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedeness}, & {non-branching}), integrated with Transcendent Knowledge about how possibilism-thinking causes loss of control in the peak loose cognitive state, and how to switch to the eternalism-thinking mental model of control-in-world.

The Psychedelic Eternalism Experiential Mode

Made to Intend to Demonstrate and Test Control Limits and Transcend Them and then Be Reconfigured

ordinary state – possibilism experiential mode – possibilism-thinking

altered state – eternalism experiential mode – eternalism-thinking

Temporarily in the altered state there’s a differnt arrangement experienced and then modelled in the mind. The mental worldmodel of time and control and possibility is changed to follow and become compatible with the

psychedelic eternalism

possibilism-thinking

  1. The ordinary state has the possibilism experiential mode, which produces possibilism-thinking.
  2. The altered state has the eternalism experiential mode, which produces eternalism-thinking.
  3. The ordinary state returns to the possibilism exeriential mode, returning to possibilism-thinking and retaining et.

In the ordinary state, teach/learn the lesser mysteries: the book learning part.

  1. , but now, also having available the loose-cognitiive developed losse- loosecog-compatible eternalism-thinking already developed and taught and learned in phase 1, 1.5:
  2. In the ordinary state, teach/learn the lesser mysteries: the book learning part. Learn about branching message mushroom trees.

In the loose cognitive state from Psilocybin, the mental world model of self-in-world is reconfigured by the the eternalism experiential mode.

Near 100% of our waking life will always be in the possibilism experiential mode (the OSC) with tight cognitive binding and the “possibilism” mental worldmodel (branching, open, non-existing future, with autonomous, monolithic model of control steering through a branching world into an open, non-existing future that’s caused and settled depending on our actions as egoic steering agents.

The mind is taught through perception & testing & experience that viable, stable control in the intense loose cognitive state requires and teaches the “eternalism” mental model. Shift weight from left foot to right foot.

The OSC returns forever, it’s the possibilism experiential mode, which reinforces same old egoic model of self in world, but eternalism-thinking is retained for use in future altered state sessions.

It’s about Attractive Failure of Control, That Causes a New Model of Not Just “Self” (right-handedness), but world too (non-branching world), during the alt state, grown available for use during next sessions.

replace by how the mind works, from outtakes

In the loose cognitive state from Psilocybin, control-instabliity occurs along with the eternalism experiential mode, which produces the “eternalism” mental model.

Tightcog -> Loosecog drives transformation from possibilism to eternalism

1-Paragraph Summary of the Egodeath theory; transformation from possibilism to eternalism/ how the mind works, how Eternalism…

Scope of Article

The theory of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs presented here is a translation from these motifs as analogies, to the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.

This article exclusively specifies the mapping from the Key Mythemes or Motifs to the Egodeath Core Concepts of the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.

This article is based in a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) thought-style, suitable for incorporation into an instructional freshman textbook stating what the theory is.

Summarizes the theory of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching}.

This theory & article presents & delivers an altered-state-based, pure Cognitive Science approach, phenomenology & analogy via motifs & mythemes as analogies (Hofstadter 1995, Hofstadter & Sander 2013).

An Extension of the 2007 Egodeath Theory

This article specifies the systematic language of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs, because that is not covered by my existing publishing-quality articles (1997, 2006).

This extension and portion of the Egodeath theory is a new for 2010-2023 sub-theory added onto the 1987-2007 Egodeath theory, systematically explaining {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs.

Supplemental Articles

For an introduction to mental representation including of control agency, see Hoffman 1996: The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment:
http://egodeath.com/BubbleOfSimulation.htm

For a summary of the core theory (the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence) without mythemes or motifs, see 1997 core theory spec (Hoffman 1997). Introduction to the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence — core theory published at Principia Cybernetica.

For a summary of core theory with mythemes except lacking {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} mythemes / motifs, see 2006 article main article (Hoffman 2006). The Entheogen Theory of Religion and Ego Death — Sep. 24, 2006, intro + broke up long sentences Sep. 12, 2007.

todo: break up:
For 2) my first pass decoding of Canterbury f134 after Brown asked for 1) writing about compelling evidence & criteria of proof and for identifying mushroom imagery in Christian art, see 1) C.E./C.O.P. & 2) the Proof article that it spawned by decoding John Lash 2008 crop of Canterbury Psalter image f134 Row 1 Left.

For instructions to Psilocybin session trainers, guides, clients, and psychonauts, see Strict Requirements for Teachers, Initiation Guides, and Students, Prior to Initiation.

For a simple, vivid, and compact summary the Theory per Egodeath.com 2005 based on my Rock lyrics analogy work that led to my religious-mythemes theory) that’s readily comprehensible, see Erik Davis: Led Zeppelin 4 (2005), p. 118 & 122 for a summary of psychedelic eternalism in Rock music per the Egodeath theory.

Erik Davis didn’t need my 2006 formal theory; he only needed my rock lyrics analogy mapping to block-universe eternalism — proving that the pictures here and my brief decoding-of-ASC-referent notes/ cheat sheet works as well as formal theory presentation, because relevant and useful.

See the Key Mythemes catalog Key Mythemes catalog & the Egodeath theory Core Concepts catalog.

Table of Contents

Contents:

  • Abstract
  • Conclusions 1
  • Challenging Experiences
  • Fasten Your Seatbelts for this Article, It Is Not “Spot the Mushroom (🍄)” or “Is Not! Is Too! Is Not! Is Too!” <– wrong conversation, wrong paradigm. It Is Time to Adult:
    What is being messaged by using msh imagery?
  • Conflicts of Interest – yes, they have them, in spades
  • NEED FRESH START: Birth of Modern Science Required Ditching Aristotle-Worship, Stop Making Aristotle Our Automatic Point of Reference, Stop Respecting and Paying Attention to Aristotle
  • Birth of Modern Psychedelic Science in Late 2023 Requires Ditching Allegro-Fixation
  • Stop Automatically Making Allegro the Point of Reference, Stop Respecting and Paying Attention to Allegro
  • Ditch Amanita, Ditch Eleusis, Ditch Wasson, Ditch Kykeon, Ditch Plaincourault-the-Proxy-Myth
  • and ditch your brain-dead “Default Mode Network, neuroplasticity, ego dissolution, nondual unity oneness” — PSEUDO EXPLANATIONS, Pre-Scientific, Pretended Folk Explanations/Narrative Parrotting
  • TO WHAT EXTENT PSILOCYBIN IN WESTERN RELIGION AND CULTURE?
  • Damnit, I am not asking “What Did the Great Man Allegro Say?”
  • What exactly did Aristotle/ Wasson/ Allegro say?? It’s so confusing, Wasson retracted his views, no he didn’t, yes he did, 500 page book needed…” THATS NOT THE FKKING QUESTION — LET IT GO PPL!!
  • Clean Break! Cut the rope! Abandon all that confusion.

fake headings:

  • Demonstrating the Threat of Loss of Control
  • The Ultimate, Paradigmatic Bad Trip (Dropped from CEQ): I Was Afraid to Lose My Self-Control; It Was Difficult to Control My Thoughts: The Ultimate Climactic Transformation Gateway Experience of the Threat of Catastrophic Loss of Control
  • Meditation Leads to Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell. The set & setting myth.
  • relate art decoding of {branching-message mushroom trees/ handedness/ non-branching} usefully to control violation, control reset, and especially Get Treasure.
  • disjuncture between the dissipated survey of bad trips (which at least calls “ego dissolution” into question) vs. THE experience, of threat of catastrophic loss of control. Petter’s Day Trip to Hell blurs the focus to end mis-fixation (Petters ends the pseudo-explanations: “it was bad set/setting”/ “some people just can’t handle ego dissolution, they erred in resisting the experience”), exact quote:
  • “while one type of challenging trip may result from fearful resistance to the psychedelic effect of ego dissolution [total BS pseudo-expl; garbled unhelpful grain of truth], others may be quite different in terms both of their characteristics and their etiology“.
  • Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell broadens the question of bad trips.
  • NO MORE PAT ANSWERS like “it’s the fault of set & setting, you failed to be in a positive mood. or: today’s Folk-Science Explanation that the professional puzzled scholars give in lieu of explanation/comprehension:
  • The bad trip is your fault, you caused it, by resisting ego dissolution.
  • The bad trip is your fault, you shouldn’t have resisted ego dissolution.
  • YOU caused the bad trip, by resisting ego dissolution.
  • Psychedelic eternalism, possibilism, handedness, non-branching, branching-message mushroom trees [not below]
  • “Lucas (2005) noted that bad trips can happen even when you follow all the rules of common sense, and criticized what she called the “set-and-setting attitude” as playing into a fantasy of control: “if we just do everything right, we can prevent negative experiences” (p. 26).
  • Panofsky: “They Would Have Omitted Branches” (citation: Brown published letters).
  • Citation: Marcia Kupfer (March 21, 2022) [I kind of want Kupfer’s quote and Panofsky’s quote, in particular, max’ly relevant
  • Top 10 Dread questions = driving control transformation to the adult mature developed permanent mode of stable viable control + Transcendent Knowledge

Names of the Theory

The most effective and communicative 1-word name of the theory is the Egodeath theory.

The short but specific name of the theory is the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism.

or more pointedly, the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism.

The most descriptive and communicative but cumbersome 3-word name of the theory is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.

The essence of the explanatory model is psychedelic, cybernetics (communication and control), and eternalism.

The name the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism is the shortest possible adequate specifier-type name of the theory.

Anti-Goals

Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism is the opposite of Letheby/Paulhus’ FAD-Plus’s confused “fatalistic determinism” (domino-chain determinism variant flavor of egoic possibilism-thinking).

Why didn’t Erik Davis get hung up on the word ‘determinism’ like Kafei did & like Letheby does in FAD-Plus’ off-base “fatalistic determinism” mis-conceptions?

1-Paragraph Summary of the Egodeath theory; transformation from possibilism to eternalism/ how the mind works, how Eternalism (or Superdeterminism in Physics; or hyper-Calvinism in Reformed Theology).

Metzinger, Thomas (2009). The Ego Tunnel: The Science of the Mind and the Myth of the Self.
[only incl given that my 1996 Bubble article and 1997 Prin Cyb links etc are listed] I didn’t get anything out of this book, falls short of my 1996 article. Who doesn’t already know that “the self is a mental model”? What does this book contribute? Heads these potentially decent models in the wrong direction.

GOOD EXAMPLE OF BOOK THAT PROPS UP RATHER THAN GRATING AGAINST the Egodeath theory

Name of the Theory

Awesome! Explained Why the theory-name “the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence” Has Poor Wordcount-Performance!

The 1988 name The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence contributes a valuable angle, but omits the key points: Psychedelic & Eternalism.

It’s not short enough to be useful shorthand, and not long enough to deliver the most key points.

So it has a poor score on wordcount vs. specifying key components.

The words “ego transcendence” don’t carry their weight, don’t earn their wordcount.

Strategy instead: Assume this free set-up: this theory of ego transcendence (that’s context setup for free), is: Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.

bam bam bam! 10 10 10.

Not “ego” (3/10) “transcendence” 6/10… meh-value words.

Then the CEQ [the broken wastebasket for the MEQ’s failures] summarily just deletes 18 of Dittrich’s 21 Dread items (86%), even though under optimal set & settings, Griffiths reports almost 40% [quote Houot] terror experiences during high-dose sessions.

‘psychedelic’ and block-universe eternalism are the key explanatory concepts; the essence of the Theory.

The phrase ‘the Egodeath theory‘ is essentially a shorthand “brand name”.

The direct, descriptor-based identification of the theory is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, or for short,

“High scores on the OBN [Oceanic Boundlessness] scale therefore indicate a state similar to mystical experiences as described in the scientific literature on the psychology of religion (eg, see [20]) [Stace 1960]. The DED [Dread of Ego Dissolution] scale includes items measuring negatively experienced derealization and depersonalization, cognitive disturbances, catatonic
symptoms, paranoia, and loss of thought and body control. High
scores on the DED scale therefore indicate a very unpleasant state
similar to so called ‘‘bad trips’’… ” (Emphasis added.)

So ditch “ego t’c” and replace misleading word “ego” by ‘Psychedelic’, and replace vague “transcendence” by extremely valuable “eternalism”.

If all you know about the theory is that it is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, the theory can be reconstructed or expanded-out from just that theory-name, indicating the soundness of this name as the full yet compact name. I was dissatisfied with theory-names and domain names, and thought of the domain name Egodeath as accurate and communicative on the zoom-out scale of 1-word zoom-out scale.

In contrast, the shorthand names are not sufficient for reconstituting / re-deriving the theory:

Were it called the Theory of Cybernetic Eternalism, intense prejudice & presupposition would omit psychedelics.

Were it called the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism, the crucial Control aspect would be too implicit.

For a nutshell on-point vivid and compact summary proving that the Theory per Egodeath.com 2005 (even before my 2006 main article; based instead on my Rock lyrics analogy work that led to my religious-mythemes theory) is readily comprehensible by anyone with merely Erik Davis’ level of intelligence and informedness, see Erik Davis: Led Zeppelin 4 (2005), p. 118 & 122 for a summary of psychedelic eternalism in Rock music per the Egodeath theory.

what are the last words i’d delete below? highlight the pillar words that are guaranteed to stay:

In the 1988 drafts, I gave up on restricting limiting the name to any single theory-name. The first names of the theory were: the theory of ego transcendence, or the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence. But both of those names, despite being verbose, omit the crucial terms ‘psychedelic’ and block-universe eternalism, which were the key explanatory concepts; the essence of the Theory.

The phrase ‘the Egodeath theory‘ is essentially a shorthand “brand name” replacing the above, and similarly, omits the firm requirement terms, specifically asserting psychedelic and eternalism as the essence of the explanatory model.

The direct descriptor-based identification of the theory is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, or for short, the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism, where ‘eternalism‘ is defined emphasizing control, ie control-transformation aspects.

To prevent any attempts to move the focus off of Psilocybin in order to substitute for and eliminate it (as a ploy to avoid ego death and ego transcendence), an equivalent official shorthand name for the theory is the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism.

This article specifically presents only focuses on defining is scoped to delivers e total focus of this article is SPECIFICALLY the systematic language of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} motifs, because that is not covered by my existing publishing-quality articles (1997, 2006).

My Nov 2020 pair of articles doesn’t really cover this system of 3 motifs suitably and systematically, as proved by my April 2022 & March 2023 additional basic breakthroughs on these specific motifs: {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching}.

This article is a STEM textbook stating the facts, stating what the theory is, instructional for 7th-grade freshmen.

This article simply, directly summarizes and states and explains what the theory of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} is.

This is a New Theory Proper, not that the 1988/1997/2006 Egodeath theory is a new theory, but that this portion of the Egodeath theory is a new sub-theory, covering systematically {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching}.

This theory & article presents & delivers an altered-state-based, pure Cognitive Science approach, phen’y & analogy via motifs & mythemes as analogies (Hofstadter 1995, Hofstadter & Sander 2013)

Out of Scope
  • Neuroscience. The Egodeath theory is successful and RELEVANT and USEFUL precisely because it is anti-neuroscience; the one and only bona fide actual Cognitive theory. As Sader Sanders & Zijlmans call for in Moving Past Mysticism, the Egodeath theory is based on 1986 rejection of mysticism specifically as a methodology for constructing an explanatory fwk and for instructional purposes. Based on STEM as antidote to poor Mysticism communication its and aversion to clear theory/ reeling in premature love of incomprehensibility (quote S&J). Mysticism as a methodology is most-eager to throw in the towel and declare ineffable before even starting. Philo-Incomprehensibilists. I firmly rejected the mysticism-as-methodology approach in 1986 and took the exact opposite tack, forming in April 1987 the winning mentality of thought, expression, and instruction / theory expression. Practical. Clear. Figure shit out and explain it through effective direct model- explanatory model construction per Paul Thagard’s book Conceptual Revolutions. No black box (quote S&J).
  • Not to show how this system is vastly superior to the previous heap of less-than-theories.
  • Not a literature review. Presents new latest aspects of an actual theory rooted in April 1987 & Jan 1988; see Summary of History of Devmt of the Egodeath theory, in Outtakes.
  • This article does not employ comparing and contrasting other would-be explanatory fwks.
  • Per Paul Feyerabend, the New Theory is under no obligation to acknowledge the existence of the “Old Theory”.
  • Defense of the theory. Peer review = the Egodeath community.
  • Introduction to the Egodeath theory / to the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism. See the See list above.
  • Critiquing the joke that passes for Psychedelic Science.
  • Critiquing the joke that passes for Entheogen Scholarship.
  • Critiquing the joke that passes for Cog Sci o Rel.
  • Critiquing Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism that swaps-out, replaces, and eliminates that which is pretends to explain.
  • Critiquing the MASSIVE CATEGORY ERROR, reductionism from peak Psilocybin effects to irrrelevant domains in the ordinary state.
  • Bandaiding your guyss broken fkkin Earth-centric Ptolemaic cosmology (though I love astral ascent mysticism as a cool analogy).
  • I AM NOT HERE TO DELIVER EPICYCLIC CORRECTIONS TO MAKE YOUR BROKEN SYSTEM SOMEHOW WORK, THAT’S BASED ON THE WRONG FOUNDATION YOU’VE MIS-INVESTED IN.

MOAR Outtakes

darn it, good bowl vanished from here. KEEP URL VISIBLE. This is a temp:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/Douris_cup_Jason_Vatican_crop.jpg

DONE! todo: link to local image of good kylix photo. does Amazon sell these for Psychonauts? 🍾 🤔 need

I finally made the above local copy of museum photo I was trying to put here. Carl Amanita Promoter Ruck pull-quotes me in book “Secrets of Eleusis” asserting all mushro symposium mixed-wine was “mushroom wine” — BUT, unhappily, it later dawned on me he mis-took me to assert Amanita.

When I wrote that at Egodeath.com, possibly 2004, I can’t say “I specifically meant Psilocybin” — only in 2022 did I erect a brick wall filter hardline saying I CERTAINLY DO NOT MEAN AMANITA! HELL NO! THE WORST MUSHROOM YOU FIND!

Anyone who knows mushrooms knows that Amanita is the undesirable reject “I’ll pass” kind then, exactly as now: “sweet in mouth like honey, bitter in stomach” (per both Ezekiel & Revelation in Bible — despite prejudiced idiot Erwin Panofsky “There are no mushrooms in the Bible” & “Medieval religious artists had no reason to think of mushrooms.”)

and don’t even THINK of trying to pull the ol’ Ruckian/Rushian entheogen scholars’ trick of “Quick, neutralize this evidence by rushing to en-cage it in the dismissive framing of “heretical, alien, secret, suppressed, doesn’t count; this evidence just further proves the absence of msh in Christianity“”

eg: link: John Lash HATES that he found mushrooms inside the “can do no right” Church — see links in my .. to his articels in my page “Wise as serpents”

Wise as Serpents: Entheogenic Religion and the Paris Eadwine Psalter (John Lash) – category: Great Canterbury Psalter. Has links to his 9 archived articles:
/Eadwine Folder – 5 Articles <– see probably article 1 or 2 here, “I cannot believe the evil Salvationism figures such as Jesus or Moses used entheogens” — John Lash doing his part to prop up Prohibition of Psilocybin by his zero-strategy, self-defeating attitudes and prejudices and presuppositions.

WELCOME TO THE “PSYCHEDELIC RENAISSANCE“[TM] 😞

John Lash, expert inventor of “psychomimetics”, which you desire b/c they “mimic the mind”

I got photos right here to prove his 2nd Ed of Not in His Name twice asserts that gibberish. In his 2nd Edition!

Maybe he’ll correct his big honkin errors about “the Wasson theory“🤢 [sic!] in his 3rd Edition, or 4th Edition….

John Lash provides an ample match for Wouter Hanegraaff’s “entheogens in the wide sense” aka non-drug entheogens.

Be real careful with those non-drug entheogens, b/c they mimic the mind, being “psychomimetics”.

Canterbury Ps image f134, Row 1 Middle:

Crop by Cybermonk
Same image, Canterbury Ps image f134, Row 2 Right
Crop by Cybermonk
Same image, Canterbury Ps image f134, Row 3 Middle
Crop by Cybermonk

These days, 2021-2023, I extremely mean EXCLUSIVELY that the above kylix definitely (proved by myth) contained Psilocybin, NOT Amanita.

good url: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jason_being_saved_by_Athena_from_the_dragon,Attic_red-figured_kylix,_attributed_to_Douris,_480-470_BC,_inv._16545–Museo_Gregoriano_Etrusco–Vatican_Museums-_DSC01046.jpg

“upload.org” bogus:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/Jason_being_saved_by_Athena_from_the_dragon%2C_Attic_red-figured_kylix%2C_attributed_to_Douris%2C_480-470_BC%2C_inv.16545–Museo_Gregoriano_Etrusco–Vatican_Museums-_DSC01046.jpg

Outtakes

The theory can be reconstructed or expanded-out from just that theory-name, (but not from a shorter name), indicating the soundness of this name.

Complete Newbie Mystical Experience (see OAV: DED, not CEQ)

(Advanced Analogy)

[awesome todo! crop side by side Funnel Hat and flipped Red Hanging]

Stamets condoned and allowed a blind spot, he painted impressionistic picture of “no psil in europe”, or “could hardly care less to focus on that topic”, so why cite? Aside from that aggravating slackness/ negligence, carelessness,
A standard valuable reference book although practically omits any focused discussion on Psil in Eur/Eng.

Samo Plainc 1997???
Rating: ??? double-check to see if I want to taint & pollute this article by adding forbidden old-paradigm geocentric-reifying words “Plaincourault” & “Wasson” – permanent barriers to progress; a huge cost of mentioning its existence. Dragging this article down, or “helping”?
Rating: 1/10 topic (same dilemma as whether to cite my major Plainc article — very comparable; agree w/ Samo). My article is even clearer than Samo that we have to shove aside the “legacy” of Wasson rudely impeding the path.
HOW CAN WE MOVE TO COPERNICUS WHEN WE’RE STUCK FOR ETERNITY DISCUSSING PTOLEMY?

MOVE

“Ego dissolution” is a pseudo-explanation. [citation]

DMN doesn’t cause reduced cogntiion.

There’s no correleation between brain meas & expeirence.

Bad trips aren’t caused by set & setting (Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell 2021).

DMN doesn’t come from Psychedelic Science.

DMN doesn’t cause ego dissolution.

It’s a myth that no Psil in Eur/Eng.

Aman primacy fallacy – leads to dead end fairytales going nowhere. & irrelevant “heretical secret alchemy”. Fails to help repeal Prohibition, it’s part of the enabler problem.

Worst choice for mystery religion initiations en masse woudl be Amanita, Psil is better.

  1. When in the loose cognitive state, stand on right foot, not left; rely on eternalism-thinking, not possibilism-thinking. 2-level dependent control, pre-existing control-thoughts, non-branching possibilities.
  2. Read my articles: Requirements for Guides.
  3. Add this knowledge of the two mental models (state-specific) to session-guide training. Not only how to avoid control instability, but how to gain Transcendent Knowledge about altered-state control stability to enable entering the state.
  4. Add Control category to CEQ.

Get to the Point What-to-Do

Read:

Hoffman, Michael. 2020.
Strict Requirements for Teachers, Initiation Guides, and Students, Prior to Initiation
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2020/11/24/strict-requirements-for-teachers-initiation-guides-and-students-prior-to-initiation/

[100-word What To Do summary is the only priority. Impressive persuasion verbiage is a waste of words, Low Pri]

Begin to Try Make an Actual Effort to Perceive Psilocybin in Western Religion and Culture

This is the start of a golden era of availability of images online.

  1. Write section headings about rich history of expert-level Psilocybin usage in Western Religion and Culture. Like Brown did. Like I did.
  2. Make a positive narrative of abundance, that’s not self-defeating, and that strategically forces repeal of Prohibition (burn the accursed, fraudulent “schedules”). Crybabying about Big Bad Church having eliminated all Psil from our religious history, is suicidally stupid strategy, and as false as could be.
  3. Fill in outline.
  4. Force it to work. Do whatever it takes. Failure and defeat, Just Give Up — our strategic commitment to date — is not an option.

The Ultimate, Classic Cause of Bad Trips

The Cause of Bad Trips: control instability during mental model transformation from possibilism to eternalism, about mental model of self steering in world

I AM NOT HERE TO MAKE *YOUR* PTOLEMAIC PARADIGM WORK

I AM HERE TO REPLACE, NOT REPAIR, YOUR PARADIGM.

The Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism IS AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE EXPLANATORY FRAMEWORK BASIS. NOT EVEN GONNA MENTION FAILED MYSTIC SYSTEMS.

Add a Control-Challenges Subscale to the CEQ

I DON’T LIKE THIS. F THE CEQ, 🔥BURN IT WITH FIRE 🔥 . I’M NOT HERE TO MAKE YOUR POS YALDABAOTH MONSTROSITY WORK.

Add a Control factor to the CEQ, containing these standard, established items:

  • I was afraid to lose my self-control.
  • I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.
  • I felt like a puppet or marionette.
  • I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
  • I felt threatened.
  • Sense of being trapped and helpless.
  • It was difficult to control my thoughts.

11-Factors’ Shadow factor 13 (SHA)

To come into alignment with the standards of STEM for communication and clarity:

11-Factors (the questionnaire with no name and 5 different names) needs to move item “#54: “I was afraid to lose my self-control” from Shadow factor 13 (SHA) to the Impaired Control and Impaired Cognition (ICIC) factor. And break up ICIC into two distinct factors, Impaired Control (IC) and Impaired Cognition (IC).

todo: add screenshots of the f134 sun and the f177 sun.

This non-existent factor doesn’t exist, and is the cause of bad trips.

About 11-Factors’ Shadow factor 13 (SHA): defined as the 8 Dread items that are in the Unpleasant Experiences high-level factor[dimension|scale], including the beacon of light guiding us through the dark wormy forest of Psychedelic Pseudoscience, Dread (DED) item #54: I was afraid to lose my self-control.

Ocean/Visionary unaccounted items are Virtual factor 12 (VIR). 10 from Ocean, 6 from Visionary. 16 total.

Quote Houot’s dissertation: Nearly 40% reported extreme fear in Griffiths hi-dose, under optimal conditions. Yet, CEQ silently omitted the key effects.

Psychedelic “Science” suppressing and repressing the shadow dragon monster by summarily tossing it into Wouter Hanegraaff’s Rejected wastebasket (BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND HARDER) just guarantees continued 40% bad trips (best case) and guarantees failing to bring back the treasure of Transcendent Knowledge.

todo: reduce wordcount to the minimum; just enough to cite & include panic attack articles in References.

Quote Houot’s dissertation: Nearly 40% reported extreme fear in Griffiths hi-dose, under optimal conditions. Yet, CEQ silently omitted the key effects.

Psychedelic “Science” suppressing and repressing the shadow dragon monster by summarily tossing it into Wouter Hanegraaff’s Rejected wastebasket (BURY YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND HARDER) just guarantees continued 40% bad trips (best case) and guarantees failing to bring back the treasure of Transcendent Knowledge.

Dittrich 1994 OAV’s Angst/Dread (DED) dimension contains 21 items, those same 21 items are the Unpleasant hi-lev dimension in Studerus 2010, see Figure S1.

3 of the OAV’s Dread aka 10-Factors’ Unpleasant effects made it into Griffiths 2016 CEQ; see the3 5D-ASC items in Scoring Guide appendix. 18 / 21 = 86% of Dread effects were omitted from CEQ.

Bad Trips Are Caused by Trying to Rely on and Assert Possibilism-Thinking, Causing Control Instability

Johnstad 2021 proposes that Bad Trips Are Caused by “Resisting Ego Dissolution”.

Dittrich’s OAV or 5D-ASC has its Angst/Dread of Ego Dissolution (DED) dimension, which has that false explanation, “Dread of Ego Dissolution”, built into its name.

It’s not dread of ego dissolution. That’s not peak or most attractive or interesting.

It’s dread of catastrophic loss of control, ram seizure panic escalation; the harder you try that way to control, the more instability is caused.

Together with smelling the most attractive treasure, Transcendent Knowledge; maturation into adult form.

Then the mind is shown — by that dynamic — the “eternalism” mental model of self steering in world.

Engenders a New Model of Self Steering in World

It’s not a Matter of Choosing to Adopting a brand of armchair epistemology or metaphaphics for Daily Life per Letheby & Johnson. Not sure whether to cite Letheby — much to commend but dead end.

It is not the case that “we need to remember that the mind models the self (and world)”, per Metzinger/ Letheby/ Johnson. Rather: In ASC control instabliity occurs along with the eternalism experiential mode, which produces the “eternalism” mental model.

The mind is taught through perception & testing & experience that viable, stable control in the intense loose cognitive state requires and teaches the “eternalism” mental model. Shift weight from left foot to right foot.

The OSC returns forever, it’s the possibilism experiential mode, which reinforces same old egoic model of self in world, but eternalism-thinking is retained for use in future altered state sessions.

It’s about Attractive Failure of Control, That Causes a New Model of Not Just “Self” (right-handedness), but world too (non-branching world), during the alt state, grown available for use during next sessions.

Moving from Earth-Centered to Sun-Centered Explanatory Framework

I’m ok with generally positively announcing a[ move to a] new correct basis & focal point. No, not a move. simply: We now have the correct foundation.

The narrative here is not “we move from bad Psychedelic Sci” to “the Egodeath theory ” ; rather: we had nothing;

We had folk knowledge rough ineffective — 40% bad trips with no understanding. Now we have

  • my ECQ Eternalism & Control Q’air, and
  • this trio of motifs decoded that’s 100% perfectly aimed at right center/basis.
  • the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism (including my 1996, 1997, 2006, 2020 articles — none of which contains this targeted scope of motif-trio coverage). This article extends my cv to remedy the gap in my 2006 article and the gap in my 2020 article which was before I grasped the breadth of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching} at the advanced level. I was red guy intermediate in f134 Row 2 Right, now I’m floating funnel hat advanced guy.

note for podcast page ep231 – limbless looker ties together (like 4 horses) two looked-at items. [6:06 p.m. March 18, 2023] f134 Row 2 right’s funnel hat + limbless looker connects floating feet of Red in tree to the receiving mushrooms – reviewion: REVISION THEORY REVISION: LIMBLESS ISN’T LOOKING AT “WRONG HANDS” SO MUCH AS AT [“WHEN YOU RECEIVE MUSHROOMS”]. “When you receive mushrooms from the dispensary, consider advanced knowledge of “stand on right foot” which is “hang from right knee”. Same as f145 Row 1 Left’s pointing w/ finger to “column base, put right foot down, read the opened scroll message”.

f145 is autobiographical: Eadwine had practiced teaching Cubensis traders about balance; control stability; preventing loss of control by relying on eternalism-thinking rather than naive possibilism-thinking. It is a charmingly realistic, highly plausible, relatable and good-hearted scene: intimately, profoundly discussing the theory of control-stability with the traders who transport cubensis.

I’m not ok with counterproductively debating on the enemy’s bogus constructed turf like “Was Allegro right/wrong about Secret Secret Christian Amanita Cult??” Just keeps the conversation stuck in same trap/rut.

todo: translation table here; find “forbidden word list” – i don’t like acknow. the existence of all the old ….

We’re here to present Copernicus, not to acknowledge the existence of our erroneous Ptolemy.

At least Ptolemy made something useful: the astral ascent mysticism framework (which Hanegraaff TOTALLY BOTCHED, shockingly, because he assumed the mind moves from eternalism to possibilism. ), unlike Psychedelic Pseudoscience’s pure contribution of dead-end confusion. [move to “how the mind works”.]

Conflicts of Interest

None.

END OF MOVE

Abstract

MOVE FROM ABSTRACT

Psilocybin causes loosened thinking, and causes loss of control until the mind switches from the possibility-branching mental model to the non-branching eternalism mental model of control and world.

Why is Eadwine & branching-message mushroom trees the perfect Antidote to BS about psychedelics, and the perfect explanation to map out uncharted “here be shadow dragon monsters”. the Egodeath theory explains this art genre and this art genre corroborate the Egodeath theory and makes it vivid too – the genre is TOTALLY ON-POINT to the perfect extreme. especially with my explanatory articulation of what specifically the art is saying/reporting.

The more you assert possibilism-power, the more it goes unstable, leaving you with the new mental model.

[really good wording in https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/18/egodeath-mystery-show-ep231-11-factors-shadow-factor-13-sha-%f0%9f%98%b1%f0%9f%98%b5%f0%9f%90%89-mar-14-2023/ ]

Bad trips are caused by loss of control during mental model transformation from the branching possibilism to non-branching eternalism model.

The Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism is an explanatory model that explains the art motifs of {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedeness}, & {non-branching}.

Provides the eternalism mental model, which is required, to provide stable self-control and avoid loss of control while in the peak Psilocybin state, to equip Cognitive Scientists to enter the peak Psilocybin state and have stable self-control while in that state.

Delivers a STEM-compliant clear, direct, summarized presentation of this domain of knowledge, Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism.

States the origin of this theory.

Provides recommendations to replace the current explanatory lexicon and psychometrics questionnaires by ones founded on a scientific, well-articulated basis, replacing rough folk explanations about the shadow dragon monster in the Psilocybin state.

Directly explains the referent of religious mythology.

This article together w/ References provides a complete conceptual vocabulary for understanding this system and language of art motifs ({branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedeness}, & {non-branching}), integrated with Transcendent Knowledge about how possibilism-thinking causes loss of control in the peak loose cognitive state, and how to switch to the eternalism-thinking mental model of control-in-world.

The Egodeath theory, first defined/identified/discovered in January 1988, is the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism. It includes mytheme/motifs decoding; it is able to identify the isomorphism of myth/motifs & the experiential phen’y of asc.

the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence
[omits eternalism and loosecog / psychedelics]

The possibility-branching mental model in the loose cognitive state from Psilocybin causes loss of control and conversion to the “eternalism” mental model

How the Mind Works: Tightcog -> Loosecog drives transformation from possibilism to eternalism

Summary of the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism

the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism aka the Egodeath theory aka the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence.

Development of the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism

  • Rooted in April 1987 (re: a new, STEM thinking-style; analysis style eg mental construct processing).
  • Congealed in Jan 1988, draft ms.’s of The Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence, ie mental worldmodel transformation from steering in open branching to pre-existing block-universe eternalism in loose cog state.
  • “The Bubble of Simulation: Subjective Experience as a Virtual Environment” (Hoffman 1996) covers m. model of control NOT just “model of self”.
  • Summarized the core theory (free from any mythemes/ motifs) in Jan 1997, at Principia Cybernetica website (+
  • Mapped to myth Oct 2006/ Sep 2007 main article, images included the 3 motifs, not recognized until March 2022.
  • Confirmed branching is a thing Nov 2013,
  • Conjectured right foot = rely on eternalism-thinking Dec 2015 (salamander bestiary element),
  • Canterbury most decoding of f134 Nov 2020,
  • Grasped branching-message mushroom trees Mar 2022,
  • Full decoding of these motifs in Canterbury Ps partic’ly f134, f145, & f177 March 2023.

The STEM Science of Loose Cog Sci & the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence

This is the biggest burst of progress possible to repair MEQ per Stang and repaire CEQ to make it do what it claims, broaden – not delete (REPRESS AND SUPPRESS THE SHADOW, WHAT A GREAT IDEA, WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG, “WE’RE ALL ABOUT SAFETY” LECTURES CEQ AT US WHILE THEY CARELESSLY TRASHCAN 86% OF DREAD without even acknowledging this and explaining why) — Dread (DED) remains essentially sound; adequate.

ECQ gathers standard psychedelic effects questions to provide an effective foundation for psychedelic psychometrics questionnaires based on this the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, where the shadow dragon monster is understood and emphatically accounted for and mapped out and clearly communicated per STEM standards

instead of today’s “mysticism” poor vague model communication/ expression (Sanders & Zijlmans quotes, from Moving Past Mysticism [as a methodology, not as explanandum, mob of strawmanners who never, ever QUOTE S&J!]

the Cybernetic Theory of Ego Transcendence is a domain-appropriate, effective, relevant, supremely usefully relevant, purely Cognitive, experiential explanatory framework, to establish the sound foundation STEM field of Loose Cognitive Science, enabling Cognitive Scientists to enter into this domain of investigation (the loose cog state) with viable control stability without being ejected back through the loss-of-control gate due to holding a state-incompatible mental model.

without any neuroreductionism or scientism distorting and eliminating the explanandum

q’airs need to be aboveboard, not hidden, not secret, CLEARLY EXPLAINED, to meet STEM standards of open, public communication and teachability, not a Dark Profession tower of Dread-free CEQ resting on half-baked Tim Leary MEQ tottering on a unstable basis of out of print 63-year old Stace single lone book as the so-called (quote Studerus), “our scientific basis” — which Chs Stang says James & Stace’s account fails to match the historical mystics’ reports. “But I wave in the air CEQ!” defends Griffith. “oh, About that CEQ….. b/c lacking a Control factor — SINCE YOU DON’T HAVE A “CONTROL” FACTOR/SUBSCALE, WHAT YOU IN FACT HAVE IS A SHADOW FACTOR 13 (SHA), THAT WILL CAUSE LOSS OF CONTROL, ejected from Psilocybin domain.

ceq Lacks item 54, “I was afraid to lose my self-control”, and HRS item “It was difficult to control my thoughts”, so CEQ — along with the jargon trendy “DMN”, “neuroplasticity”, “ego dissolution” (quote the journal article that says to stop using that term) (the Journal of Psychedelic Studies​ article Johnstad: “set & settings as the primary cause of bad trips is a myth; bad trips are bc resist ego dissolution” (explains nothing; vague; useless, unhelpful) , and false model of mysticism as mere beginners “nondual unity oneness”,

such CEQ-type ” science” constitutes a dragon-sized gap, a fatal flaw, omitting THE MOST IMPORTANT subscale of fx; so is guaranteed to result in control seizure / loss of control/ panic, and this domain will remain not understood by Science [the very things — risks, failures, missteps that CEQ warns against, are precisely guaranteed to be caused by CEQ due to its SUPPRESSION / REPRESSION of #54 & lack — DANGEROUS lack of a CONTROL category w/ HRS item “It was difficult to control my thoughts”] (see Canterbury Psalter image f145 Row 2 Left, scale-holding guy pointing to scroll instructing ignorant barbarians: “your left foot standing on, will be unbalanced and will collapse in the Psilocybin state.”

Employed a principled rejection of Neuroscience, to make room for bona fide, actual Cognitive Science; Loose Cognitive Science or high, genuine Cog Sci, incl’g Cog Sci of Religion.

Unscientific Narrative Bias Against Psil in Eur/Eng

this field of entheogen scholarship has a HUGE problem with confusing biased narratives vs. sound theory.

It is the most extremely, thoroughly bias-driven field, where fallacious arg’n & strong unstated presuppositions sits firmly on the throne. This article moves us from Earth- to Sun-centered right STEM foundation including above all, clear model representation opposit of myst’m BUT zero reductionism. We must have a dominant area of Cog Sci that forbids the usual Neurotakeover which eliini elim’s the explanandum while pretending to cover it, as CEQ perfectly exemplifies.

so-called “11-Factors” (15 factors) is a perfect example of marketing narrative (mis-aiming of the spotlight of attention) vs. what’s delivered (66 items including Shadow Factor 13 (SHA)). Narrative: 11 factors. Reality (tripped up Griff/Johns): 13 low level factors + 2 high-lev totallying 66 items same as OAV 1994.

Why didn’t Griff have in hand, 11-F to see that there are 21, not 13 Dread-derived iems, incl 54 I was … ctrl”? b/c this is not a Science.

It is earth-centered folk Science; move to Sun-centered real basis, with STEM communication clarity.

COMMUNICATION GRADE for Psychedelic Psychometrics Science: F. They confuse each other! Studerus completly fatally confused Griffiths.

There are 8 different names of “11-Factors”, which actually has 15 factors. More like the Studerus’ “11 Conflicting Names” q’air! 😅

Psychedelic Psychometrics Science Merely Attempts to Cover Therapy, but the Big News Is Transformation of Control Model

(NOT just “model of self”; model of world; see image: Golden: Entry into Jeru) – Psilocybin portal to non-branching world, mis-using it dabbling for “therapy” you have no idea the portal and seizure it opens, quote Houot “Grif reports nearly 40% bad trips, and that’s under optimal set/setting.” What would ACTUALLY be “optimial ” and “preparation of the client” would be — THE TRUTH IS, you gotta teach everyone eternalism-thinking — NOT as a brand of Letheby “metaphsyics” or “epis”, but rather, as a spacesuit requiered to enteer this state, this anti-control state. You gotta be equipped approply, EFFECTIVELY PREPARED means, BY DEFINITION, YOU HAVE TO LEARN ETERNALISM-THINKING TO RELY ON IT DURING PSILOCYBIN PEAK STATE. We’re not in mere beginner, “complete [newbie] mystical epxerience” therapy-land anymore.

You Wanna Talk “Complete Mystical Experience” without Fooling Around? Must Learn Eternalism-Thinking.

Cybernetics = Comm’n & Ctrl, neither one is covered delivered by pop Psych Sci eg “dmn”, “neuroplast’y”, “ego dissolution” explains NOTHING.

The master proposition from Metz & Leth is “Psychedelics change the mind thru a “changed model of self” — WRONG, that’s way inadequate, (ever for mere “therapy”; it’s as inadeq as Leary’s MEQ to cover ACTUAL range of mystic exp’g, ESPECIALLY the threat of loss of control, the very ENGINE of mystic-state transformation. [image: f145 Row 1 demons switching his hands/feet looking at God holding a closed scroll.] loss of control = fire = light = engine & heart of ADULT mature mystical experience

not your earth-centric crude childish folk “science” of “complete [newbie] mystical experience”

Amanita primacy fallacy is part of problem.

Epistemology vs. State-Specific Experiential Control Dynamics

Not a takeaway: “we must apply and affirm eternalism during daily life”.

Near 100% of our waking life will always be in the possibilism experiential mode (the OSC) with tight cognitive binding and the “possibilism” mental worldmodel (branching, open, non-existing future, with autonomous, monolithic model of control steering through a branching world into an open, non-existing future that’s caused and settled depending on our actions as egoic steering agents.

The “eternalism” mental worldmodel is state-specific; so, this theory provides a different relationship to, & application of Epist’y, than Metz & Letheby provide.

This is the beginning of a Golden era of Psalter studies and recognizing and comprehending msh imagery in W / East. religion & culture.

At 23:00 Hancock & P.T. host say Stamets says there were tons of Psilocybin in Europe (despite Stamets’ narrative impressionistic painting to the contrary) https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/03/14/graham-hancock-on-psychedelics-today-podcast-just-started/

tbd – see article notes/outtakes

Write articles and article section headings and books about psilocybin in western religion and culture. Try.

Put some muscle in it.

YOU HAVE TO WANT TO FIND PSILOCYBIN.

You won’t find it it you want it to not be there. Beward of the conflict of interest b/c of NARRATIVE COMMITMENTS/ INVESTED IN RUTS OF HABITUAL NARRATIVE FRAMING.

Entheogen scholarship wants Psilocybin to be absent from Europe, it’s narrative driven, gotta support the narrative prejudice.

The objective and mission of entheogen scholarship is not to commit to defeatism and a narrative of defeatedness.

The goal is Transcendent Knowledge and repeal of Psilocybin prohibition, and strategy toward that.

Currently:

Goal #1 is crybabying “big bad church so mean, it elim’d all msh”. McKenna’s narrative commitment: infantile and self-defeating and false.

Goal #99 is finding psilocybin evidence (no one is interested in this, in fact IT IS LITERALLY UNTHINKABLE TO PAUL STAMETS AND TO LETCHER HATSIS.

Goal #999 is repeal of Psilocybin Prohibition.

We need to prevent repeal (there is a massive, effective conflict of interest: if we find msh in W religion, that threatens our ADDICTION TO DEFEATEDNESS NARRATIVE) and Psilocybin threatens our addiction to puerile infantile immature childish Amanita OBSESSION (Amanita Primary DOCTRINE presupposition). That’s why entheogen scholars Letcher Hatsis strive to block Psilocybin evidence.

Entheogen scholarship cannot allow entheogens in W religion, b/c that would demolish their #1 narrative commitment, “look at what good Defeated we are”. So we have a coverup operation by plpl people who PRESENT themselves as if asserting entheogens but it is perverse b/c so extremely stingy, “at any point, there was 1 or maybe 2 ppl using “The Mushroom” (picture kiddie Amanita 🍄 ) in the Big Bad Church, as an alien HERETICAL invasion (oooh a rush of stimulation when Ruck says “heretical”.)

The real objective and mission here, THE PROPER NARRATIVE COMMITMENT, is to expect and find and search out and uncover and recognize the extremely heavy presence — be very wary about the neutralizing framing of finds of “mushrooms”(? (🍄)) in art.

Perceive Psilocybin in every religious myth.

Every religious myth is a description not of Psilcobybin but of the effect of Psilocybin, which is the eternalism experiential mode.

The eternalism experiential mode constructs and trains the mind to develop a new mental model of control and of the world of cybernetic steering.

Forget everything we think we know.

Forget all the assumptions and prejudices.

Be especially wary of impressionistic narrative framing and storytelling about relation of psilocybin in western religion.

Paul Stamets book has no section focused on expecting and VIGOROUSLY engaging: PUT SOME MUSCLE INTO IT.

ACT YOU LIKE CARE. Act like you actuall really DO want to find Psilo in W relig/culture.

Hatsis acts like, he shows massive evidence that he is fully invested in his anti-mushroom narrative.

He’s invested himself, his brand-commitment, into a dead end, a conflict of interest.

So he produces a corrupt catalog of 4th-grader fallacious arg’n that’s not even “specious”.

Hatsis strongly desires to prove no Christian no western ever ingested any “mushroom” (picture kiddie Amanita, exclusively).

What kind of entheogen scholarship do we … is produced, the product, is predictable: prevaricating, a narrative of absence.

Full of self-contradiction, not very surprisingly; “I do and I do not want mushrooms in our history.

There is and there is not evidence.”

Straighten out what it is you ACTUALLY want: to prove absence of “The Mushroom” (🍄)?

Is that the mission, the impressionistic narrative-painting paradigm to commit to?

Conclusions 1

Challenging Experiences

Fasten Your Seatbelts for this Article, It Is Not “Spot the Mushroom (🍄)” or “Is Not! Is Too! Is Not! Is Too!” <— wrong conversation, wrong paradigm. It Is Time to Adult:
What is being messaged by using msh imagery?

The goal is not spot the mushroom (🍄).

The art does not intend to convey mushroom.

The art is striving to convey the main effect of Psilocybin, which is transformation of the mental model of control-in-world from possibilism to eternalism.

The concern is not, per Letheby/ Metz/ Johnstad, “transformation of the mental model of control to unity oneness through neuroplasticity ego dissolution.”

The concern is loose cognitive association binding in the eternalism experiential mode.

The Cause of Bad Trips in present page says “The cause of bad trips is control instability during mental model transformation transformation from possibilism to eternalism, as this genre of art reports. And as religious myth depicts, when recognized as Psilocbyin cybernetic eternalism.”

The main, central, toweringly important experiences are these.

Dittrich 1994 OAV’s Angst/Dread (DED) dimension caontains 21 items, those same 21 items are the Unpleasant hi-lev dimension in Studerus 2010, see Figure S1.

3 of the OAV’s Dread aka 10-Factors’ Unpleasant effects made it into Griffiths 2016 CEQ; see the3 5D-ASC items in Scoring Guide appendix. 18 / 21 = 86% of Dread effects were omitted from CEQ.

Add a Control factor to the CEQ, containing these standard, established items:

  • I was afraid to lose my self-control.
  • I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.
  • I felt like a puppet or marionette.
  • I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
  • I felt threatened.
  • Sense of being trapped and helpless.
  • It was difficult to control my thoughts.

Conflicts of Interest – yes, they have them, in spades

The whole world seems to be one giant conflict of interest against Psilocybin (b/c it’s so damn good; it’s the one to beat).

first define examples: Wasson’s, Panof’s, Hatsis’, McKenna’s reasons for impressionistic narrative picture-painting of “no Psil in W relig”. even Stamets strange lack of looking directly at this topic.

Letcher Hatsis is rightly committed to smashing the false narraive of kiddie Amanita as the engine of mystery reljigions (preposterous! wrong msh! the experts actual, tell me).. But he ends up with conflict of interest in his conflation of “Amanita” with “mushrooms” and he overcorrects.

It is a kind of conflict of interest once he invests 100% in “no mushrooms in Christianity” and sloppily conflates ALL msh’s and becomes commited to getting rid of false tale of Amanita, now BECOMES commitment to removing Psilo as well, without even him realizing it or comprehending it. Confused sloppy conflation (bc focusing on Allegro as THE point of reference for his entire concept of this field of Science – false basis for science, not proper basing of the field) becomes a conflict of interest.

Picking “Wasson” or “Allegro” as THE point of reference for this field of science, aligns it by a false unscientific star. Re-pick what we use as our point of refernce is the NEUTRAL question WITHOUT PRESUPPOSITIONS (like “I get excited wh3n I hear ‘heretic’ or ‘secret’) — titillation is the basis for poor Science of 1910, not 2023. We are not here to debate Wasson. We are here to do science of “to what extent Psil in W religi” — see conflusion of my 2006 Plainc article – I said PUUT ALLEGRO & WASSON ON FORBIDDEN WORD LIST. ENGOUGH W/ SILLY “THE HOLY MUSHROOM” 500 PAGES OF irrelveant false star to steer by, “what exactly did Aristotle” –

NEED FRESH START: Birth of Modern Science Required Ditching Aristotle-Worship, Stop Making Aristotle Our Automatic Point of Reference, Stop Respecting and Paying Attention to Aristotle

Birth of Modern Psychedelic Science in Late 2023 Requires Ditching Allegro-Fixation

Stop Automatically Making Allegro the Point of Reference, Stop Respecting and Paying Attention to Allegro

Ditch Amanita, Ditch Eleusis, Ditch Wasson, Ditch Kykeon, Ditch Plaincourault-the-Proxy-Myth
and ditch your brain-dead “Default Mode Network, neuroplasticity, ego dissolution, nondual unity oneness” — PSEUDO EXPLANATIONS, Pre-Scientific, Pretended Folk Explanations/ Narrative Parrotting

Citation: end of my 2006 article on Plaincourault says: “Therefore, we now need to mothball and IGNORE Allegro and IGNORE Wasson, WIPE THE CHALKBOARD CLEAN, TOTAL RESET, JUST FORGET EVERYTHING, “DE-COMMIT” [as when I break down all the guitar gear hookups], CLEAR OFF THE PEDALBOARD, WIPE THE SLATE CLEAN, and learn to think and ask CLEARLY AND SIMPLY:

TO WHAT EXTENT PSILOCYBIN IN WESTERN RELIGION AND CULTURE?

Damnit, I am not asking “What Did the Great Man Allegro Say?”

What exactly did Aristotle/ Wasson/ Allegro say?? It’s so confusing, Wasson retracted his views, no he didn’t, yes he did, 500 page book needed…” THATS NOT THE FKKING QUESTION — LET IT GO PPL!!

Stop making this would-be “science” all about Allegro, all about Wasson.
Clean Break! Cut the rope! Abandon all that confusion.
Abandon the Cult of Social Group-Think, Circle-Journal Citation Fest

GREAT ANALOGY: Science has to trashcan Aristtole to break free of casting all inquiries as “What does Arist say?” Stop asking that! Stop sailing by the star of what Aristotle said, = Allegro = Wasson. BREAK SCIENCE FREE FROM ENSLAVEMENT TO WHAT ARISTOTLE SAID ABOUT PSIL IN W RELIGION. Make a fresh PROPOER foundation – NOT allegro, NOT plainc, NOT elesusi, NOT kyekon, NOT DMN, NOT ego disolltion, NOT NONDUAL nondual unity oneness, NOT COGNITIVE Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism, *not* Epistemology, but Control Stability is the Science STEM foundation, not “Neuroplasticity” in a circle-journal citation fest, parrotting fest of irrelevant psuedo-expl PROVED to be irrelevant by 39% BAD TRIPS UNDER GRIFFITH’S Aristotle-steered false star ie STACE 1960 FALSE MODEL IS BROKEN AS AS BROKEN AS EARTH-CENTERED PTOLEMAIC COSMOLOGY

Ptolemy is great for analogy astral ascent mysticism – perfect for that, Saturn gate = eternalism gate, perfect – but awful when you treat Aristotol and Ptolmey as our — I mean Stace, and James, out of print book “vouchsafed our notion of “complete mystical experience” quips Erik Davis Erik, 63 years outdated, not even based in psychedelics, and contradicted by mystics’ archive reports Charles Stang of Harvard Divinity School to Griffiths’ face in Youtube Harvard video!! 😅 😅

The Art Historians’ Utterly Pathetic Brinckmann Bluff

Makes as much sense as “we art historians have COVERED (over, covered up our big problem we have) — see Brinckmann “little” book 1906 hot off the press, thick 86 pages 😲 📚📚, covering the word ‘pilzbaum‘ a whopping 5 count-em FIVE times the word Pilzbaum 5 times in 1 book is proof that we art historians have thoroughly covered Italian Pines which (aside from hosting Amanita) have nothing WHATSOEVER TO DO…. LOL ETC

btw ITS IN GERMAN ONLY 😅 😅

Gee I wonder why Wasson censored that towering pile of citations?

THIS IS ALL YOU GOT?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Tree Stylizations in Medieval Paintings (Brinckmann 1906)🔍🔬🧐

Entheogen Scholarship’s Main, Driving Agenda: Find & Neutralize the Evidence, in Order to Advance the Defeatedness Narrative of Absence

Every “mushroom” find (picture kiddie Amanita, ‘cos that’s what’ we’re OBSESSED with looking for) is utilized (mis-used, abused) to advance an agenda (that is not the actual pro-entheogen agenda, but a competing, invading substitute objective):

Each mushroom find is leveraged and utilized by Carl Amanita Promoter Ruck to advance a conflict of interest anti-entheogens motive/purpose: twist the finds, to push the presupposed totally invested narrative, of Suppression, of Absence, of perpetual defeatedness.

MAKE IT HAPPEN. WAKE UP AND TRY.

PUT SOME EFFORT INTO IT. eg:

In one trip ~2004 to Snodfart’s Junior Academy, in the bookstore I took a bunch of photos of mushroom trees and uploaded them to the web as my gallery.

It was EASY, but no one lifts a finger to do this.

You have to care. You have to expect. You have to WANT the presence. You have to demand.

PUT SOME MUSCLE INTO IT.

Amanita will always be the billboard for Psilocybin: abandon the Amanita Primacy Fallacy, it’s a childrens’ myth, as Hatsis says, not a proper, serious foundation for an adult-level scholarly field.

Everyone acts like it’s all a given that there’s no Psil in W relig/culture.

Nothing is a given. We don’t know anything about Psilocybin in W relgion.

Stop making common assumptions, presumptions, and prejudices the foundation for scholarship.

Push back vigorously against the people everywhere you state facts, “there is no Psilocybin in Europe”, they constantly tell me from all quarters. McKenna, Food of the Gods: “Do not look for Psilocybin, it’s not there, the bad people [insert storytime narrative]”.

This article shows there was extreme, ultra-advanced use of high dose Psilocybin with full engagement of the gateway cybernetic eternalism gateway/ transformation.

Medieval artists evidently had far more advanced skill and comprehension of Psilcybin effects than today’s “psychedlelic science” that carelessly deletes 18 of 21 (86%) of OAV’s Dread effects even though 39% of best-case high dose has extreme fear.

Set and settings is a myth [like everything in this fake field], per Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell, Johnstad says “the actual cause of bad trips is resisting ego dissolution“ — that’s a storytelling narrative conjecture, throwing around pseudo-explanatory terms in a folk lexicon that’s passed off as “Science” – not a useful articulate explanation meeting the STEM standards of modelling and communication.

Sanders & Zijlmans’ article Moving Past Mysticism, delivers a half truth: we do need to have an entirely new model of “mysticism”, and listen to their message, mystics: separate / differentiate (you fail to ackn this) mysticism as a methodology VERSUS mystic experience as the explanandum.

Walter Stace 1960 out of print book, Chs Stang names James and Stace by name, saying “James and Stace are contradicted by the historical archive” re: negative experiences.

🦄💨🌈

A bunk “foundation” to construct psedudo-science sky castle on, Studerus 2010 “scientific foundation basis” (cites guess who, as always: the single, lone, 1960, “vouchsafe” per Erik Davis’ jab) out of print!! joke of a “basis” for MEQ concocted by Tim Leary in 1962.

Charles Stang says half of mysticism is missing from MEQ – Griffiths waves around CEQ in response, but CEQ is exact same of course, same paradigm, trashcanned carelessly 86% of Dittrichs’s Dread effects.

DO NOT USE CEQ; USE DREAD aka the full set of Unpleasant Experiences, especially ICC & ANX but ICC — the 11-Factors fatal failure that guarantees the Shadow continues to win: flawed omission of 54, I was afraid to lose my self control; until add Control-stability factor 7 items to CEQ. See my ECQ: Eternalism and Control Questionnaire.

Mushroom trees & religious mythology recognized as description of Psilocybin effects prove that session guides must learn the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism, to guide through bad trip gateway to get & bring back the treasure, transformation from possibilism to eternalism; = qualified possibilism-thinking.

The Cause of Bad Trips: control instability during mental model transformation transformation from possibilism to eternalism, about mental model of self steering in world

The cause of bad trips is control instability during mental model transformation transformation from possibilism to eternalism, as this genre of art reports. And as religious myth depicts, when recognized as Psilocbyin cybernetic eternalism.

The Psychedelic Narrative Turf Wars

Internal battle: Scientists vs. Mystics. The solution: the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism. It’s neither of the two caricatures: Physicalist Epistemology reductionism, nor foggy headed mystics as a methodology of fog and vagueness.

Sanders & Zijlmans yes, without leaving out cybernetic eternalism as Letheby fatally does, & CEQ does, leaving a dragon-sized opening.

Only the Egodeath theory has any articulate explanation of shadow dragon monster guarding treasure and how to bring back that treasure and learn from the dragon.

The field of entheogen scholarship needs a complete reset, partially compatible with Hatsis’ call to abandon the Amanita Primary Fallacy. Stop being limited by the past thinking, ruts of thinking, conventional narratives that propagate; prejudices are ESPECIALLY forceful in this field so we have to extra-ignore them especially stop treating these as facts:

cult , secret – need to entirely abandon and rethink carefully about the nature of secret

We can increase our ability to perceive Psilocybin mushrooms in Western religious history by looking for combinations of mushroom imagery, handedness motifs (favoring right the right-hand side) and looking for non-branching (such as added branching and cut branches), along with understanding the psychedelic experience of timeless block-universe eternalism.

This helps toward full repeal of Psilocybin Prohibition.

Strategy of aggressive/ sure-footed art interpretation: Hypothesis: Firmly assume art motifs are striving to represent eternalism; then, how to read the motifs?

Vigorous testing of hypothesis.

This is a test/demonstration overlaying of a heavy-handed eternalism reading to demonstrate that an eternalism reading works well.

Demonstrates what kind of features to look for, inventoried to map to Cybernetic Eternalism.

  • How to describe the motif/features relevantly, but without details and hints.

Each image lists a few typical features. For details, see References.

This article connects the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism to the central bad trip articles, explaining what’s going on and what to do. What to do: read my Requirements for Guides. todo: add to references.

Todo

each image: indicate how strong it is for {mushroom}, {handedness}, and {non/branching} motifs.
Eadwine f134: 10/10/10.
Eadwine f177: 10/10/10.

Arrange sections in same order as this TOC.

Revert to separate top-bottom panels though try to keep them conjoined.

Sort Features to end up with top 10 each.

Johnson Quote on Letheby Book

Probably summarize the point rather than quote it: Johnson 2021, Introduction: Psychedelic Science Needs Philosophy:

“scientists should be better informed by the field of philosophy.

“Philosophy can provide more accurate and relevant frameworks, concepts, and language, for example, regarding states of mind and metaphysical beliefs.

“It may also be critical in understanding how psychedelics work.”

Solution: the Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism, presented here.

Problem: Psilocybin is illegal because Terence McKenna and all entheogen scholars wrote that our own religion, Christianity, lacks a Psilocybin tradition.

Solution: The Maximal Psilocybin Theory of Religion & Myth, presented here.

Flaws and Failures of Psychedelic Science & Philosophy of Psychedelics

It is undecided the angle here, I’m not going to waste wordcount listing the many reasons to discard and ignore status quo.

But capturing / summarizing the remarkable list of failures, the arguments against granting any credibility to the failed efforts so far:

  • #1: The CEQ disaster: Deletes 18/21 = 86% of Dread items due to incomprehension, while bragging about providing broader coverage.
  • The MEQ semi-disaster: Charles Stang of Harvard Div School reports that Stace , “mysticism” fails to match historical mystics negative reports – the CEQ is the broken wastebasket that’s supposed to catch the failures of the MEQ
  • Erik Davis: “Stace’s book is the foundation of psychedelic science of mysticism? It’s what, 2023-1960 = 63 years old!
  • The many ways in which Brinc book is shockingly inadquate to support Panofsky’s HUGE negative claims, See my list from last night.
  • Grotesque overinfluence of Wasson’s scholarly obstrauctionism: Wasson uses 10% of Panofsky’s arguments which employ Brinc book which was many years old, now 117 years old,
  • Pan calls it a “little” book,
  • it only contains ‘pilzbaum’ 5 times,
  • it’s not translated from German to English,
  • Panofsky misrepresents the book as if it proves that mushroom trees are accidental distorations of italian pine (which Wasson doesn’t tell the same baloney cover story, it’s “palestine tree type”)
  • Panof arguments are shockingly ignorant, biased, prejudiced, begging the question / assuming that which is to be proved: “Furthermore, medieval religious artists had no reason at all to think of mushrooms.”
  • Panof self-contradictory kettle logic: Mushroom trees don’t mean mushrooms, because non-naturalistic art. Also, Mushroom trees don’t mean mushrooms, b/c they have branching, and if some especially ignorant craftsman was under misunderstood/ delusion that the prototype meant msh, the craftsman would have ignored the prototype and naturalistically paintined msuhroom trees without branches.”
  • ATROCIOUS argumentation from Panofsky CERTAINLY didn’t convince Wasson, which explains Wasson’s cover-up operation of censorting Pan’s letters and lame anti-convincing arguments and censoring Brinckmann’s book.
  • Wasson thought Pan was an idiot, and as much as Wasson attacked rudely mycologists by using Pan as a blunt club, Wasson knew that everything Pan said was false, ignorant, & prejudiced. That’s why Wasson used only 10% of Pan’s arg, and suppressed the other 90%.
  • Watch videos of Chris Letheby, confirms: Letheby w/o realizing it, takes a position against Superdeterminism, against block-universe eternalism, against Sam Harris’ no-free-will, against no-free-will, and against Reformed theology. A very incomplete and lopsided coverage of Philsoophy, as lopsided as Stacean “mystical experience”
  • a Complete Newbie Mystical Experience
  • M Johnson writes “surprisingly”, psychedelics fail to make people into hard materialists/ physicalists” –
  • Regardless of Letheby & Johnson’s options that they are aware of, they are of course naturally inherently unaware of the eternalism state of consciousness.
  • Griffiths’ marketing narrative is self-contradictory: “Speaking as a scientist, pigs might/ may/ can/ could be able to fly, and meditation might/ may/ can/ could produce the exact same effects as high-dose Psilocybin” – see J. Peterson’s instant rebuttal to Griffiths’ self-contradiction:
  • In fact, per Griffiths own promoted results, scientific evidence demonstrates that meditation FAILS to produce the reliable and strong effects as Psilocybin. So why is meditation still oversold as being better than Psilocybin and the yardstick against which to witheringly judge Psilocybin?
  • The data indicates the reverse relation.
  • Meditation fails to meet the standards of Psilocybin; Meditation is phony and substitute
  • Meditation is popular BECAUSE it fails to deliver mental model transformation; it successfully holds enlightenment at bay forever. Save freewill fog at all costs – the Atman Project, pursuing enlightenment in such a way as to avoid enlightenment.
  • The last thing egoic thinking and expectations wants & expects from spirituality, is actual ego transcendence.
  • We’d rather reduce the size of the ego forever (thus reifying the egoic possibilism-thinking/ mental worldmodel).
  • The more you meditate, the more you avoid enlightenment.
  • Medivael mushroom art asserts {handeness} representing {non-branching} representing eternalism, which is EXACTLY (unkonwingly) the metaphysical revelation which Letheby and Johnson’s “naturalism” mocks and ignorantly disparagees. Result: control seizure instability, due to metaphysical self-contradiction & incoherence exposed.
  • Score: Shadow Dragon Monster 1, Letheby-Johnson “Naturalism” 0.
  • It is a myth that default mode network causes ego dissolution. That conceptual lexicon is all reductionist and unhelpful and pseudo-explanation.
  • What ppl mis-call “a complete mystical expeirence” is nothing but beginners’ version of unity nondual oneness, the mere beginning, not the end of the worldmodel transformation process.
  • You had a Complete Newbie Mystical Experience.
  • Letheby et al falsely claim that the self model changes, but actually it’s the self-in-world model that changes, and “embodiment” is a distorted manifestation of that self-in-world change.
  • Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip in Hell says rightly, “WE DON’T UNDERSTAND BAD TRIPS”.
  • Houot calls for abandoning what I call crude folk retreat of Surrenderism, and instead, be like shamans, who only have positive experiencing of having full control over the altered state.
  • What people mis-call “mystical experience” is really merely one narrow, false, uninformed model, it is actually the malformed incomplete notion, STACEAN MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE, or Stacean “mystical experience” (falsely so-called) – see the critiques by Charles Stang in transcription of the webinar interview with Griffiths and then of/in the next webinar’s interview.
  • The MEQ is 50% incomplete, CEQ is 90% incomplete.
  • letheby’s coverage of Philosophy is entirely limited to variants of egoic possibilism-thinking, including egoic “fatalistic determinism”, which are all notions based in only the ordinary state.

Letheby fails to consider eternalism, block-universe eternalism, only has limited rebuttal of no-free-will.

Johnson and Letheby really do fit the caricature that the mystical defender scientists paint: Johnson and Letheby really do say “ALL MYSTIC-STATE REVELATION IS FALSE AND DELUSION”; “EGOIC POSSIBILISM-THINKING IS TRUE”, AND “NATURALISM MEANS HARDCORE REDUCTIONIST MATERIALIST ANTI-IDEALIST PHYSICALISM”.

As their critics charge [see my page about Moving Past Mysticism], Johnson and Letheby really do push Cognitive Neuro-Reductionism: a scientific explanation, they say, must be in terms of Neuroscience, not Cognitive Sci / Cog Phenomenology (or I’d importantly add, not in terms of the two models of time: transformation from possibilism to eternalism).

I don’t need to parody THE FOLLY (that means foolishness) of Johnson and Letheby, they do it for us.

Move over Hatsis, sower of incomprehension, there’s a new clown king on the throne.

right: the FAD-Plus questionnaire, Letheby’s article about it, and Johnson’s agreement with Letheby – “Egoic Possibilism Is True, and all mystic worldmodel alternatives are delusion” – “the only true worldmodel is freewill materialist reductionist brain neuroscience worldmodel” – signed, Letheby & Johnson

right: the FAD-Plus questionnaire, Letheby’s article about it, and Johnson’s agreement with Letheby – “Egoic Possibilism Is True, and all mystic worldmodel alternatives are delusion” – “the only true worldmodel is freewill materialist reductionist brain neuroscience worldmodel” – signed, Letheby & Johnson

Motivation for Creating this Page

I don’t want to jumble and lose my article-related ideas in Idea Development page 18.

Want a dedicated page where I can move ideas in & out of the article, the scope/boundary being the article.

It is so easy to get misled by what people THINK is important, vs what’s important. A caricature of Windows vs. Mac:

Windows: Throw in every feature that any user might ever have thought of. Survey customers and have them design the system. Bloater is better. Mobile device = desktop / tower PC UI crammed in pocket 3″ screen by force. Legacy-based. Carry every commitment & past expectation forward.

Mac: Users are idiots, ignore them. Streamlined, stay focused on what actually matters. Give them the 5% of features they ACTUALLY need. Ignore the rules and expectations, approach it from the opposite/ unknown direction. Start by full zoom-out. Fresh slate. Wipe board, de-commit from everything.

Let’s Focus on the Wrong Shiite and Get Nowhere Forever (Forbidden Word List)

my lack of engagement with any other “scholarship” is a feature, not a bug

(If you are Thomas Hatsis:) 95% of the field’s focus is on Allegro, therefore, must center everything accordingly w/ spotlight firmly fixed forever on Allegro.

(If you are John Lash:) 95% of the field’s focus is on Wasson, therefore, must center everything accordingly w/ spotlight firmly fixed forever on The Wasson Theory and The Greatly radioactive Man Wasson.

(If you are Roland Griffiths:) 95% of the field’s focus is on Griffiths, therefore, must center everything accordingly w/ spotlight firmly fixed forever on Stace/ Leary/ Pahnke/ Richards/ Griffiths and sell that as “Mysticism”. We shall assess whether you had a complete newbie mystical experience of default mode ego network dissolution cognitive neuroscience.

(If you are Carl Ruck:) 95% of the field’s focus is on Secret Elite Amanita Cult; therefore, must center everything accordingly w/ spotlight firmly fixed forever on Secret Elite Amanita Cult — with the latest 1920 academic Anthropology Dept. theory of “the wild vs. the cultivated”, with ‘fungal‘ used at every possible opportunity, as directed by the Ruck Committee of Writers.

(If you are Wasson:) 95% of the field’s focus is on Eleusis/ Kykeon/ Ergot; therefore, must center everything accordingly w/ spotlight firmly fixed forever on Eleusis/ Kykeon/ Ergot. This will help remove Psilocybin from our own religion and its Hellenistic roots (sacred meals, mixed-wine banqueting).

Forbidden Words

mainly the list is in Idea Dev p 18

No quotes allowed. state why pilz artists added branching and cut branches and mention that this answers Panofsky’s “arguments”.

The following words are overused and now serve as an impediment to an explanatory theory: not going to mention them.

This article avoids any reliance on that conceptual vocabulary/ lexicon for explanation.

Easy to Depict Psychedelic Eternalism via These Motifs

It is highly feasible to use fingers and trees and legs and limbs in diagrammatic visual art, so use those to express what we want/ have / possess to express, transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Given that what we have that we need to express is transformation from possibilism to eternalism, and given that it is easy to depict finger shapes and limbs and mushrooms and branching including cut branches, or removed branches, let us take advantage of this opportunity, as mystical artists, and so employ those motifs for that purpose.

The result is what we see.

Does it appear that the artists wanted to depict “a mushroom” (Panofsky’s clumsy, clueless phrase).

No; Panofsky is right, the art does not look like the artist wanted to depict “a mushroom”; the art looks like the artist wanted to depict branching vs. non-branching – and right limb / heel/ foot/ leg being favored, along with mushrooms.

Why? Because the artist is endeavoring to depict transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

Here Be Dragons: Transcending the Egoic Control System

CEQ add Control subscale containing the following items, you threw them into Wouter Hanegraaff’s Rejected Wastebasket, they are here coming back out.

What’s Going On, with the Naturalistic the

Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell

We cant figure it out all out,

Here’s the center of dragonland, the pregnant woman harassed by the dragon ready to swallow up egoic thinking agency demonstration observation of illusory boundaries of control and vulnerability to source of control when … and control stability drives transformation, system righted, to be made compatible with the eternalism experiential mode.

The control system and world model are observed as a mental construct world model of agency steering among branching possibilities.

To assert non-branching is to assert personal control nullity of a type, control instability when in the loose cognitive state, fatal non-viable control, then drives:

transformation of the mental worldmodel

transformation from possibilism to eternalism

The Psychedelic Eternalism Experiential Mode

The Psychedelic Eternalism Experiential Mode

ordinary state – possibilism experiential mode – possibilism-thinking

altered state – eternalism experiential mode – eternalism-thinking

Temporarily in the altered state there’s a differnt arrangement experienced and then modelled in the mind. The mental worldmodel of time and control and possibility is changed to follow and become compatible with the

psychedelic eternalism

possibilism-thinking

  1. The ordinary state has the possibilism experiential mode, which produces possibilism-thinking.
  2. The altered state has the eternalism experiential mode, which produces eternalism-thinking.
  3. The ordinary state returns to the possibilism exeriential mode, returning to possibilism-thinking and retaining et.

In the ordinary state, teach/learn the lesser mysteries: the book learning part.

  1. , but now, also having available the loose-cognitiive developed losse- loosecog-compatible eternalism-thinking already developed and taught and learned in phase 1, 1.5:
  2. In the ordinary state, teach/learn the lesser mysteries: the book learning part. Learn about branching message mushroom trees.

In the loose cognitive state from Psilocybin, the mental world model of self-in-world is reconfigured by the the eternalism experiential mode.

Metzinger.

Journal: Philosophy and the Mind Sciences (Metzinger 2020)
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2023/01/29/journal-philosophy-and-the-mind-sciences-metzinger-2020/

Made to Intend to Demonstrate and Test Control Limits and Transcend Them and then Be Reconfigured

How to End Prohibition

The real cause of bad trips

The solution to bad trips

How to pass through the transform gate to get the transformational treasure

Switching to the developed, reshaped form

True Nature of Bad Trips and Get the Treasure

We don’t know anything about bad trips, such as Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell.

I can’t cite CEQ, because its Initial Item Pool lacks “I was afraid to lose my self-control” and “It was difficult to control my thoughts”. lacks all

The cause of bad trips is not set or setting, but is inherent in the experience of psychedelic eternalism, including analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control, demanding/requiring moving from relying on possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking, under the fascinating experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control.

This is the actual nature of wisdom, and is expressed in medieval art by {branching-message mushroom trees}, including {handedness} and {non-branching}.

Cite “Day Trip to Hell”, Petter

“the characteristics, etiology, and consequences of psychedelic “bad trips” remain … unclear. … challenging psychedelic experiences may be … varied … the seven categories identified by Barrett et al. (2016) may be too limited. Set and setting … have … been overemphasized.”

The CEQ is too limited, in that Griftiths, without explanation, simply eliminated 18 of 21 Dittrich’s Dread items, including “I was afraid to lose my self-control”, and omitted HRS’s “It was difficult to control my thoughts”, from the CEQ.

The CEQ has a giant, dragon-sized vulnerability, to be patched by adding the deleted Control-challenges category back in, together with comprehension of psychedelic eternalism and how it’s represented by {branching-message mushroom trees}, {handedness}, and {non-branching motifs}.

Petter Johnstad wrote:

“Lucas (2005) noted that bad trips can happen even when you follow all the rules of common sense, and criticized what she called the “set-and-setting attitude” as playing into a … fantasy of control: “if we just do everything right, we can prevent negative experiences” (p. 26). Instead, she understood psychedelic bad trips as a shamanic initiation experience involving the dismemberment of inauthentic parts of the self.”

The Theory of Psychedelic Eternalism identifies this so-called “inauthentic part of the self” as not a mater of personal biography, but is inherent in cognitive development: it is possibilism-thinking, which is {childish}, immature, {perishable}, {mortal} thinking, to be normally replaced by eternalism-thinking during the advanced, skilled (not newbie) peak state.

psychedelic eternalism is __.

Work Across Hellenistic & Christian Art

Art Depicts Transformative Psilocybin Effects, Notably Eternalism

Medieval Christian art together with Hellenistic art depicts the Psilocybin-induced experience of eternalism.

Painters of miniatures = brains behind op. (Mâle 1913, Preface)

The {handedness} motif __.

The {mushroom tree} motif __.

The {non-branching} motif __.

Naturalistic Religious Experiencing

(citation: Moving Past Mysticism, Sanders & Zijlmans). (citation: Strassman: The Religion of Psychedeleic Spirituality)(citation: Erik Davis: “Stace long in the tooth”) (citation: Matthew Johnson: Consciousness, Religion, Gurus: Pitfalls)

What they call “mystical experience” & “complete” is in fact, specifically, just merely Stacean “mystical experience”, which Charles Stang at Harvard Divinity School says fails to match the history archive written by mystics.

Peak Dread: The Compelling Experience of the Threat of Catastrophic Loss of Control

The most frightening imaginable experience is the experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control.

Egoic control-agency thinking experiences being fenced in from 3 directions, driving a repudiation and transformation of the mind’s control model:

  • Compelling deja vu: I remember that this is where my mind was forced to lose control.
  • Helpless puppet of universal alien mind control — aka eternalism (Philosophy of Time), aka superdeterminism (Physics).
  • No control because perceive that control-thoughts already exist, pre-existing, pre-created, forced upon the mind.

Eternalism or Superdeterminism as Ubiquitous Alien Mind-Control

Wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism

“Wiseman and Cavalcanti argue that any hypothetical superdeterministic theory “would be about as plausible, and appealing, as belief in ubiquitous alien mind-control”

The Principle of Artist Responsibility

If the artist drew a tree that gives art historians the impression of mushroom (evidenced by them describing it as a “mushroom tree”), then the artist is to be held as meaning mushroom in some sense.

Specifically, artists in this genre present and depict {branching-message mushroom trees}, not simply literally “mushrooms”, but rather, the ultimate effect; the Psilocybin eternalism experiential mode.

The alternative, employed by Panofsky in an attempt to shield artists from culpability for intentionality, is irrational and insulting to artists, robbing them (or “the art world”) of awareness, intentionality, choice, communication mastery, responsibility, and artfulness.

Mushroom-looking imagery inherently means mushrooms.

If the artist doesn’t want to force a mushroom impression on the viewer, and thus be held responsible for meaning mushrooms and intentionally choosing to convey a mushroom impression, then they must not present mushroom-looking imagery.

Why did “the art world” specifically “come to accept” the most mushroom-looking imagery possible? To consciously, deliberately, intentionally convey and depict psychedelic eternalism.

The Principle of Target Form Intent, Not Only Source Form

Panofsky: “Completely ignore the fact that the target strives to be as mushroom-shaped as a tree can be; exclusively put all attention on the [alleged] Italian Pine original shape, only.”

Panofsky attempts to prevent any attention on the target form, by hyper-empahsizing the (alleged) starting form.

His vulnerability is the question, why this particular target form “came to be accepted by the art world” and why did the accidental thoughtless unconscious direction of careless sloppy distortion CONSISTENTLY PULL TOWARD MUSHROOM IMAGERY FOR TREES?

No “Mushroom Exception” to Standard Art Principle of Multiple Connotations

There is not a mushroom exception to the basic art interpretation principle that an image can mean multiple things: mushroom and tree and the Psilocybin eternalism experience of non-branching possibilities.

Non-Naturalistic Art Applies to Flexibility of Mushroom Depiction as Well

Panofsky argues that artists didn’t work from nature, but prototpes, then argues if artists wanted to convey a mushroom impression (for what art historians report as conveying a mushroom impression) they would need to follow nature and naturalistically draw mushrooms without branches.

Artiss did not follow nature, but prototypes, to draw msh imagery, because artists did not want to draw mushrooms; rather, branching-message mushroom trees.

Mushroom Trees Mean the Ultimate Psilocybin Effect

Panofsky (1952a, 1952b) asserts there are too many mushroom trees for them to mean mushrooms. He silently presupposes that it’s unthinkable and indefensible to assert that all mushroom trees mean mushrooms (or mushroom effects).

Mushroom trees mean mushrooms and their effects, because mushrooms cause the religious experience of non-branching; the eternalism experiential mode.

Mushroom trees mean branching-message mushroom trees, depicting psychedelic eternalism.

The Principle of Independent Image and Text Domains

An image can be informed by text and backstory, but its reading is not dictated and constrained by the accompanying text or backstory.

The image contains its independent use of motifs and morphology, to be distinctly analyzed and stand on its own.

A good example is Eustace crossing a river.

Knowing the Placidas backstory is irrelevant for the morphology message, and is of no help at all in reading the morphology motifs.

Conversely, you can do a complete psychedelic eternalism decoding and reading of this St. Eustace image even while knowing nothing at all about the backstory or the figures depicted.

As another example, in no way is reading the morphology message of Ariadne holding a branch in Dionysus’ Victory Procession mosaic dependent on knowing the backstory of this branch, such as what tree species the branch is from.

The important thing is reading the language of the visual morphology, such as {mushroom hem} (or {panther watering bowl}) in conjunction with {handedness} and {non-branching}.

The Top 10 Dread Effects

The Top 10 Suppressed & Repressed Dread Effects

The main psychedelics psychometrics questionnaires contain Control-challenging psychedelics effects items:

  • I was afraid to lose my self-control.
  • I had the feeling of being connected to a superior power.
  • I felt like a puppet or marionette.
  • I had the feeling that I no longer had a will of my own.
  • I felt threatened.
  • Sense of being trapped and helpless.
  • It was difficult to control my thoughts.

The CEQ omits and suppresses all such Control-challenging items, to replace them by the main, replacement category, Grief, which is preferred by the existing industry because a “Grief” sub-scale sounds as if it’s business-as-usual, ordinary-state, familiar couch psychotherapy.

See how CEQ treats these centrally important challenging effects, such as “I was afraid to lose my self-control”, “It was difficult to control my thoughts”, “Sense of being trapped and helpless”, “I felt threatened” – see the Control factor items of CEQ [Griffiths 2016]. LOL!!

Control seizure is covered by CEQ eg its 7 items in its Control factor/subscale. Failing that, have you tried sacrificing a thicket-caught ram?

🐉😅

cite all the bad trip articles and just point out Studerus 2010 Unpleasant has 21 items, yet CEQ Scoring apx has 3 of the 21, and lacks these 7 which are most relevant. I might have reasons to object to some articles considered in isolation but my article can/should

This article connects the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism to the central bad trip articles, explaining what’s going on and what to do.

Psilocybin Mushrooms Are Commonplace in Western Regions in All Eras

Stamets is self-contradictory and gives no explanation for omitting Europe from Psilocybin regions before or after 1976.

There Are Thousands of Mushroom Trees in Christian Art

There are 75 mushroom trees in Great Canterbury Psalter alone, showing that Panofsky’s “hundreds” (Letter 1) is under-counting; the number is in the thousands.

39% of People Have Bad Trips, Under Optimal Conditions

Cite Houot’s dissertation using this figure, “almost 40%”. “39%” magically changes to “30%” later, by Griffiths.

The same magic that turns 21 Dread effects into just 3, in CEQ.

CEQ Omits 86% of Dread Effects Items and Omits Control-Related Challenges

The field of psychedelics science is largely based on psychometrics questionnaires. The science of bad trips and the science of psychedelic eternalism resolving bad trips to get the treasure. The debate about mysticism in psychedelic science, the calls for a naturalistic scientific explantion as opposted to mystical “ineffability”: as Petter Johnstad’s Day Trip to Hell says, we are faced with these questions, and we need to come up with the answers. Here are the answers.

I am on the side of the calls for naturalism. psychedelic eternalism is naturalism.

The Egodeath theory is properly scientific.

The Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism is a domain-appropriate, domain-effective, useful explanatory model.

The Egodeath theory insightfully formally/specifically describes the problem (the fascinating experience of the threat of catastrophic loss of control), delivers the practicable and more-specific [than folk surrenderism] traditional solution (change from relying on possibilism-thinking to eternalism-thinking), and delivers the full resolution completion/ objective: transformation of the mental worldmodel from possibilism to eternalism.

When you enter into the territory of psychedelic eternalism, entry is through the control-threat-demonstration trial testing gate.

The CEQ is profoundly inadequate and has a giant, dragon-sized hole and vulnerability. the Egodeath theory patches this hole by adding a Control-challenges subscale with the best items/effects questions, along with the traditional solution, {standing on right leg}; changing to eternalism-thinking.

The Dread category in OAV (Dittrich 1994) and the “Unpleasant Experiences” high-level category in 11-Factors (Studerus 2010) contain 21 items.

But the CEQ contains only 3 items from 5D-ASC, per CEQ Appendix 1, Scoring Guide (Griffiths 2016).

The CEQ includes 3/21 = 14% of OAV’s Dread items; the CEQ omits 18/21 = 86% of OAV’s Dread items, including “I was afraid to lose my self-control”.

Griffiths summarily omitted the poorly understood Control-related items such as “It was difficult to control my thoughts” and “I was afraid to lose my self-control”.

Griffiths simply omitted the Control-related items, and moved attention off of these distinctive Psychedelics-specific effects and onto familiar-sounding, ordinary-state based “Grief” effects instead. Citation: selected articles from my whole category, https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/nav/#Psychedelics-Questionnaires

From Folk “Surrender” to Scientific Explanation

Moving from Unstructured Folk Wisdom of “Surrender to the Experience” to a Formally Structured Explanatory Theory in Terms of the Psychedelic Eternalism Experiential Mode

cite: Janikian (2019), and see my page about Janikian
https://egodeaththeory.wordpress.com/2022/12/07/standard-hazy-trip-advice-on-surrender-to-shadow-trust-submit-and-let-go-of-control/

Your Psilocybin Mushroom Companion: An Informative, Easy-to-Use Guide to Understanding Magic Mushrooms—From Tips and Trips to Microdosing and Psychedelic Therapy
Michelle Janikian
2019 (per Copyright page & review)
https://www.amazon.com/Psilocybin-Mushroom-Companion-Easy-Mushrooms/dp/1646043901/ 

Conclusions 2

  • There have always been many Psilocybin mushrooms growing everywhere.
  • There are many thousands of mushroom trees in medieval art.

To end Psilocybin Prohibition, desire and expect to find Psilocybin all throughout Western religion.

Psilocybin grows globally and has always grown on bovine dung in Europe and England, despite Paul Stamets (1996) trying to simultaneously assert ubiquity and special-exception absence at the same time.

We get a biased framing narrative from Stamets, more than a scientific report of when/where there is Psilocybin mushrooms, and of why Europe before 1976 is somehow a Special Exception (contra Samorini).

Instead of approaching entheogen scholarship as an exercise of “spot the mushroom, approach entheogen scholarship as an exercise of looking for the combination of mushroom imagery, handedness (favoring right-hand limb), and branching motifs (favoring non-branching).

Try harder to find mushroom imagery in Christian and Hellenistic art. First of all, you have to want to find it.

Don’t assume and force a biased, neutralizing reading that every instance of mushroom imagery in Christian art is “hidden” and “heretical” by virtue of it being present in Christian art, that it is absent and hidden; assume it is simply present and explicit. Stamping it as “heretical/eleits elite/ secret” is your bad attmpe attempt at “explaining” through a neutralizing strategy: “my explnation for the presentce of msh is that that are absent by being heretical and secret and reserved for the elite”. Does the art tell you that it is heretical secrete reserved? NO! that is YOUR pseudo epxlantion you are IMPORTING onto it. It’s not an accidental misreading; rather, it is your attempted explanation (gone wrong).

The explanandum is not “secret hiden hereetical msh imagery”, you are mixed up.

The explanandum is simply presense of msh imagery. You are mixing up your explanation with the explanandum.

The thing to be explained is not “secret hidden elite-reserved heretical mushroom imagers”.

That’s you conflating and projecting via presupposition prejudice bias.

The thing to be explained is simply msh imagery, neutrallilly as a bare fact. That’s the given . Actually what is given to be epxlained is the confluence of these 3 motifs:

  • Mushroom trees.
  • Handedness, favoring right limb.
  • Branching & non-branching.

The Egodeath theory (the mytheme theory, the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism) explains that confluence/ seys system of 3 clustered motifs.

They depict by analogy, eternalism ; mental worldmodel transformation from tpt to eternalism-thinking. from possibilism-experiencing/ possibilism-thinking to the eternalism experiential mode / eternalism-thinking.

con’t from above:

I used this mentality to easily contribute galleries of images and gather images that people have presented for consideration.

This approach incorporates’s & leverages depictions (by analogy) of the ultimate “effect” of Psilocybin, which is transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

This 3-motif perspective, instead of the 1-motif perspective of only looking for mushroom imagery, enables finding and perceiving and positively identifying mushrooms in art.

This approach supports comprehending Transcendent Knowledge as analogical psychedelic eternalism with dependent control.

Top 3 messages: Combine & work across Hellenistic & Christian art.

Treat art motifs as an independent axis from textural textual backstory.

Don’t just use surrenderism to give up in defeat and avoid the treasure, along with the threat of the shadow dragon monster. Cite Houot dissertation.

Aim to pass through the eternalism-guarded gate to get the treasure, of Transcendent Knowledge.

Change from the narrative of “the big bad church got rid of all Psilocybin mushrooms, so don’t even try to look for them

Entheogen scholars WANT mushrooms to be absent.

Entheogen scholars are fully, deeply invested in the suppression of mushrooms by Genesis/ Church/ Bible/ Christianity, as their main, driving narrative.

Take charge of the narrative strategically.

Change the narrative/ paradigm explanatory framework to: the given is that art means is analogies depicting and describing eternalism experiencing from Psilocybin.

Entheogen scholars must end their addiction to the self-defeating willful blindness.

Stop wanting mushrooms to have been supressed by Genesis, the Bible, Christianity, and the Church.

Genesis 1 according to entheogen scholars: “God said Psilocybin is schedule 1 so put people in jail” except Genesis doesn’t say that.

cite: What Really Happened in Garden of Eden. Stop presentism projecting Psil Proh onto Genesis [MW Winkelman quote: “Don’t you guys know Sunday School theology”?]

We need to abandon just that Sunday School-level theology and use a Gjnostic pro-Psilo, pro-Serpent reading.

The Serpent was more subtle than any other creature.

Stop investing in and building up that self-harming narrative that requires blinding and discounting as “alien” the many mushrooms inside the Church or Western religious history.

Invert the narrative, to end Psilocybin Prohibitiion.

Flip the narrative, to: the church *does* have buttloads of explicit Psilocybin mushrooms.

There is well more than enough evidence, when read through the lens of combined motifs of psychedelic eternalism: {mushroom trees, non-branching, + handedness}.

If you don’t, you perpetuate Psilocybin Prohibition.

If you follow this strategic set of directives, you maximize chance of full repeal of Psilocybin Prohibition.

Replace folk “how to RETREAT/ back away from dragon” by “how to pass through the gate”.

Houot: after the shamans’ ego death then reconstruction/ reassembling, they then have viable control.

TRUE mystics, same.

Different narrative/ spotlight of emphasis, but same trajectory of transformation from possibilism to eternalism.

This getting of the treasure by passing THROUGH the {password-guarded gate} — not retreating via surrender and accepting non-control — is what art motifs show and instruct and communicate to us.

Reject egoic-type non-control & retreat; spotlight transformed viable control that’s through the gate.

Step through the gate by shifting weight from left leg to right leg.

I present/deliver the Egodeath theory, the mytheme theory, the cybernetic theory of ego transcendence; the Theory of Psilocybin Eternalism.

Begin to Try Make an Actual Effort to Perceive Psilocybin in Western Religion and Culture

  1. Write section headings about rich history of expert-level Psilocybin usage in Western Religion and Culture. Like Brown did. Like I did.
  2. Make a positive narrative of abundance, that’s not self-defeating, and that strategically forces repeal of Prohibition (burn the accursed, fraudulent “schedules”). Crybabying about Big Bad Church having eliminated all Psil from our religious history, is suicidally stupid strategy, and as false as could be.
  3. Fill in outline.
  4. Force it to work. Do whatever it takes. Failure and defeat, Just Give Up — our strategic commitment to date — is not an option.

Write section headings and chapter titles and book titles, make a narrative that’s not a self-defeat-fest pity party about the Big Bad Church/ “suppression/ secret/ rite/ cult/ cliche cliche cliche/ heretical/ secret Amanita alchemy”, then fill them in.

  1. STEP 1: WRITE OUTLINE HEADINGS. In every book, begin by writing section headings all about the rich history of Psilocybin in Europe/England/Medit. IT’S ALL ABOUT JUST NARRATIVE ANYWAY; WE JUST NEED better narrative. *NOT* a sob story about Big Bad Church, self-defeatism.
  2. STEP 2: FILL IN. Fill in the outline. Follow my lead. Samo, Brown.
  3. Leverage to repeal Prohibition and burn the fkking fraud-driven “schedules” and defund prohibition. Set the prisoners free. GTFO of ppls business, NO WE DO NOT NEED ANY “BENEFICIAL REGULATION” — WHAT WE “NEED” IS, F OFF AND MYOB. Funding amount needed? $0. We don’t need think tanks about how to do Prohibition better. We don’t need “more research”. Ppl do their own research. Just leave them the hell alone.

Stamets: Add a *serious* section to your book Psil Msh of the World that is FOCUSED with VIGOR: State how you attacked the problem, did field work like SAMO FINDING LIB CAP IN ZILLION COUNTIES IN ITALY.

Act like you give a f about the topic! let’s see some REAL discussion with VIGOR this time!

You have made me REWRITE your book to gather your careless snippets, a half sentence here, a careless aside there, to try to piece together your position on the topic BUT YOU HAVE NO POSITION ON THE TOPIC bc the topic, scoped to that topic, of “to what extent Psil in europe/england” is LITERALLY UNTHINKABLE to everyone.

So that’s how we ended up with Letcher Hatsis impressionistically , sub-scientifically, painting a narrative storytime storytelling of “There were no Psilocybin in England before 1976.”

Pray tell please explain, Paul Stamets, how there was a shit-tonne of bull dung and horse sh*t in England for an infinite years, yet no Cubensis until 1976.

INSANITY FOLK NARRATIVE!

🐮

💩

🍄

This is not Science. This is not Reason. This is not addressing the topic as a topic, proper. This is folk narrative + incuriosity.

This “Psychedelic Science” floats on an out-of-print, 63-years outdated, Walter Stace “scientific basis” of unicorn gas.

🦄💨 🔍👨‍🔬

Moved from “Moses, Burning Bush, and Tablets (Ingeborg Psalter)”

todo: I could burn up a lot of word count and accomplish little, listing and describing all the previous treatments. OR, clean slate, wipe the board, fresh start.

This article isn’t a book or dissertation. How would readers like me to expend and burn up my 8000 word count? On DUMB pseudo-ARGUMENTS? Or laying out revelation?

I met an angel, who said would be giving me Transcendent Knowledge, and the angel talked all night about the errors of the wrong Old (less-than) “Theories”, and never did get around to telling Truth.

Pri 1: Summarize Truth. Continue in the tradition of the 1997 Core Theory Summary posting at Principia Cybernetica site, and the 2006 main article (99% assertion of true theory, 1% refutation of previous failed views). Positively state what is the case. No words wasted on mocking Panofsky’s dumb pseudo-arguments. This article is the general-purpose reply to straighten out Panofsky’s confused thinking, and everyone’s.

Artists did not ONLY want to depict mushrooms; they wanted to depict the main effect of mushrooms, which is eternalism; the eternalism experiential mode, which produces eternalism-thinking. THAT is why they added branches — and cut branches, which Panofsky fails to mention. No need to engage his arg verbatim.

Pri 5: Explain where entheogen scholars went wrong, showing how their DUMB ARGUMENTS are bogus and bunk and unhelpful and irrelevant.

This article is a presentation of an explanation to be used as a reference point.

This article is a theory summary specification.

People complained that Brown fended off Hatsis attack but the ball didn’t move forward down the field. I am setting the ball all the way in the goal.

What defeats of previous theories are implied along the way — WHO CARES??!!

Salamander (Bodleian Ms. 602)

Figure 1. Salamander. Bodleian Ms. 602, fol. 027v.

Features:

  1. right hand touching head, like right paw touching cap [3:35 p.m. February 20, 2023]