BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Following up 'Food of the Gods'

 
 
gyrus
15:04 / 15.07.06
With a positive magic mushroom story in the headlines, thought it'd be a good time to ask everyone about something that's been bugging me recently. Does anyone know of any follow-up research in the wake of Terence McKenna's book Food of the Gods? Specifically, about the possible role of psychedelics (or at least, intense trance states) in (1) the evolution of the Homo lineage and/or (2) the evolution of human religion and consciousness.

Obviously McKenna's book was a faulty attempt at drawing this argument, about mushrooms as a causal factor in human evolution, together. But the years since its publication, even since his death, have seen an explosion of palaeoarchaeological activity. I recently read Steven Mithen's The Prehistory of the Mind and The Singing Neanderthals (my review here). Both struck me as fascinating, but odd in that the specifics of the theories (human consciousness as a result of increasing "cognitive fluidity" and metaphorical thinking, the importance of "boundary loss" in the social aspects of music and language) almost demanded consideration of altered states and psychedelics. But Mithen doesn't mention them - not even to dismiss them.

Apart from these books I'm not that up-to-date with debates in current palaeoarchaeology and so on. People like David Lewis-Williams (The Mind in the Cave) seem willing to bring altered states to the centre of the stage of the origins of art - is anyone doing the same with the origins of humans, consciousness and religion?

(Just found this useful collection of links related to McKenna's theory, will have to explore the links...)
 
 
Char Aina
16:09 / 15.07.06
that book made me want to stop taking recreational drugs.
i found a new lease of life as an experimenter and studied up on the complex relationship between human's and imbibables, and man, did i become annoying.

i got a lot out of the journey, though, and i'm glad of much of the knowledge.
it was such a seminal step in my leaving behind of the addiction i was slowly and unwittingly building, and probably the true beginning of my proper journey into realms wierd.

i would be more than exited to hear some development of the ideas that book kicked off.


over all i say thank fuck for terrence, and hope dearly that someone as clever is toiling in the same field.

thanks for the thread, dude.
 
 
33
17:05 / 15.07.06
Yes - I have permanently achieved 2 things through using mushroom extracts ..

I am not sure if that qualifies as some of the stuff he mentioned in 8 brain circuit theory and there were other factors that some here might not believe or doubt but in short yes..

This isnt really anything secret if your run in certain circles..

33
 
 
33
17:07 / 15.07.06
By the way a guy if you havent heard of him that might interest you is Andrew Shulgin who investiages this very area though I believe its synthetic in his case ..

You've probably heard of him hes pretty well known.

33
 
 
astrojax69
09:59 / 16.07.06
'sasha' shulgin? i gather grant knows a bit about this guy...


there is some interesting theory about that cave art was probably created by someone [a shaman] in a mind state similar to that of an autistic savant' probably induced pharmapsychologically or through some meditation/trance state.

seems obvious man has been getting high on something pretty well forever. and we're not alone. sounds plausible.
 
 
gyrus
12:08 / 16.07.06
astrojax69: David Lewis-Williams' The Mind in the Cave is the book to read about the shamanic trance theory of cave art. A guy called Paul Bahn has criticised this line of theory for its "desperation" to prove that psychedelic plants were involved, but Lewis-Williams is very careful to stress that trance states were involved, but the specific catalyst for the trances could have been anything (drumming, etc.).

Mithen talks about trances for about a page or so in The Singing Neanderthals, when he talks about dance and its ability to break down personal barriers.

I just wonder why current palaeoarchaeology is so bizarrely shy still of talking about hallucinogens. Is it plain old politics, not wanting to address something culturally contraversial? Or am I missing someone who's actually being scientific about it and addressing the issue?
 
 
astrojax69
00:58 / 17.07.06
thanks the tip on the book, gyrus. looks like i'll be hearing back from amazon soon...

and yeah, i think it is the [academic] politics of not inculcating the benefits of mind bending drugs, even if it was thousands of years ago... sad. still, cultures shift, if slowly.
 
 
gyrus
15:19 / 17.07.06
I wonder sometimes if I should drop my incredulity at the ongoing avoidance of such issue in "scientific" circles. What do I expect?! It's a fine art, keeping a healthy balance between naivety and world-weariness.

I guess the main reason I'm incredulous at this is the fact that psychedelic are being discussed in many areas of academia and science now. Plus, in The Singing Neanderthals, Mithen is clear that he's not prudish about reasonable speculation:

"Although I lack any evidence and doubt if any could be found, I am confident that the music played through the Geissenklösterle pipes [36,000 year-old bone instruments found in Germany] and sung within ice-age painted caves had a religious function." (p. 271)

It seems such a short leap from this attitude to bringing psychedelic plants to bear on his theories that it begs many questions about why the issue's totally absent.

Well, I'll just have to track these people down and interview them!
 
 
Olulabelle
10:06 / 20.07.06
I've just typed out a massive reply to you Gyrus, and then I lost it.

You said: People like David Lewis-Williams (The Mind in the Cave) seem willing to bring altered states to the centre of the stage of the origins of art - is anyone doing the same with the origins of humans, consciousness and religion?

One of your links, here: Prehistoric Psychoactive Mushroom Artifacts says that:

this article intends to focus its attention on a group of rock paintings in the Sahara Desert, the works of pre-neolithic Early Gatherers, in which mushrooms effigies are represented repeatedly. The polychromic scenes of harvest, adoration and the offering of mushrooms, and large masked "gods" covered with mushrooms, not to mention other significant details, lead us to suppose we are dealing with an ancient hallucinogenic mushroom cult. What is remarkable about these ethnomycological works, produced 7,000 - 9,000 years ago, is that they could indeed reflect the most ancient human culture as yet documented in which the ritual use of hallucinogenic mushrooms is explicitly represented. As the Fathers of modern ethno-mycology (and in particular R. Gordon Wasson) imagined, this Saharian testimony shows that the use of hallucinogens goes back to the Paleolithic Period and that their use always takes place within contexts and rituals of a mysfico-religious nature.

I would suggest that this is certainly thinking about religion, and also human consciousness. I don't know why you are separating the research into the use of hallucinogens within ancient civilizations in terms of art from that of its affect on consciousness, the things all cross into each other and are inextricably linked aren't they?

Lysergic acid in Ergot found in bad bread in the middle ages caused people to hallucinate and dance including, I once read, Thomas More. The Greeks had Kykeon which was said to contain Ergot and cause revelatory states and R Gordon Wasson wrote a book about it called, 'The Road to Eleusis'. Some people believe that the Norse 'mead of inspiration' had mushrooms in it. All those occurrences of hallucinogens in foodstuffs or drinks would affect people in many ways, including artistically, certainly consciously and religiously.

I can't read the whole of the Independent article, but I would like to. Are you a member of the Independent site, and if so could you PM me a copy of the article?

33, as Gyrus says, I think you might mean Alexander Shulgin. He and his wife Ann did lots of experiments in synthesising psychoactive drugs. He's written two well known books about it called PiHKAL and TiKHAL.
 
 
gyrus
14:55 / 26.07.06
Damn, I'm sure I posted a lengthy reply to this yesterday - now it's not here! Grrrr. Can't be arsed to repeat it all, but here's a link to a duplication of the Independent article:

http://www.strangeattractor.co.uk/further/archives/2006/07/what_science_ca.html
 
 
_Boboss
13:47 / 28.07.06
got this for me birthday.

interesting book, finished it yonks ago and still can't decide if i love it or hate it. mainly love it i think - he takes a nice, sensible 'hang on a sec' attitude to the wasson/mckenna theories, and basically turns up very very little evidence that any kind of shrooms were ever used in a ritual, shamanic or religiose context outside of a couple of small tribes in siberia, and casts a fine critical eye on some of the evidence used to support those theories in the past. he doesn't lose his respect for the wackier theorists those, just nicely recontextualises them, eg mckenna as a fine latterday shanachee rather than yr actual prophet, and wasson as a great layman explorer-adventurer if not an actual ethical or reliable anthropologist.

came as a right shock to me and most of me mates, old ravers all who'd swallowed the shrooms = god (and art, language etc.) hypothesis more or less completely. his basic point is actually a little more brave i think: shrooms weren't a useful or pleasureable drug for people prior to the mid C20th, too dangerous and unpredictable, however nowadays their effects chime very nicely indeed with the way many people think and want to think cheers, and they can/should be pursued safely and effectively for both recreational and inspirational purposes.

the book bugs me for two reasons - he doesn't really consider how little evidence there could ever be for the survival of unbiased reports of cultural practices from oral cultures (eg how little we know about teh druids); and that he really doesn't lay into the UKs damn ridiculous recent legislation strongly enough, when he has built himself a very solid foundation for doing so.
 
 
33
10:40 / 30.07.06
Yes-sorry

it was Alexander as you pointed out..

33
 
 
gyrus
15:45 / 03.08.06
Gumbitch!!! I will have to check Shroom out. I flicked through it at a friend's a while ago and was disappointed there didn't seem to be any "follow-up" stuff, more of a review of the past. Maybe his point is that he's looked carefully into the matter and there isn't any new evidence, and further there's doubt cast on Wasson & McKenna's evidence.

Have to say I kind of wonder about people who took McKenna wholly seriously! I always found him very persuasive, but a bit over the top. I've got a lot of tolerance for people who have to be more emphatic than they might have been if it wasn't for the widespread denial of certain issues (like the role of drugs in society). But then McKenna himself was always tricksterish - he easily flipped from apparent psychedelic fundamentalism to a self-deprecatory "well, this is just my thing" kind of attitude.

In the end, regarding prehistory (or any of the numerous threads of "history" that aren't actually documented, or are only documented patchily, or in a biased way - wow, that probably doesn't leave much left!), it's always worth bearing that old archaeological maxim in mind: "Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence." Basically, we'll almost certainly never know whether mushrooms played a role in the emergence of consciousness, for this reason. Some people take this as a cue to ignore the matter entirely. I like to have a range of models. There'll always be scope for more circumstantial evidence, but essentially this evidence marks out the boundaries for informed speculation.

This swing from complete belief in mushrooms as the be-all and end-all to "Ah well, they're just a 20th century thing" seems a bit simplistic (though I'll reserve judgement on Andy's book until reading it of course!). But generally, I always thought psychedelics were great tools for complexifying theories, making our thinking more flexible and many-faceted - but it turns out they can also just amp up that all-too-human rigidity, too.

I suppose in the end this emphasises Andy's point: even in light of the obvious benefits of psychedelics, we have to fall back on ourselves in the end.
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:50 / 06.08.06
I'm sure I'm not the only one, but the "obvious benefits of psychedelics" aren't all that obvious to me. Isn't the main effect convincing the user that they have some great insight into the universe? Which is great for the user, of course, but not clearly that great for everyone else.

On the other hand, intoxication is pretty common in the animal kingdom and there is no reason to think early man was immune. I think one can go as far as to say that if some psychadelic substance around for use, it would have been used, though I'm not sure how common that situation would be (that may be why there is limited evidence of psychadelic use). The origin of language is a big mystery, of which we are largely ignorant (as I understand it), though I'd caution against trying to find simplistic causal mechanisms.
 
 
LykeX
07:46 / 09.08.06
With respect, Lurid, it sounds like you haven't tried any.
The main effect is not, IME, to produce some vague insight (although they can do that), but rather to give very real and productive results, such as new ways of looking at a problem.
I have at times used psychedelics as an aid to self-analysis and, while I can't make promises regarding the effect on you and others, I have certainly found "obvious benefits" in the (limited and responsible) use of psychedelics.

Podcast no. 42 on this page is a talk on the subject of using psychedelics to stimulate practical, new ideas in a very down to earth manner. Have a listen.
 
 
Olulabelle
19:53 / 11.08.06
That's an interesting link LykeX, thank you.

Gyrus, this is a bit Temple-y maybe for this thread but as I mentioned before I think that theoretically one can suggest that it was mushrooms which made the Norse Mead 'sacred'. Since mushrooms can be held in suspension in honey this would make sense. Obviously you have the evidence that the Aztecs also used mushrooms and although on Erowid the honey mushroom thing is disputed, I can confirm that actually it does work.
 
  
Add Your Reply