From: Mark Crosby (crosby_m@rocketmail.com)
Date: Mon Feb 02 1998 - 11:42:18 MST
Anders cites Biol Psychiatry 1980 Dec;15(6):841-858:
< Where comparisons could be made, the performance of
these "temporal lobe" [impaired] patients paralleled
the performance of subjects acutely intoxicated with
known doses of delta 9-THC. >
There is a difference between 'acute intoxication'
and dosages desirable for nootropic purposes.
Simplistic analogy: the difference between the
'loosening up' seen in someone who has had 'just a
couple' of alcoholic drinks, versus the
unconsciousness seen in someone who has had 'too
many' drinks.
Anders, later:
< The problem with drug experiences (or for that
matter a lot of our subjective experiences) is that
they are highly unreliable - how much of the effects
are real, and how much is just delusion? >
Is it delusion, or merely annecdotal, when certain
affects are replicated time after time over many
years of trials, under many different environmental
conditions, especially when the subject has
attempted, with varying levels of success, to achieve
this affect with other substances and methods?
Perhaps the more serious delusion is the belief that
useful information can be obtained primarily by
chemical studies of the effects of a single substance
without sufficient regard to the "set and setting"
influences that Michael mentions.
< What I worry about is that so many simply accept
that the subjective very positive results correspond
with real positive results - as a scientist, I want
to find good evidence for that before I start
endorsing it as a transhuman technology. >
Some real positive results:
(a) greater interest in and responsiveness to the
stories and activities of a child than is otherwise
the case after a long day of work and study (as
measured by that most important of objective
measures, 'sparkle in the eyes', as well as
documented retention of concepts covered);
(b) contrary to the study of college students cited,
greater fluency, flexibility and elaboration of
literary expression (in personal journals - as
validated at later times while in 'sober' and/or
critical modes.)
On the other hand, I've seen no evidence that the
substance in question has any positive impact on
ones' ability to perform mathematical or logical
calculations; although, a little attitude adjustment
is sometimes helpful for finding the logical (or
syntactical) bug that has been 'hiding' in that
program all day. How would psychologists (or
neuroscientists!) set up tests to measure the
'causes' of that type of 'ah hah!' experience, I
wonder?
Mark Crosby
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:33 MST