Fuck. That. Sense. Of. Certainty. [And you oughta get smarter, drug using friends...]
As a lifetime computer user, I had an undeveloped sense of the value of human interaction. A few rounds of Ecstasy with friends showed me that there was something deeper to be explored. Did I know that the experience was due to the drug? Of course. Did experiencing that closer human connection, even if transient, make me a better person? I think so.
Also, as a lifetime computer user, I live in a world of certainty: 1+1=2; algorithms work the same way every time; my computers only do what I tell them to do [har har] and don't talk back. A few rounds of mushrooms shook away that blinding certainty. It turns out that I can see vastly more shades of green than I knew, that what you think of as depth perception is but a shade of what I saw then, that your visual center can be seriously and awesomely tricked, that you can close your eyes and spend hours watching Escher-like images unfold and evolve. Does it matter that I've seen a shade of green that you probably haven't? Not directly. Does it matter that I'm not blinded by certainty as you are? Definitely.
Obviously, I'm not advocating Mr. Saunders' methods, but there's more nuance in this discussion than your comment reflects.
Just to be clear: what makes me furious is the idea that someone would harm themselves in such a way, and yet continue down that path in a misguided journey of self-discovery (or whatever).
I've had some very similar experiences to yourself and I'm not against using drugs, per se.
But. When you say stuff like "what you think of as depth perception is but a shade of what I saw then", or "I've seen a shade of green that you probably haven't", you cannot separate what you actually perceived, and what your brain thinks it perceived. Exactly so: I'm either a great singer when I'm drunk, or I think I'm a great singer when I'm drunk.
Using drugs safely can be a lot of fun. But I take all of those experiences (including my own) with large tablespoons of salt.
EDIT:
Feel like I should add another point. Perception is everything. Your stone-cold-sober perception is just one possible state. It's the best we have, but I still barely trust it.
The biggest revelations for me, have always come from hard science. Quantum physics blows my mind, cosmology blows my mind, heck I did a degree in Physics because I was fascinated. I've never beat the lasting awe for reality, with anything that, for all I know, is utterly fake.
As a lifetime computer user, I had an undeveloped sense of the value of human interaction. A few rounds of Ecstasy with friends showed me that there was something deeper to be explored. Did I know that the experience was due to the drug? Of course. Did experiencing that closer human connection, even if transient, make me a better person? I think so.
Also, as a lifetime computer user, I live in a world of certainty: 1+1=2; algorithms work the same way every time; my computers only do what I tell them to do [har har] and don't talk back. A few rounds of mushrooms shook away that blinding certainty. It turns out that I can see vastly more shades of green than I knew, that what you think of as depth perception is but a shade of what I saw then, that your visual center can be seriously and awesomely tricked, that you can close your eyes and spend hours watching Escher-like images unfold and evolve. Does it matter that I've seen a shade of green that you probably haven't? Not directly. Does it matter that I'm not blinded by certainty as you are? Definitely.
Obviously, I'm not advocating Mr. Saunders' methods, but there's more nuance in this discussion than your comment reflects.