I started thinking about the stoned ape theory, any thoughts?
Terence McKenna had some trippy ideas. Try reading his stuff, it all stems from there.
>>82583991I think it makes sense, but humans were probably already a bit smart. Have anyone studied the effects of drugs on monkeys and other animals?Either way it's hilarious that mushrooms, flowers, cacti exist that literally give you crazy ideas. What is this some sort of RPG?
>>82584177>its just like.... le vidya!!!!kys fag
>>82584177You get similar effects including vivid hallucinations from hypoglycemia up to and including seizures, tachycardia, cardiac arrest and death.
>>82584632Do you have a source for that?>vivid hallucinationsHallucinations are less important in comparison to the activation of novel neural connections letting you view things differently and in unexpected, imaginative ways. Imagination or invention is the true purpose ad reason for all forms of intelligence and is only achieved with hard work, effort, knowledge, divine inspiration, or inexplicably with the shortcut of smoking a funny plant.
Brain function breaks down between 5 and 2 mmol/L with neuron death below ~1.7 mmol/L which worsens quickly at lower concentrations for those who haven't experienced hypoglycemic episodes tens of thousands of times to develop alternative fuel supplies in the brain.
>>82584653>Do you have a source for that?It's a well known phenomena there are thousands of papers on these effects related to type I diabetes mellitus dating back quite far.
>>82584653>novel neural connectionsThis is a mistake you've made. These are not novel nor are they uniquely activated. Rather, psychoactives modulate various properties such as noise suppression, dynamics and gating thresholds. Using circuit analogies is flawed due to the fact the brain is arguably a non-dimensional non-hierarchical network of "nodes". An electronic circuit typically does not have dozens of different mediums via which signals and hysteretics are passed with a variety of latencies and slews, integrals or differentials of arbitrary orders.
Whereas an electronic circuit can roughly be summarized in a "2d" sense by counting a finite number of precisely structured and interconnected nodes ... the brain is more akin to a dynamic multi-order system such as "society" rather than merely a "factory" or similar.
>>82583991I'm more into the murder ape theory
>dynamic multi-order systemBest term I can come up with was initially and it seems I'm forced into it not identifying any better nomenclature ... >fractal
>>82584704Well, regardless of the mechanics of it the point is that it makes you more imaginative and creative, perhaps not to a very useful degree for modern humans who are already extremely smart and imaginative, but for more primitive creates like monkeys it could be very potent which is the theory we are discussing. I truly don't know why someone brought up seizures and death as a comparison because it's pretty difficult to do anything other than seizuring or dying in those situations so it is not really relevant here
>>82583991Actually Stoned Ape is pretty much the plot of Kill La Kill but with mushrooms instead of clothes. I find mushrooms scarier.In Kill La Kill, the clothes fibers or whatever are an alien race that hijacks living creatures and accelerates their intellect and directs evolution, making them super powerful.
are drugs expensive.
This is one of the greatest issues with "AI" processors and such currently. GPUs have strictly defined I/O and structure. Whereas a likely better model for the brain is a dynamical fractal system where there is no fixed structure but rather the structure is in itself modified by the natural operation of that structure.Likewise, memory and processing in the harvard architectures tend to be discrete. Memory, program code, execution flow and processing would be best unified instead.Again, the nodal structure should be dynamic with any node being capable of interacting dynamically with any other node. For example "local" data to one node wouldn't necessarily remain inaccessible to other nodes. Instead, the local data could simply be communicated dynamically and duplicated or re-transmitted as needed by other nodes receptive of that communication. Consider a dynamic multi-channel ambi-directional bus ... only rather than the dualism of two directions consider arbitrary divisions and frequency bands. Such as ripples in a pond potentially combining with an infinite number of varied sources and receptors.
>>82584805If you have to ask that question (it implies you have money issues) probably yes for you. Of course they are insignificantly cheap in the grand scheme but I assume you don't have money. Weed and mushrooms is around 50 euro per 3-5g, MDMA about 10 per pill, cocaine is a lot more expensive. But it all varies of course and you can find mushrooms for free in most countries.
>>82584769There isn't any reason to believe a monkey would experience more "potent" effects than a human. That's based upon your bias in terms of understanding how the brain actually functions as a collection of dynamically adaptive "nodes" without fixed structure. A monkey has a very similar brain and most likely would experience very similar effects in a fractal sense of self-similarly across varied scales. The scale of the effect would differ but it could trivially be said to be "the same" effect across those scales in the sense of being self-similar like a fractal.
>>82584835I did not say the effect would be more potent but that the result would be because they have a much higher ceiling for improvement compared to humans who already know how to do a billion things.
>>82584826>Of course they are insignificantly cheap in the grand schemewhos mans is this.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIeGabXxfEO/?hl=enwhoare you buddyy??
>>82584844>I did not say the effect would be more potent but that the result would beThat's what I'm arguing you're mistaken about. What is actually the difference? You're supposing these are two different things but they're one and the same.No, LSD does not make a monkey a genius nor does it a human.
>>82584884>does not make a monkey a genius nor does it a human.But that's not what the theory claims either. It claims that monkeys made incremental improvements because of heightened imagination, trying strange and unorthodox (for an animal) things and methods of doing things, because normally an animal would never engage in that behavior without some foreign stimulus affecting their brain and making them behave weird.
You seem to have a very human-centric point of view. I don't believe any human has ever nor will ever approach one hundred things, let alone one billion. You're far too lax in dividing and don't categorize neatly enough by abstraction. For example reading and looking at images are to me one and the same activity.
>>82584905That sort of thing is ultimately interpretive subjective not objective.
>>82584905>unorthodox (for an animal) things and methods of doing things,And by what measure was it determined that:1) the process differed2) was relatively more or less efficientFor example eating requires a particular amount of energy and various resources. In exchange several tradeoffs are made such as moisture expended in return for glucose and fructose. Determining that the method of eating improved in monkeys dosed with LSD would be quite far-fetched.
Can a monkey dosed with LSD learn to eat pie more effectively than a pig?
>>82584905>But that's not what the theory claims either.I have to guess at what you're referring to, but despite the foolishness of it I shall. Let's assume you're referring to experiments in which the monkey was given tasks to complete which were not familiar to it from its natural environment. In these situations, when dosed with mind-altering substances some of those substances could lead to altered thinking patterns in which problem solving improved specifically in those unnatural problems.What would be improbable is if the monkey in an altered-state more effectively solved the problems from its natural environment it evolved specifically to solve most effectively via natural selection and evolution.
In other words, of course if you break the monkey's brain it'll potentially solve problems it wasn't designed to ever encounter. It'll be forced to adapt and the solution will come naturally from the underlying system of the brain's natural dynamic adaptive function "plasticity" rather than inherited properties.Of course mind-altering substances can affect plasticity. That's what mind-altering means.
