> > But why ascribe any of those feelings to something supernatural?
>
> > John Thornton
>
> I'm not. Quite the opposite. I said that it was very *natural.* Which makes
> sense given that I'd ingested something that grows naturally on the Earth.
> Whether or not we were meant to discover this link as an evolutionary tool I
> can't say, though many seem to believe this is the case. Your chemical
> breakdown on how psychedelics work (which I'm familiar with) doesn't negate
> anything I said. Chemicals are part of nature. As Einstein supposedly said
> while dying, "Look deeply into nature and then you'll understand." That's
> the point I'm trying to make.
>
> In other words, one needn't necessarily believe in the supernatural in order
> to understand or accept that our lives are deeper and more complex than mere
> slabs of meat. What the ultimate answer is, I don't know. I'm still
> exploring this question. But I believe there are currents that many atheists
> either overlook or simply dismiss, and I think this is short sighted.
I assumed that you were invoking the supernatural since you were approvingly quoting Hicks:
"God looked down and rained gifts of forgiveness, acceptance and eternal love from his unconditional heart, and I realized the true nature of my existence, of all our existence, is God's perfect and holy sunship, that we are spirit, we are not bodies, we are mind, we are thoughts in God's mind, his beloved children, and that has never changed"
I guess I don't know what you mean when you write:
"In other words, one needn't necessarily believe in the supernatural in order to understand or accept that our lives are deeper and more complex than mere slabs of meat."
If this isn't invoking something supernatural what are saying? I certainly think psychedelics are a useful tool. Breaking down our barriers between self and the universe and demonstrating that this separation is in our minds rather than exisiting "out there" somewhere is beneficial in helping our understanding of complex relationships grow.
Why a mere slab of meat instead of just a slab of meat? What is "mere" about our physical existence? This suggests that you think there is some non-corporeal aspect to our existence that is more important than our physically existing lives otherwise why use the term mere? I do reject the idea that my consciousness transcends my physical existence. My physical existence makes my consciousness possible.
John Thornton