[FRIAM] Pragmaticism and puritanism

[Prof David West]

Nick,

Dave agrees with your first paragraph, with a minor nuance — when I said "we" are being elitist, the pronoun refers not to Nick but to those that Nick is channeling, i.e. the 'scientific community."

Now as to the second paragraph: I would never say that anyone should take psychedelics any more than I would say they should spend a year sailing on the Beagle. 

I am a puritan — probably everyone is, but with regard different things. I won't use recreational drugs (except alcohol to which I seem to be immune), I have never used heroin or opiates (both dangers and benefits are short term and disproportionate on the risk side). I conform to a set of behavioral rules but never assert that any of them are universal and should be observed by others.

I do think you are making a fundamental error when you apply your puritan/Apollonian perspective to the psychedelic drug case. It is not a question of trading "short term _pleasure_" for "enjoyment in the long run." I am asserting that the "knowledge to be gained" is worth the "short term _effort_" required. Although there is certainly some kind of "pleasure/satisfaction" from spending long hours in the lab hunched over the microscope, or cleaning out the monkey cages that may translate the pleasure of standing on a stage in Stockholm sometime in the future. But, normally we see a spectrum of effort now - knowledge reward later. It is the latter I am asserting *vis-a-vis* hallucinogen use.

I sure as hell hope that I am not an elitist. But I must confess that I am hyper-sensitive to elitism perceived in others. That sensitivity is deeply personal and pervades almost every aspect of life. It has been expressed on this list before - with regard politics, "Truth," and the current conversation about drugs.

When I assert that "science is only useful for solving the easy problems," that is not elitism, but arrogance talking.

I would say — an I am pretty sure you would disagree with me — that there are _no grounds that justify the privilege_ accorded to "science and scientific method." And, the corollary, there is no justification for science to dismiss a body of investigation simply because the subject matter or the approach to understanding runs contrary to orthodoxy. I believe you would disagree with me, because your personal experiences has demonstrated, to you, apparent justifications for your privileging of science.

I began this conversation with a question: I have three or four "piles of experience/knowledge; A, B, C, and D. Can Peirce and his method help me find a way to integrate, make-sense-of-as-a-whole, all the piles? And the answer seems to be, no. No, because piles B,C, and D are irrelevant because they are not "science." This position raises my elitism hackles.

I am becoming convinced that hermetic (and hermeneutic), mystical Taoist-Buddhist-Sufic, and psychedelic, approaches will provide means for such an integration and that "science" will be a special case much like Newtonian physics is a special case.

davew



On Tue, Mar 10, 2020, at 7:03 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
> Dear Phellow Phriammers,

> 

> I want to thank you all for giving me a place to think “out loud” about these matters. You see, as a behaviorist, out loud is the only way I know how to think. 

> 

> I was struck by the relation between two words of critique employed in Glen’s and Dave’s most recent posts: **Elitist! ** And **Puritan!** What is remarkable to me is that they really do go together. Elitist points to my privileging science as a method for determining the truth. Puritan points to my reluctance to risk future satisfaction for present pleasure. What they share is an [Apollonian?} focus on the long run. Really the two boil down to the same thing … that the apparent non-randomness of past events is evidence that in some sense, and to some degree, the future can be counted on, that a careful plan will, *on average and with many exceptions, *lead to a better result than a impulsive reaction. “Science” is just a name for practices of knowledge-gathering that have a likelihood to produce expectations of experience that will endure. So, my privileging of science, in general, and expertise in particular is recursive: I believe in science because in my enduring experience science produces expectations that endure the test of time. I.e, scientific behavior is somewhat more likely to work out in the long run than non scientific behavior, despite MANY exceptions. Puritan (sez I) is just a name for somebody whose confidence that there IS a future is sufficient to justify relinquishing short term pleasure for the enjoyment of the long run. 

> 

> No, I am not sure that Dave and Glen would disagree with any of this. That ambiguity is what makes this argument so tantalizing for me. Dave MIGHT be saying that the evidence suggests that to be consistent, I and all other elitist puritans SHOULD be taking psychedelics because the evidence shows that the knowledge gained thereby will pass the test of time and that the long term satisfaction I will gain from having taken them will cancel out any short term ill-ease that I experience. In short, are you sharing my elitist puritanism but challenging my understanding of its implications, or are you disagreeing with my elitist puritanism, and offering a different, non-pragmaticist, approach to life. Or both? Or neither? 

> 

> I am sure you both will say that you have explained this to me a dozen time, and why on earth would you repeat yourselves now. 

> 

> Perhaps you have brought me to a teachable moment?

> 

> By the way, Dave. What probably would happen if you showed up at Friam under the influence is that I would ask you to quarantine yourself for two weeks. Last night AP revealed that the Trump administration had vetoed a CDC recommendation that all elderly persons be discouraged from getting on airplanes for the foreseeable future. Elderly, to my surprise, seems to mean “over 60”. 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Nick

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Nicholas Thompson

> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology

> Clark University

> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com

> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

> 

> 

> 

> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200311/91e28bed/attachment.html>