Wouldn't it be interesting if atheists had fundamentally different experiences on DMT than "believers"? Like only seeing abstract patterns and such rather than contact with entities and journeys to other worlds? But it doesn't seem to work that way, what you believe in apparently doesn't matter too much. You're going to get shown whatever you're going to get shown, and pretty much all you can do is put either a rational or spiritual spin on it for yourself when you come back, depending on your preference. Or at least that's how it seems to me.

Interesting thoughts here. I find it quite amazing that I've met the being that called itself God multiple times and I'm an atheist. At first it was tempting to believe in God but after integrating these strange experiences it only reinforced my non belief. I have an open mind but a skeptics heart.

Interesting thoughts here. I find it quite amazing that I've met the being that called itself God multiple times and I'm an atheist. At first it was tempting to believe in God but after integrating these strange experiences it only reinforced my non belief. I have an open mind but a skeptics heart. If there was a God I think there would be solid evidence for that being. It makes nonsense to me that an all powerful omnipotent creator can exist without ever leaving a single trace. Its illogical at best just plain silly IMO.

olympus mon wrote:
Interesting thoughts here. I find it quite amazing that I've met the being that called itself God multiple times and I'm an atheist. At first it was tempting to believe in God but after integrating these strange experiences it only reinforced my non belief. I have an open mind but a skeptics heart.


Right, that's exactly the kind of thing I was thinking of. And I think this is the key to answering the OP's original question. He wanted to understand how an atheist could have a transformative experience without it being "spiritual", as if a religious person would see angels and demons but an atheist wouldn't be able to experience something like that and still get something useful out of it, because it would be in conflict with their beliefs.

But I think the difference is all about how the experience is interpreted, rather than the content of the experience itself. Let's say that Olympus Mon had the exact same vision that Eliyahu describes in his "how I got my name" thread. Would this force him to start believing in the objective reality of God and angels, and make him want to read up on all the stories of Elijah? Not at all. Although he might, I'm sure that some "non-believers" have been converted to a more spiritual viewpoint by using psychedelics. But as a person with a strong rational tendency instead of taking it literally he would most likely analyze that "vision" similar to how you would interpret a dream, and think something like "hm, well those 'angels' probably represented my desire for self improvement and personal growth, and those demon things were all the doubts and fears getting in the way of accomplishing my goals. And being told I'm a biblical figure and cheered by the crowd like that might mean I'm feeling a little unimportant and underappreciated in my life right now, I should try to do something about that." And then this understanding could lead him to work harder to achieve his ambitions and get more of the recognition he is lacking in his everyday life, thereby increasing his overall personal happiness and satisfaction. All without any need to adopt a belief in God.

Just as one possible example. Maybe I'm way off base, but that's more or less how it appears to me

If that were the case I suppose my DMT trips would have no more value than regular deep dream states. I personally see no point in just trying to deny. I feel like telling myself it's not real all the time would get pretty old real quick.

I have had entities straight up tell me that they are real.. What good does it do me to question that over and over?

Sure, YOU feel that way because of YOUR experiences and beliefs and how these chemicals affect YOU. And that's fine. What I'm talking about is how they might affect someone else with OTHER experiences and OTHER beliefs differently, in such a way that they may be able to get at least as much real, tangible improvement in their real selves and their real lives. So how is that denying anything or saying it isn't "real"? I haven't said that these experiences are equivalent to regular dreams at all, I personally believe they are all together different. I'm just pointing out that it is possible to interpret them in a similar fashion and get something meaningful out of it without needing a belief in God.

Also for the record, I'm not saying this is how I personally view these things at all. I consider myself a very spiritual person and have a very beneficial relationship with my concept of "god". This concept just doesn't allow me to see my way as the right or only way, I am forced to consider all perspectives as equally valid. I am not downplaying the importance or personal significance of your vision by suggesting it could be interpreted differently. I'm simply pointing out that it CAN be, and that different people can experience the same thing in very different ways, for the sake of trying to help you understand the thing you said you wanted to know. If you're just going to automatically dismiss any answer that doesn't fit your own way of seeing things, what's the point of asking?

I wasn't trying to be dismissive of your viewpoint I was merley attempting to clarify my position.

Ever since I seriously began considering the idea that my trips contained actual paranormal phenomena it gave me a degree of control over the experience that i never had until I became flexible to the idea that there was something real going on.

I'ts called lucid tripping

I'm down with that, sounds good to me. And again, it's not even my own viewpoint per-se, it's just one of any number of possible ones that might work better for someone with a more rationalistic, logical mindset. I'm sure you can understand that Mr. Spock.

HF, was that post just in regards to me?

If so, I didn't say I didn't believe in spirituality. I'm actually quite interested in transcendentalism and Buddhism at this point in my life. I just don't believe in deities or angels, and the entities I "meet" I consider a part of myself.

Also Eliyahu, I see you constantly saying that entities have told you that they're "real" The word "real" is a little bit confusing here, because to me, the entities are real as well. With the possibility that contact with entities with psychedelics is an internal working, I don't think it makes the experience any less "real."

HF, was that post just in regards to me?

If so, I didn't say I didn't believe in spirituality. I'm actually quite interested in transcendentalism and Buddhism at this point in my life. I just don't believe in deities or angels, and the entities I "meet" I consider a part of myself.

Also Eliyahu, I see you constantly saying that entities have told you that they're "real" The word "real" is a little bit confusing here, because to me, the entities are real as well. With the possibility that contact with entities with psychedelics is an internal working, I don't think it makes the experience any less "real."

But haven't you been implying the psychedelic experience is basically all in your head?

To me that qualifies as imaginary/pretend or am I oversimplifying it?

It could "be all in your head." But if it is, why does that make it any less real? I think it is over simplifying it by assuming that it's not meaningful or "real" just because it occurs within one's own mind. I am proposing that is is only happening in one's own mind, but that it is possible that these internal realms one may experience with the help of psychedelics are just as real as consensus reality.

I assume by calling them "real" you're saying that they exist autonomously, and all I'm proposing is that they may exist internally.

Luckily, we don't have to reinvent the wheel.