• Orbituary
    link
    English
    352 months ago

    Semantics are hard.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -4
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      To be honest I hope my comment helps people understand the nature of psychedelics. Think of it as tl:dr

      • Cadeillac
        link
        English
        72 months ago

        Can something synchronize in a different way without first desynchronizing?

        • @Dasus
          link
          English
          -4
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’d say yes.

          If you have two instruments playing the same tune, they’re synchronised. You can keep them in sync, even when the tune changes, as long as it changes in the same way for both instruments.

          • Cadeillac
            link
            English
            52 months ago

            That is still the same two instruments in sync. There was not a new resynchronization

            • @Dasus
              link
              English
              -42 months ago

              They’re synchronising on a different wave length.

              I don’t know how else you’d “synchronise differently”?

              You’ve changed the tone. It’s a new thing. A different thing playing.

              Yet at no point were the instruments out of sync.

              I’m not arguing psychedelics don’t desync the brain (I feel the do sort of retune the instrument as it were, only for it to be better able to sync with others), I’m arguing you can stay in sync while changing what is that is in sync.

              • Cadeillac
                link
                English
                12 months ago

                Yeah, no, that makes no sense, furthering my point that you can’t. The instruments are what is in sync. Not the music. Tone doesn’t matter. If the instruments remain in the same synchronization, then they are just still synchronized

                • @Dasus
                  link
                  English
                  -3
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  synchronization

                  noun

                  the operation or activity of two or more things at the same time or rate.

                  The instruments are “in sync” because of what is being played on them, not from the mere fact of being musical instruments. To get two instruments being played in sync, you’d need two (or one very skilled) musicist to play them. I couldn’t play in sync with anyone, I wouldn’t know how.

                  • Cadeillac
                    link
                    English
                    12 months ago

                    We’re not going to come to an agreement man, I’m bowing out

          • Orbituary
            link
            English
            01 month ago

            Wow. Now explain poly-rhythms and asyncopated comping. You sound like a musical genius. /s

            • @Dasus
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Yeah no, I’m not too shabby on musical theory.

              Resolve a debate in a separate sub-thread of the comment you replied to.

              When two people play instruments, and they’re playing at the same tempo (although this is prolly a simplification), are they not in sync at that point?

              Or would they not?

              No, I’m no musical genius, or even an amateur, it’s one of mh worst subjects, musical theory, but it seems to me that if we were to use the analogy of music to psychedelics, I think it would be a bit disingenuous to say the brain desyncs, unless it’s in a similar way as with a phase shift in music, but since that sort of still sounds good, wouldn’t we be able to argue phase music is still “in sync”?

              Synchronisation has a lot of meanings depending on context. Biology, neurobiology, music, physics, friggin timetables.

              So yeah, your expertise in music is of little use except to improve this analogy. I feel like you can’t comment on the original topic as much. Psychedelics and their pharmacology and neuropsychiatric effects.

              I’ll be pleased to be proved wrong though.

              • Orbituary
                link
                English
                01 month ago

                Ok. Based on what? Definitely not that I cultivate and grow psilocybin. Couldn’t be that. Nor could it be that I make DMT as well. Definitely wouldn’t inform me on this topic at all. Moreover, I’m probably awful at all that music stuff, too. Shit, what could a faceless, nameless stranger on the internet know about anything? Probably not much.

                You win.

                • @Dasus
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Based on your very lackluster understanding of their effects.

                  “That I make DMT”

                  Lol, pretend harder kiddo. Yeah, most organisms do in fact make DMT, but you’re talking about EXTRACTING DMT from plant-material which has enough alkaloids for it to be worth it. So what you’re pretending to be some arcane drug knowledge is you googling “easiest highs” and trying some of the simpler guides like rice-tek and perhaps an exctraction of either some reeds you collected or a small bag of imported plant material. I’m of the people who wrote those guides.

                  You can equivocate all you want, but you’re still dodging the fucking question about the subject. No point in trying to pretend to be an expert without any knowledge. It just shows people that you’re a pretentious teen.

                  • Orbituary
                    link
                    English
                    01 month ago

                    Yep. You’re the super-winner now. Got me.