As I said, I get it. There are other people reading this thread though, and maybe some of them don’t know much about a certain topic, let’s say DMT, so they might get the idea that there is a basis for associating DMT with vaccine deniers and weirdos, in particular since psychedelics already have a very bad rap since Nixon’s war on drugs, and on Leary in particular.
It would already help if, instead of stating “I don’t like people who are fans of DMT” (quotes or not), you simply say what you don’t appreciate about the crowd in question, e. g. their love of pseudo-science, harmful medical quackery, or whatever else they postulate that might potentially harm others. Put in a different way: there are plenty fans of DMT that probably are perfectly pleasant people.
Sorry, this is not targeted at you or anything and developed into a bit of a rant, but I’m myself trying to communicate better and that might come out unfiltered.
I’m with you on Joe Rogan though, he was never particularly clever, but the show was at least somewhat entertaining when he was just being a clueless meathead wanting to learn about the world. Now I consider it actively harmful.
To be completely honest, I missed where you said “I know what you mean,” so we’re probably on the same wavelength.
And I definitely could have elaborated on what I meant to make it more clear why I think many DMT advocates come on too strong and make their arguments starting from very flawed (and pseudoscientific) premises, but I got lazy and assumed we were mostly operating from the same experiences with the Joe Rogan crowd.
Thanks for helping me improve my argument and communication. Cheers and enjoy your weekend
As I said, I get it. There are other people reading this thread though, and maybe some of them don’t know much about a certain topic, let’s say DMT, so they might get the idea that there is a basis for associating DMT with vaccine deniers and weirdos, in particular since psychedelics already have a very bad rap since Nixon’s war on drugs, and on Leary in particular.
It would already help if, instead of stating “I don’t like people who are fans of DMT” (quotes or not), you simply say what you don’t appreciate about the crowd in question, e. g. their love of pseudo-science, harmful medical quackery, or whatever else they postulate that might potentially harm others. Put in a different way: there are plenty fans of DMT that probably are perfectly pleasant people.
Sorry, this is not targeted at you or anything and developed into a bit of a rant, but I’m myself trying to communicate better and that might come out unfiltered.
I’m with you on Joe Rogan though, he was never particularly clever, but the show was at least somewhat entertaining when he was just being a clueless meathead wanting to learn about the world. Now I consider it actively harmful.
To be completely honest, I missed where you said “I know what you mean,” so we’re probably on the same wavelength.
And I definitely could have elaborated on what I meant to make it more clear why I think many DMT advocates come on too strong and make their arguments starting from very flawed (and pseudoscientific) premises, but I got lazy and assumed we were mostly operating from the same experiences with the Joe Rogan crowd.
Thanks for helping me improve my argument and communication. Cheers and enjoy your weekend