Reader responses (here and on my new blog on the Psychology Today website) highlight both sides of the self as experienced with dissociative drugs (DXM and ketamine). There is a sense of being centred, perhaps while in free fall and watching the world go by, and there is a sense of freedom from constraints. You no longer care about the rules and regulations of that other world, the one you left behind, now that you are so very present in this one. On the other hand, you can’t seem to take this experience back home with you. So can it be of any real value? Without being moralistic about the fact that you got there with drugs, there’s also a real loss, a real sadness, about having to say goodbye to that magical place.
My own days of dissociating.
So what do I say to Charles? I used to drink bottles of DXM in my twenties (they hadn’t invented ketamine yet). I would sometimes drink a 250 ml bottle and then go to see a movie. Sitting there, melting in that cushy seat, I would feel that the movie had a special significance — that the people on the screen were really there for me, and I was a part of them. The people in the theater, breathing and whispering all around me, felt like an intimate tribe. (Then I’d try to leave the theater after everyone else, because I couldn’t walk without stumbling.) Or I’d sit on the Toronto subway brimming with exaltation. Every stop seemed a fantastic production, a special performance just for me. All that screeching of the brakes, the careening people, and finally….that glorious moment of stillness, punctuated by the dramatic whoosh of the opening doors — all at the same time! My emotions, my sense of astonishment, and the freedom of the moment were real. But it was a temporary reality. One that only crazy people can hold onto for good. In fact, ketamine is the drug that has been used most often to study the experience and the neurochemistry of schizophrenia. Hmmm….that doesn’t sound good.
A true self?
My diversions with dissociatives seem pretty juvenile compared to Charles’ existential struggles. Blockade your NMDA receptors for a few hours and you really will experience the world in a new way, you really will drop a lot of baggage, that baggage being all the rules, judgments, and mental habits you’ve been acquiring since infancy. Is there a true self left over when comprehension begins to disintegrate? For Charles it seems that way. He feels like he’s returned to his soul, or some reincarnated entity that came before birth or before the long road of knowledge acquisition, cognitive development, and increasing socialization that he’s followed ever since. But is this his true self?
Or is the true self rather the sum total of all that knowledge and comprehension, the tinker-toy configuration of familiarity that we build up over the years, as well as the peaceful, self-forgiving messages that blow through that complicated structure on good days? It seems to me that the true self actually includes the self-imposed constraints, rules of conduct, and uncomfortable habits that we’ve worked on for all these years. But also the energy and insight capable of changing them. If that’s so, then the true self might be something one wants to learn to accept, just as it is, with all its confusing habits. Rather than something one wants to relocate in a purified wonderland. Charles thinks he can find his soul by taking dissociatives. But I suspect that what he finds is a state of cognitive relaxation that can be very pleasant and that seems incredibly meaningful because it allows him to imagine himself at the centre of the universe.
Or maybe there’s a third answer. Maybe there is value in watching your values disintegrate, watching the rules melt away, just so you can finally get a glimpse of how those habits dominate you from day to day. If that’s the case, then Charles might be advised to see what’s left the next day: just loss, a headache, and some nausea….or is there some wisdom he can take with him?
Informed by unparalleled neuroscientific insight and written with his usual flare, Marc Lewis’s The Biology of Desire effectively refutes the medical view of addiction as a brain disease. A bracing and informative corrective to the muddle that now characterizes public and professional discourse on this topic.” —Gabor Maté, M.D., author of In The Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters With Addiction
I have trouble with the notion of a true self: I think it exists, but it is both subjective and dynamic. It is true to us, always; but because we’re so close to it we never see how it changes from one situation to the next. In fact, we generally deny this Protean quality about ourselves, but readily point it out as a flaw in others.
My question is whether Erikson and Marcia’s notion of ‘identity formation’ apply to Charles. Aren’t Western males supposed to find some kind of ‘indentity integration’ at around 30 years of age, at which point their sense of self is at least slightly more consistent?
And yet, if so much of our selfhood is the gradual accumulation of what we learn, from one situation to the next, isn’t some amount of dissociation healthy? Doesn’t it help us keep tabs on what we make up about ourselves and what really is more consistent?
As Bill Hicks once remarked about religious dogma: “A psychedelic experience [makes] you realize everything you learned is, in fact, just learned and not necessarily true.”
Erikson’s theory is, what, 60 years old? and Marcia’s must be about 20 or 30…. Sure the self is dynamic. Sometimes we appreciate that in others, and sometimes in ourselves. A nice simple word for “dynamic” is “flexible”. I’m working on that one, still, in my life, even though I’ve written about it for two decades….in theory.
But yes, I do agree that some amount of dissociation is healthy. Yesterday I was riding my bike along the river in Arnhem, and I was so caught up in the lacery of the trees that I almost veered off the bike path. (A nice touch, bike paths….a bit parallel to what we used to call “ground control” in the 60s.) So, that was dissociating. And it was lovely…and valuable. Even when dissociation comes through drugs, I don’t have a moral argument against it. My only arguments concern health and wellbeing. And, oh yeah, the serious loss issues when it just disappears.
Hi Marc:
I like this section about disassociation arising in the context of a pleasant experience. It is very interesting though you have me wondering about about an “absence seizure” or perhaps a “loss of presence seizure” which is very common though often dismissed as “being elsewhere, on cloud nine”, or other.
Having done the same sort of thing on motorcycles from time to time it is a risky endeavour for those in motion.
There is some talk about placing a small video cam in the dash allowing a computer to analyze the driver’s expression and buzz him/her back to Earth when it detects lack of focus ( disassociation?).
I find these experiences to be very interesting.
Might be better to induce these events during meditation, I am thinking.
An interesting study for me if it has not been done already is to capture some grad students and wire them up to record their brian states for a number of weeks to detect how often they are “not at home” and for how long.
As a fellow ‘experience-seeker’ in my twenties, lost and confused and trying to find myself and such, I can certainly relate to what Charles is going through. I’m still in the midst of figuring this all out, so I can only offer my opinions while still entrenched in the chaos.
I like the quote Dave offered from Bill Hicks: “A psychedelic experience [makes] you realize everything you learned is, in fact, just learned and not necessarily true.”
Those words mirror some of my thoughts on the issue. It feels to me like there is a third answer. Yes, the self must include the ego, the voice that judges, questions, worries and conforms. And I think the self also includes those deeper, freer parts of us that we experience more fully while on psychedelics or dissociatives. The self that is unashamed, uninhibited, completely free and alive.
But to go back to the Hicks quote – I really do think there is value in the self you discover or unveil when in an altered state of consciousness. We evolve devouring so many rules, messages, and beliefs about ourselves, but I don’t think these necessarily express what we really feel underneath, or what we want to feel. So many of these values are learned from the people around us, from the experiences we go through, but who is to say this is the way we have to be? The way we ‘truly’ are?
If I had grown up living with a tribe in the Sahara, would I have turned out differently? Most definitely. If I had grown up with a family that was divorce-free, would I have different beliefs and fears today? Most likely. So if there are so many ‘possible selves’ to consider, then I don’t believe the one we most frequently experience has to be absolute.
It’s certainly true that these profound experiences we have on drugs are temporary, and in the aftermath one must do a lot of work to pick up the pieces and try to meld these insights into our every lives and selves. Or rather, to try and shed the parts of ourselves that do not resonate with who we feel we really are.
I myself am struggling with this battle, and it’s confusing and difficult to say the least. But as long as my gut keeps telling me there is more to who I am, I’m determined to keep on searching.
I resonate and empathize with your struggle. But I can’t help thinking that there are many roads to the realization that what you’ve learned is not necessarily true.
When I did acid in the 60s and 70s, I got a serious glimpse of that insight. And it was powerful. But when I began to study psychology and brain science, I got an even better perspective on it. I came out of my studies thinking: well of course what you learn isn’t necessarily true! (in fact, delete “necessarily”) What you learn is what you learn. Your brain is a learning machine. That’s what it’s supposed to be (evolutionarily speaking). How could it evaluate “truth”?
Cognitive science has nothing to do with truth. And while that may be disappointing, in one way, it’s also refreshing. Cognitive science can teach us what drugs teach us … that we perceive, acquire, and use the information that comes from our sensory-motor exchanges with the world, and that becomes the template of all subsequent experience. That becomes our “context” …. our sense of what’s real.
I don’t regret my acid trips. But I’m very glad that I followed them up with a scientific investigation of the mind. Now, I really understand how learning shapes experience and insight. Perhaps this tarnishes my earlier notions of “truth”, but it also frees me to look for something like truth outside my own silly habits, values, and beliefs.
You seem surprised that your experiences shape your values, rules, and expectancies. I would be surprised if they didn’t! Of course they are not “true” or “absolute”. But they do determine how you feel, and that is a reality that we have to come to terms with.
Hi Marc:
As I recall my own experiences and read the comments to this post it occurs that we should give up “Garden of Eden” views of the human past whether it is in our collective or personal histories.
I think that if there were some semi tropical island continent of joyous naked vegans, where the fruit simply fell from the trees year round and where a benign Deity banned predation and seamlessly managed birth control and STDs we might submerge ourselves in cosmic oneness with our senses blooming in our consciousness with their full potentials.
As it is we have developed the cortex in order to avoid annihilation in an indifferent and frequently very adverse environment.
We see that human survival has been a very close run affair and though we have made it so far this outcome was in no means guaranteed and could well have ended in the scattering of a few bones long ago.
The cortex has both preserved us and increasingly sought to become the master of our hodgepodge brains. This has meant lives of constantly delayed gratification as the cortex considers threats versus opportunities and tries to shape possible future outcomes in a favorable direction no matter how much frustration that might mean in present circumstances.
Any drug that incapacitates or disassociates higher cortical centers partly or wholly permits the “true” unrestrained pleasure seeker to reassert him or herself. In this way we feel we are living more “authentically” than when we are fully under cortical restraint.
Any anxieties we may experience with regard to a given situation can simply be comfortably dismissed. These are the moments when we disregard risk and wait to see if we have acquired an STD, lost our jobs, marriages, become pregnant and possibly thrown away all or part of our future opportunities and satisfaction in life.
What we must come to terms with is a life with a lot of discomfort built into it if we want to accomplish anything or simply continue living reasonably comfortably. I have been reading about the training regimen followed by American hurdler Lolo Jones and what is striking is the fantastic degree of REAL painful suffering these elite athletes subject themselves to by an act of Will.
Nothing may be more deceptive and dangerous than what your “gut” tells you.. As uncomfortable and alienating it may seem we have no alternative but to go forward in developing the rational mind. If we decline, inevitable change will deprive us of any knowledge as our survival drops to zero.
True each individual must die some day so we declare this to be a “good” but we are in this together and I hope that each reader is not indifferent to the prospects for humanity upon our passing.
Mike, these are excellent thoughts, clearly expressed. Two responses come to mind.
First, the cortex evolved as an extension and overlord of the limbic system, which evolved as an extension of the thalamus/hypothalamus, etc. This trend is called encephalization, and it evolved right alongside our ability for stereoscopic vision. What does this imply? That as we became able to see and judge threats and opportunities FROM A DISTANCE, our evolving brains gave us more time to build in strategies for dealing with them. Yes, the cortex is strategic, and it has long been considered a master of inhibition….inhibiting lower brain systems. So, indeed, without it we are more spontaneous — by definition. And by necessity less likely to survive.
Second, because we live in our cortices, and our cortices process “culture” — and we do love our culture (which includes our partners, children, and friends, oh and our games), the cortex has a distinct silver lining. It’s where we accumulate and organize knowledge, and that knowledge is exactly what we live to pass on to other members of our culture. Some experts call our present era a knowledge society. Knowledge is our most precious commodity. So let’s be grateful to that wrinkled sheet of cells that allows us to live beyond our own limited lifespans!
Marc:
I just think it is your background that permits these sharp insights into the minds of other people ;-).
Striving to think better, aiming toward the best ways ( currently). I see I need to have a strong view on the term “encephalization” though I understand what you are pointing towards here.
This blog and your book have also demonstrated that when we examine our own or “human intelligence” in general we have to first understand that we are actually talking about “intelligence” as it has unfolded across 100s of millions of years and a nearly countless number of species nearly all entirely extinct. “Human Intelligence” turns out to be simply one range of expressions in a single species.
Many of the subassemblies of the human brain are 10s of millions of years old. Neurotransmitters like Serotonin and Dopamine are many 100 million years old as are many of the hormones and other biologically active chemicals are possibly a billion years old.
Even more oddly all the neural circuits in all living beings have been adapting for exactly the same amount of time. Humans have adapted in a different way than the nematode but all living designs are current.
So our “most human” are those who are more fully encephalized than their cousins. WOW. So we have this apparatus attempting to drive a simulation of the real world for the purpose of making predictions about force relationships that have yet to take place – possible future states that may or may not decohere with the notion that we might play a role in how this future state actually decoheres.
Since there are limits to how many different conscious phenomena any single being can keep in mind simultaneously these simulant models have to be shared as Culture.
No wonder then that our entire consciousness is almost entirely oriented toward the future. It would have no useful purpose otherwise. It seems there might be no present whatsoever. There is only the past and some number of possible future states that we may be able to influence if we can gather adequate predictive capability.
Being in the now could only be possible in some environment that was secured to a degree of innocuousness that was nearly incapable of threat or where threat was a very low probability.
This might only be possible with any significant frequency in an environment that had already been steam rolled to a featureless plane surface.
So this is the Source. If one opts for state of contentment characterized by gratification at the first opportunity the individual is wiped out immediately by the first creature able to acquire our life resources. The entire species goes more or less immediately unless its genetic information is vested in a form like plankton or even bacteria that is able to reproduce in truly astronomical numbers with no regard whatsoever for the “individual” example of the species.
So as life in a world became encephalized nearly continuous disappointment was engendered in the cause of living out one more day an perhaps one after that.
I think I will have to go reflect on this a bit now… 🙂
HI Marc,
You stated that ketamine hadn’t been invented when you were experimenting with dissociatives. So you were experimenting with DXM when you were younger than 11? Ketamine was invented in 1962. Now it didn’the really start being used recreationally until the early 70s… but oh wait in the early 70s you turned 20 so if you were using DXM in your 20s then ketamine had well indeed both been invented and was being used recreationally by a socially vocal following by that time. Such lack of fact checking lowers ones credibility with a portion of those they may wish to reach. Do be more careful.
Part 1 of this to part article made me think oh here is someone in the psychology community with and open mind. Part 2 made me realize though that as far too often happens someone with intellectual understand but lacking understanding through personal experience is simply going to miss the mark no matter how openminded they may be.
Even rather deep states of drug induced dissociation does not inherently mean loss of memory, understanding, connection, or all rational thought. Only the connection to and processing of the incoming sensory data is inherently disrupted and even lost. This does leave one with internal data only which includes knowledge of self, location body (i.e. at home in bad), presence of companions (i.e.significant others, cats, etc.), current personal preoccupations and struggles, and personal history/memories .
There can be loss when leaving the state but there can also be lasting adjustments to how one views oneself, ones relationships, and the world around them, even experience a strong lasting sense of spiritual ballance and we’ll being follow use of certain dissociatives that aren’t imparted by other substances. I suggest the same sense of loss can be experienced after attending an exciting event like a concert or christmass morning. Does that mean the event was not valuable and should not have been attended? Those I have talked to who have experienced this spiritual part have said that it is in part due to the sense that removed from push of the sensory and left with just the internal they experience an unmolested sense of self and a wholeness not achieved elseware, similar to what can be gained from deep meditation. I posit they are both paths to the same thing.