Drugs and Phantasy.
Archives of Internal Medicine – September 01, 1966
Source: OpenAlex
Summary
A critical review challenges the logic behind some psychedelic research, particularly regarding the fundamental question of Psilocybin's role in life. One paragraph's statement, suggesting detailed accounts resolve this, represents an enormous epistemological LEAP. Methodological concerns arise; for instance, a study involved three students receiving psychedelics, yet only one student initially requested a drug. Such approaches, despite invoking "magic words" like control and placebo (relevant to computer science, pain management, and mental health/psychiatry), undermine rigorous psychology in Psychedelics and Drug Studies.
Abstract
The final paragraph of the 20-page chapter "A Brief Review" (and it is, by-and-large, a good review) reads: "We feel that detailed first-hand accounts of experiencesas they occurred(typescripts of tape recordings) by subjects, screened for stability, in sensorilly controlled environments, will help to resolve the question of whether the hallucinogenic experience should be an available adjunct to life." That statement leaves one rather puzzled: if such an account can resolve or help resolve a question as fundamental as the one posed, I would consider this one of the longest inductive leaps. After the obeisance given to the signals such as control, placebo, and other magic words, can one so readily accept the account of three students each of whom (save one) received psilocybin, LSD, as well as Sernyl at separate times? Another statement in the introduction leaves me equally nonplused, namely that only one student requested a drug