Drugs and Phantasy.
Archives of Internal Medicine September 1, 1966 DOI: 10.1001/archinte.1966.00290150098021 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 3 |
| Population | Three students who received psilocybin, LSD, and Sernyl |
| Interventions | psilocybin LSD Sernyl |
| Topics | Psilocybin |
| Keywords | Statement logic Leaps Paragraph Magic telescope Epistemology World wide web Hallucinogen |
| Citations | 2 |
| Key points | Argues that the chapter's reliance on first-hand accounts from three students is insufficient to resolve the fundamental question about hallucinogenic experiences as an adjunct to life. |
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