The mystic trip: how psychedelic research fell for mysticism.
Richard Saville-Smith, Sharday Mosurinjohn
Psychopharmacology July 17, 2026 DOI: 10.1007/s00213-026-07119-3 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Mysticism |
| Keywords | Methodology Mystical experience questionnaire Psychedelics |
| Key points | Argues that the term 'mysticism' in psychedelic research is outdated and misleading, and advocates replacing the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) with a Psychedelic Experience Questionnaire (PEQ) to avoid a dubious quasi-religious construct. |
Abstract
This paper critiques the use of the term "mysticism" in psychedelic research, arguing its continued use is outdated and misleading. It highlights the confusion stemming from the historical context of "mysticism," particularly through the works of Walter Stace and Walter Pahnke, whose ideas have shaped the psychedelic discourse despite being flawed and largely unexamined. The paper is divided into two parts: the first is an archaeology that re-evaluates these foundational texts that misled psychedelic discourse; the second is a genealogy that traces how the concept of "mysticism", with its religious roots, became attached to "psychedelics" and became normalised in second generation psychedelic research. It advocates for rebranding the Mystical Experience Questionnaire (MEQ) to the Psychedelic Experience Questionnaire (PEQ), emphasising that this change accords nicely with the idea of Psychedelic Experience which Walter Pahnke developed in his later research, as a five-part typology, and liberates the instrument from the hangover of a dubious legacy in which the correlation between therapeutic outcomes and mystical experiences invites psychedelic experiences to be shoehorned into a very particular and peculiar quasi-religious construct.