Working with Weirdness: A Response to “Moving Past Mysticism in Psychedelic Science”

In this opposing viewpoint to ‘Moving Past Mysticism‘, an article which argued that ‘mystical’ constructs are overly laden with beliefs and do not suffice objective measurement, it is argued that ‘mystical experiences’ have a rich history of scientific investigation as the authors lay out a brief summary of their underlying constructs and empiric validation. They argue that the sole reliance on brain-based explanations is essentially a type of ‘neuroenchantment’ that ignores the transformative impact of subjective experiences on people’s lives, behavior, and values. The authors state that research should remain open to all varieties of the psychedelic experience, including weird and extraordinary states that do not conform to western culture and its expectations.

Abstract

“In response to a recent call to rid psychedelic science of the concept of mystical experience, we argue that acknowledging the varieties and weirdness of psychedelic experiences should be at the heart of any research program on this topic. We highlight the rich tradition and scientific tools for studying mystical-type experiences, their relevance for understanding the therapeutic effects of psychedelics, as well as the need for more diversity in the experiences and participants included in this research.”

Authors: Joost Breeksema & Michiel van Elk

Summary

Sanders and Zijlmans argue that psychedelic research should not focus on mystical experiences because they are unscientific and fraught with supernatural assumptions. We disagree and argue that mystical experiences are clinically and scientifically relevant.

1. CONFUSION BETWEEN MYSTICISM AND THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF ME

The authors dismiss mystical experiences as scientifically irrelevant or even wholly unempirical, but this is a straw man argument that does not do justice to the depth and complexity of this topic.

Sanders and Zijlmans argue that using the concept of MEs within psychedelic research smuggles in a supernatural interpretation of the experiences that people have under the influence of psychedelics. However, scientific research into mystical experiences is rich in insights into the mechanisms associated with these experiences.

William James was the first to systematically assess and categorize different types of religious experiences. He identified several characteristics of mystical experiences, including transcendence of space and time, feelings of unity and connectedness, a sense of awe, and positive emotions of love and peace.

Walter Pahnke’s 1962 “Good Friday experiment” was the first controlled scientific study to determine that psilocybin could reliably occasion MEs. A long-term follow-up found that psilocybin-occasioned MEs had enduring and positive effects on participants’ lives, careers, and life choices.

MEs are important determinants of quality of life, particularly in patients nearing the end of their lives, and can provide great ontological comfort, a greater sense of purpose in life, and increased connectedness with nature, loved ones, and family.

3. SCIENTIFIC TOOLS TO STUDY MYSTICISM

There are many excellent tools available to empirically study MEs, including the Hood Mysticism Scale, the Ego Dissolution Inventory, and the 5-Dimensions of Altered States of Consciousness scale. These scales have proven to be valuable in mapping out the phenomenology of nonordinary subjective experiences induced by different psychedelic substances. Qualitative research methods are particularly helpful to study, understand, and analyze these experiences, using a wealth of research techniques such as in-depth interviews, participant observation, and innovative methodologies such as microphenomenology.

4. A MANIFESTO FOR EMBRACING THE WEIRDNESS OF PSYCHEDELICS

Researchers are increasingly interested in microdosing psychedelics, in purely neuromechanical aspects of psychedelics, or in developing nonhallucinogenic “psychedelic” drugs. However, these studies do not take away from the subjective experience that psychedelics induce.

Contemporary psychological and neuroscientific research seems to focus on ordinary cognitive functions, while extraordinary states of consciousness are considered “fringe science” and remain beyond the scope of mainstream research. Psychedelics can induce experiences that cannot easily be understood within Western scientific epistemologies.

The weird status of psychedelic experiences is further complicated by the reliance on white, heterosexual, WEIRD participants in many studies.

Rather than narrowing our focus by discarding categories such as MEs, we should remain open to all varieties of psychedelic experience. Cross-cultural comparisons can help safeguard us against such a compartmentalized, Western-centric view about psychedelics and their alleged effects.

Over the past decades, a great number of explanatory mechanisms for psychedelics have been proposed, including neurobiological, autobiographical, emotional, cognitive, chemical, psychological, and indeed mystical explanations. However, it seems doubtful that a single explanatory framework will ever suffice, so psychedelic researchers should investigate all possible relevant angles and pathways of studying MEs.