The article analyzes Erowid trip reports to understand common visual hallucinations experienced on psychedelics. By processing thousands of reports, the author identifies recurring visual themes, categorized as "form constants." These include spirals, lattices, vortexes, and other geometric patterns, often accompanied by visual distortions like breathing walls and morphing objects. The analysis also highlights the influence of set and setting, showing how factors like dosage, substance, and environment impact the intensity and nature of visuals. Ultimately, the research aims to demystify psychedelic experiences and provide a data-driven understanding of the subjective effects of these substances.
John Salvatier's blog post argues that reality is far more detailed than we typically assume or perceive. We create simplified mental models to navigate the world, filtering out the vast majority of information. This isn't a flaw, but a necessary function of our limited cognitive resources. However, these simplified models can lead us astray when dealing with complex systems, causing us to miss crucial details and make inaccurate predictions. The post encourages cultivating an appreciation for the richness of reality and actively seeking out the nuances we tend to ignore, suggesting this can lead to better understanding and decision-making.
Hacker News users discussed the implications of Salvatier's post, with several agreeing on the surprising richness of reality and our limited capacity to perceive it. Some commenters explored the idea that our simplified models, while useful, inherently miss a vast amount of detail. Others highlighted the computational cost of simulating reality, arguing that even with advanced technology, perfect replication remains far off. A few pointed out the relevance to AI and machine learning, suggesting that understanding this complexity is crucial for developing truly intelligent systems. One compelling comment connected the idea to "bandwidth," arguing that our senses and cognitive abilities limit the amount of reality we can process, similar to a limited internet connection. Another interesting observation was that our understanding of reality is constantly evolving, and what we consider "detailed" today might seem simplistic in the future.
Robin Hanson describes his experience with various "status circles," groups where he feels varying degrees of status and comfort. He outlines how status within a group influences his behavior, causing him to act differently in circles where he's central and respected compared to those where he's peripheral or unknown. This affects his willingness to speak up, share personal information, and even how much fun he has. Hanson ultimately argues that having many diverse status circles, including some where one holds high status, is key to a rich and fulfilling life. He emphasizes that pursuing only high status in all circles can lead to anxiety and missed opportunities to learn and grow from less prestigious groups.
HN users generally agree with the author's premise of having multiple status circles and seeking different kinds of status within them. Some commenters pointed out the inherent human drive for social comparison and the inevitable hierarchies that form, regardless of intention. Others discussed the trade-offs between broad vs. niche circles, and how the internet has facilitated the pursuit of niche status. A few questioned the negativity associated with "status seeking" and suggested reframing it as a natural desire for belonging and recognition. One compelling comment highlighted the difference between status seeking and status earning, arguing that genuine contribution, rather than manipulation, leads to more fulfilling status. Another interesting observation was the cyclical nature of status, with people often moving between different circles as their priorities and values change.
Summary of Comments ( 61 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43171007
HN commenters discuss the methodology of analyzing Erowid trip reports, questioning the reliability and representativeness of self-reported data from a self-selected group. Some point out the difficulty in quantifying subjective experiences and the potential for biases, like recall bias and the tendency to report more unusual or intense experiences. Others suggest alternative approaches, such as studying fMRI data or focusing on specific aspects of perception. The lack of a control group and the variability in dosage and individual responses are also raised as concerns, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the typical psychedelic experience. Several users share anecdotes of their own experiences, highlighting the diverse and unpredictable nature of these altered states. The overall sentiment seems to be one of cautious interest in the research, tempered by skepticism about the robustness of the methods.
The Hacker News post "What do people see when they're tripping? Analyzing Erowid's trip reports" has generated a moderate number of comments, most focusing on the methodology and interpretation of the Erowid trip report data analysis presented in the linked article.
Several commenters express skepticism about the validity of using Erowid trip reports as a basis for scientific analysis. They point out the inherent biases in self-reported data, including the possibility of exaggeration, memory distortion, and the influence of set and setting (the user's mindset and environment). One commenter notes that people who have intensely negative or uneventful experiences might be less likely to report them, skewing the data towards more positive and unusual experiences. Another highlights the difficulty in quantifying subjective experiences like hallucinations, suggesting that the attempt to categorize them into neat buckets might oversimplify the complex and highly individual nature of psychedelic experiences.
Some commenters also question the statistical methods employed in the analysis. They argue that the article's approach to clustering similar words together might not accurately reflect the actual subjective experience of the user. For instance, the clustering of seemingly unrelated words might be an artifact of the method rather than a genuine connection within the trip experience.
However, other commenters find the analysis intriguing, even with its limitations. They appreciate the attempt to bring a more data-driven perspective to understanding psychedelic experiences. One points out the value of large-scale qualitative data like Erowid reports in generating hypotheses for further, more rigorous research. Another commenter mentions the potential for such analyses to inform harm reduction strategies by identifying common themes and patterns in difficult experiences.
A few commenters share personal anecdotes about their own psychedelic experiences, relating them to the categories described in the article. These anecdotes provide a more grounded and personal perspective on the often abstract discussion of psychedelic phenomena.
Overall, the comments on Hacker News reflect a mixture of skepticism and curiosity regarding the article's analysis of Erowid trip reports. While acknowledging the limitations of the data and methodology, many commenters see the value in attempting to analyze and understand these experiences in a more systematic way. The discussion highlights the ongoing tension between the subjective and scientific approaches to studying altered states of consciousness.