jahsjahs

Gareth Evans' 1978 1-pager "Can There Be Vague Objects?" is notable both for its brevity, and for its significance.

https://academic.oup.com/analysis/article-abstract/38/4/208/...

Your perspective can't be dismissed.

From my perspective, to put my anecdotal experience beside yours, I know many very stable, very loving, very intelligent people who use LSD occasionally. These people generally don't talk about it, or haphazardly recommend it to others. But they do enjoy the experience of altered consciousness, and the experience of experimenting with new thoughts and perspective.

If it is a damaging drug, as you claim, then these people emerge from their trips strengthened from the harm. If it has irrevocably altered their personalities, then it has done so to their benefit.

LSD, like other drugs, is a way to play. There are those who take it too seriously - this crowd are as ridiculous to outsiders as the whisky, coffee, or marijuana enthusiast. But for most, it is simply a safe and reasonable way to spend a day in leisure.

Whenever discussion of the DSM arises, I tend to revert to Ian Hacking's critique of the guide (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n15/ian-hacking/lost-in-the-forest).

I'm a big fan of his contributions in the philosophy of science, which perhaps gives his opinion more weight than it should on psychiatric matters (Rewriting the Soul, and Mad Travellers are excellent books).

Is this criticism mistaken though?