• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Terrence McKenna & UFOs

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

conor

Skilled Investigator
Not counting all of his New Age 2012 singularity stuff, what do you guys think of his views on UFOs?

I'm going to post 2 links to youtube videos.

I think these are interesting videos, one in which he recounts a UFO experience and one in which he gives a theory as to what is behind the phenonemon. Interesting stuff IMO. What do you guys think?


 
I think he may have been on to something. The fact that most researchers would reject reports of events that occurred while the experiencer was pharmacologically modified seems extremely short-sighted and prejudiced. You might want to check out Richard Strassman's research if you haven't already.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
the dennis mckenna 'paratopia' episode was fascinating, anyone who's not listened to that definitely should.

I'm no 'researcher' so I don't know if he's sold any 'colonic harmonizers' to ruin his reputation but maybe he could be future paracast guest?

be great to hear gene & david's take on his and terrences work...
 
I'd heartily recommend, as Jeff Ritzmann did on his recent Paratopia episode, the podcast lecture Terrence McKenna gave. It's available through iTunes at the Psychedelic Salon and his talk is simply called, "UFOs".
It's a head-spinner!
 
itsthenoise said:
the dennis mckenna 'paratopia' episode was fascinating, anyone who's not listened to that definitely should.

I'm no 'researcher' so I don't know if he's sold any 'colonic harmonizers' to ruin his reputation but maybe he could be future paracast guest?

be great to hear gene & david's take on his and terrences work...
Click to expand...

Thankfully, he never sold any colonic harmonisers. He is mainly known as being a big advocate of psychedelic drugs and was one of the main proponents of what he called the 2012 singularity.
 
Found this video on an old thread from 2007, posted bya guy called RedClover. If you're reading this, cheers! We're fellow "Paranormal Mavins"!

This video is even better. The collective unconsciousness seems to organise itself in the symbols of the day, whatever they might be, and always manifests itself from the fringes of belief and thought, to aliens and angels and demons and even fairies and leprechauns. The unconscious, collective or otherwise, seems to be the "final frontier", without language, primordial in the sense that it's language is symbolic imagery, but also beyond the box that language puts things in, beyond sensible description from one individual to another. The form it takes is one from the fringes of culture, denizens of other worlds, written or spoken about in our most fantastical tales, when a definite point is being made about our humanity in general. They warn us of things past the individual.

"They are us!" as Grant Morrison said after his experience in Katmandu. Anyway, here's the video (again, thanks RedClover)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3163231789026536985&q=terence+mckenna
 
McKenna's view of UFOs was Jungian in part. He considered them an externalization of the collective psyche's need to be overwhelmed by the supernatural ( more or less ) . He states several times that their role was to "erode faith in science" . Materialistic science has dominated all educated opinions for many decades now, and his idea was that unexplained UFOs were originating form ourselves, our minds, to show that science cannot explain everything. He didn't subscribe to the theory that they were from outer space, even after witnessing one.
He was a brilliant guy, I saw his speak a few times.
 
conor said:
...what do you guys think of his views on UFOs?
Click to expand...

Funny I started a thread with this lecture on McKenna's theories concerning UFOs that raised some hackles several months ago. Its funny how some folks will quickly dismiss someone or something with a nasty sniff without doing any research. IMO McKenna was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th Century. His views on consciousness are among the most insightful I've ever encountered. And I don't care what the naysayers out there think about this opinion. I've done my research and devoured over a 100 hours of McKenna's amazing lectures, read three of his books, done copious amounts of psychedelics (back in my youth) met the "machine elves" etc. IMO psychedelic substances are wondrously important and may be a shortcut into understanding human consciousness.
 
christopher o'brien said:
Funny I started a thread with this lecture on McKenna's theories concerning UFOs that raised some hackles several months ago. Its funny how some folks will quickly dismiss someone or something with a nasty sniff without doing any research. IMO McKenna was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th Century. His views on consciousness are among the most insightful I've ever encountered. And I don't care what the naysayers out there think about this opinion. I've done my research and devoured over a 100 hours of McKenna's amazing lectures, read three of his books, done copious amounts of psychedelics (back in my youth) met the "machine elves" etc. IMO psychedelic substances are wondrously important and may be a shortcut into understanding human consciousness.
Click to expand...

I think it is too premature to discount any plausible theory related to this phenomena. I had a dream of ufo's twenty years ago which I wrote down. I described them as "mandalas with skulls" before I really knew what a mandala was. Recently I was exposed to Jung's theory that UFO's are mandala symbols. Imagine my surprise....

Edit: I should also note that at the time of the dream, I had had no exposure to Jung either.
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
I honestly do not understand the fascination with this marginal character, Terrence McKenna.
Click to expand...

That's pretty safe. Care to elaborate? McKenna has always been an interesting thinker in my opinion, and as with any other person espousing his theories on things you don't necessarily have to agree with his solutions or answers. The subject matter he puts forth excluding his own personal view on it I find quite imaginative, and not very common.
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
I honestly do not understand the fascination with this marginal character, Terrence McKenna.
Click to expand...


Marginal? I couldn't agree less. I'd easily say he was one of the most articulate and compelling speakers and thinkers of the 20th century. Marginal has no place in his description. Are you even familiar with him? Do you understand his ideas?
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
What about his thinking do you find compelling? Which ideas or concepts do you like? Is it his 2012 horseshit, perhaps?
Click to expand...

Nice loaded question there ...
Anyway, No, I don't think his 2012 theories are quite accurate, although his ideas about that were not the same as these new age doomsday fables that the media is churning out these days. The underlying theory that there is an attractor that is drawing time toward a certain concrescence I do think is extremely interesting and even plausible, but attaching a date like 2012 to it is probably wrong. By the way, he always admitted that his 2012 theory was extremely far fetched and unlikely, and said he didn't blame people for not buying it since he had no proof.
But, 2012 was just a small part, and the least interesting of his ideas I think. His ideas on consciousness, his social criticism, his understanding of linguistics and how language shapes the world and psyche, his botanical knowledge, his dry humor, his thoughts about the laws against drugs and expanding one's own consciousness, his knowledge of alchemical writings, marxism, religion, etc. -THAT stuff is compelling and it outweighs the 2012 theory. He wasn't perfect, but the guy was a unique human with a rare skill for relaying information and stretching the bounds of thought.
 
"The underlying theory that there is an attractor that is drawing time toward a certain concrescence I do think is extremely interesting and even plausible, but attaching a date like 2012 to it is probably wrong."


Why do you think it's plausible? What do you mean by "drawing time toward a certain concrescence?"
 
I am not the one claiming that his so-called thinking is compelling, O'Brien. I am not asking for anyone to do research for me. Rather, I'm asking for those who are making statements about McKenna to elucidate their claims. This is not unlike the burden of proof. I am interested in exposing the fact that probably none of the people talking about McKenna here has the slightest idea what they're talking about. Care to join the discussion? Or perhaps you're more interested in starting a religion about Chris Angel?

Thanks for the links but I have no interest in hearing more of McKenna.
 
I am interested in exposing the fact that probably none of the people talking about McKenna here has the slightest idea what they're talking about.

What a fucking assumption, whoa. So that's your agenda? You're just starting shit with people, great way to waste time I guess. Sounds more like trolling.
You want me to have serious discussion with you about this stuff? No, you don't. Clearly you don't know what you're talking about, or what McKenna was talking about. You don't have the slightest notion of what I or anyone else understands, so humble yourself and don't assume others have the same limitations you do.
 
There's really no need to get all touchy here. Someone challenges the value of your guru's thinking and, rather than defend him with reason, you start insulting me? What is up with that?

You claim that there exists an "attractor that is drawing time toward a certain concrescence." Fine. What is that attractor? What evidence is there to indicate that time, whatever you mean by that, is being drawn towards a certain concrescence. Also, define "certain concrescence." All I'm asking you do to is to fulfill the burden of your claims by explaining just what in the hell you're talking about. I suspect that you cannot because there's absolutely no meaning behind anything you're stating. It's all nonsense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top