Ayahuasca, psychedelic studies and health sciences: the politics of knowledge and inquiry into an Amazonian plant brew.

Kenneth W Tupper, Beatriz C Labate
{"title":"Ayahuasca, psychedelic studies and health sciences: the politics of knowledge and inquiry into an Amazonian plant brew.","authors":"Kenneth W Tupper,&nbsp;Beatriz C Labate","doi":"10.2174/1874473708666150107155042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article offers critical sociological and philosophical reflections on ayahuasca and other psychedelics as objects of research in medicine, health and human sciences. It situates 21st century scientific inquiry on ayahuasca in the broader context of how early modern European social trends and intellectual pursuits translated into new forms of empiricism and experimental philosophy, but later evolved into a form of dogmatism that convenienced the political suppression of academic inquiry into psychedelics. Applying ideas from the field of science and technology studies, we consider how ayahuasca's myriad ontological representations in the 21st century--for example, plant teacher, traditional medicine, religious sacrament, material commodity, cognitive tool, illicit drug--influence our understanding of it as an object of inquiry. We then explore epistemological issues related to ayahuasca studies, including how the indigenous and mestizo concept of \"plant teacher\" or the more instrumental notion of psychedelics as \"cognitive tools\" may impact understanding of knowledge. This leads to questions about whether scientists engaged in ayahuasca research should be expected to have personal experiences with the brew, and how these may be perceived to help or hinder the objectivity of their pursuits. We conclude with some brief reflections on the politics of psychedelic research and impediments to academic knowledge production in the field of psychedelic studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":72730,"journal":{"name":"Current drug abuse reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"35","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current drug abuse reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874473708666150107155042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35

Abstract

This article offers critical sociological and philosophical reflections on ayahuasca and other psychedelics as objects of research in medicine, health and human sciences. It situates 21st century scientific inquiry on ayahuasca in the broader context of how early modern European social trends and intellectual pursuits translated into new forms of empiricism and experimental philosophy, but later evolved into a form of dogmatism that convenienced the political suppression of academic inquiry into psychedelics. Applying ideas from the field of science and technology studies, we consider how ayahuasca's myriad ontological representations in the 21st century--for example, plant teacher, traditional medicine, religious sacrament, material commodity, cognitive tool, illicit drug--influence our understanding of it as an object of inquiry. We then explore epistemological issues related to ayahuasca studies, including how the indigenous and mestizo concept of "plant teacher" or the more instrumental notion of psychedelics as "cognitive tools" may impact understanding of knowledge. This leads to questions about whether scientists engaged in ayahuasca research should be expected to have personal experiences with the brew, and how these may be perceived to help or hinder the objectivity of their pursuits. We conclude with some brief reflections on the politics of psychedelic research and impediments to academic knowledge production in the field of psychedelic studies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
死藤水,迷幻研究和健康科学:对亚马逊植物酿造的知识和探究的政治。
这篇文章提供了对死藤水和其他迷幻药作为医学、健康和人文科学研究对象的批判性社会学和哲学反思。它将21世纪对死藤水的科学研究置于更广阔的背景下,即早期现代欧洲社会趋势和知识追求如何转化为新形式的经验主义和实验哲学,但后来演变成一种教条主义形式,方便了对迷幻药学术研究的政治压制。运用科学和技术研究领域的思想,我们考虑死藤水在21世纪的无数本体论表征——例如,植物教师、传统医学、宗教圣礼、物质商品、认知工具、非法药物——如何影响我们对死藤水作为研究对象的理解。然后,我们探讨了与死藤水研究相关的认识论问题,包括土著和混血儿的“植物老师”概念或迷幻药作为“认知工具”的更具工具性的概念如何影响对知识的理解。这就引出了这样的问题:从事死藤水研究的科学家是否应该被期望有个人酿造的经历,以及这些经历如何被视为有助于或阻碍他们追求的客观性。最后,我们对致幻剂研究的政治和致幻剂研究领域学术知识生产的障碍进行了一些简要的反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Preface. Meet Our Editor-in-Chief Proceeding of the 8th Alcohol Hangover Research Group Meeting. Development of a Definition for the Alcohol Hangover: Consumer Descriptions and Expert Consensus. A Review of the Physiological Factors Associated with Alcohol Hangover.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1