I've seen a lot of emphasis in the psychedelic community on 'meaningful' or 'intentional' use vs. recreational use, with an implied judgment that recreational use is somehow lesser. I've had both kinds of experiences and they've both been valuable in different ways. Is the meaningful/recreational distinction useful or is it just gatekeeping?
Reply #1 · ▲ 312 upvotes
The meaningful/recreational frame exists because the clinical research that created a lot of the current public interest was explicitly intentional — therapeutic context, trained guides, intention-setting. People extrapolated a normative claim from a methodological choice.
Reply #2 · ▲ 289 upvotes
What matters is respect for the substance and honest relationship with your motivations. Someone taking psilocybin at a festival who is fully consenting, well-prepared, and genuinely present is doing something different from someone using it to dissociate from pain they don't want to address. The label 'recreational' covers both of those very different things.
Reply #3 · ▲ 401 upvotes
Both types of use have their place. Insisting every experience needs a therapeutic framework misunderstands what these substances do. Beauty, wonder, joy, connection — these are legitimate ends, not just byproducts of healing.
231 more replies — forum posting coming soon.
← Back to Experiences