Spoiler alert: We are part of something so much greater than ourselves. Love for everyone and everything is the meaning and purpose of life.

These insights are not what "the new science of psychedelics teaches us" because they are outside the realm of science. There are no experiments that will confirm the purpose of life or our unity with something greater. If we're going to remain scientists, all we can say is that these kinds of statements are often made by our psychedelic research test subjects, but is that really all we want to claim? Certainly, for the test subjects, these experiences are more than fodder for a mystical experience survey. They are statements about meaning, not scientific knowledge, which is exactly why the subjects are motivated to give up smoking, drinking, fear of death. They are not spoilers because just reading those sentences has little effect. Nor would a cognitive behavioral therapist get far by instructing the subjects to give up the cognitive distortions that oppose these truths in their brains. Suggested reading: [b:The Abyss of Madness|13717985|The Abyss of Madness|George E. Atwood|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1348634397s/13717985.jpg|19350657], by a psychologist who opposes the medical model and brings phenomenology back in to the treatment room.

On the issue of whether well people or sick ones should be administered the drugs, my experience is that often the main distinction between these two classes of people is whether they're culturally willing to see a therapist, and whether they can afford to do so.

I was drawn to this book because, like the author, I would like to see psychedelics return from their exile as schedule one drugs. I admit I still have trouble believing the authorities would ever sanction these inherently anti-authoritarian drugs. Like Bob Jesse (psychedelics advocate of whom Pollan writes) I'm not happy about the medicalization of these drugs (or of psychotherapy, for that matter) but understand that realistically it may be a necessary part of their path back to respectability.

It would be easy to make the mistake of evaluating this book by whether I agree with the author so let me address where I think the book succeeds and fails. It is very readable, written intelligently and encyclopedic in what it includes. It's part history, part personal essay, part science, and even part philosophy, e.g. "Henri Bergson, the French philosopher, [ . . .] conceived of the human mind as a kind of radio receiver, able to tune in to frequencies of energy and information that exist outside it." The issue at hand is whether consciousness is created by the brain or merely perceived by it. Michael and Henri are on opposite sides of this issue. Pollan goes into great detail on how psychedelics affect the brain backed up by fMRI, which didn't much interest me (another reviewer found this the best part!) because I'd read Dr. [a:Raymond Tallis|345338|Raymond Tallis|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1513796174p2/345338.jpg], a clinical fMRI expert who is on Henri's side of this debate.

One thing I found surprising was Pollan's interviews with potential guides. I had imagined that their great number of personal trips and their guiding experience would have given them wisdom, yet from my (I'm a psychotherapist) perspective, their clinical skill was lacking (unless Pollan's reporting was flawed) and yet they exuded great confidence in their guiding expertise. I'm not sure I'd be willing to trip with any of them.

Pollan questions the business model of psychedelic therapy--if one dose can cure you, won't it put therapists out of work? The answer is that one dose doesn't cure you. Serious lasting change will still take time. Pollan himself hasn't changed as much as he thinks he has and the guides he interviewed could use more therapy as well.

I did notice some minor errors--e.g. "Turn off your mind, relax and float downstream" was not original with John Lennon but came from The Tibetan Book of the Dead which had been made popular as a trip guide by the much maligned Timothy Leary.

3.5 stars rounded up to 4 as support to the cause.