> What does society look like when science starts investigating consciousness with a more eastern philosophy lens?
I doubt that will happen to any effective or substantial degree, "science" is concerned with the quantitative and objective reproducibility. It is impossible for a scientist to fully assimilate the state of someone who is experiencing a "satori", without them either being that person or also experiencing a satori themselves. And if they achieve that, which is unlikely, they are back at square one: how are they going to relay the satori to other scientists for documentation and further research: what is there to research with regards to inner experience when the only known modes of knowledge in science are all outward?
Rather, scientists look for effects with whatever physical tools are available to them, such as changes in brain center blood flow; and then they tend to conflate the effects as the causes. IE. it's the changes in the brain causing the satori, not the satori causing the changes in the brain!
Several recent books on the topic present psychedelics as a tool for Science. Most link to the famous quote from Stan Grof on psychedelics as the "microscope" for the mind (or telescope). It really does not look like getting through the Eastern philosophy lens... And the new center's backers seem motivated by the tooling potential too...
---
The books I refer to include Pollan's recent book (cited several times in this thread), some of Grof publications, "A Really Good Day" by Ayelet Waldman, a plethora of "reports" from people's experience on Medium, and preview on Consciousness Medicine from Françoise Bourzat.
There certainly is a large overlap between people who are advocates of one or the other. Though I think, coming from the eastern philosophy side of things, the association is kind of strange. Literally, withholding from intoxicants is part of the five householder precepts in Buddishm & Taoism, maybe in others as well . With good reason (my opinion). At least from a vipassana perspective, anything like psychedelics will just get in the way.
That being said, I like the idea of using these kind of tools in a controlled setting for treating certain psychological issues. I hope they're careful in not getting too many people zonked out on newly created mental constructions. Though I suppose its better to be happy than depressed, regardless of the conditions surrounding it.
The key word here being, "intoxicants". All medicines are not intoxicating. Giving one access to pure nondualistic states of consciousness, in a safe, controlled, and intentional setting, as many entheogenic medicines are capable of doing, is the exact opposite of intoxicating.
Also, the Buddhist lineage it sounds like you are referring to is one of many. Because you mention vipassana, I'm guessing Theravada / Hinayana. There are other vehicles that have different precepts & ontologies, e.g. Mahayana and Vajrayana.
That being said, I do firmly believe that having a solid foundation will benefit any experience in expanded states of consciousness induced by psychedelic medicines. This foundation can be nurtured and supported through myriad means such as meditation, therapy, and other forms of mindfulness-based, somatically-oriented practices.
With this foundation in place, it is not uncommon for people to reach much deeper states of meditative capacity and awareness through the careful use of these substances. This is why, within the guide communities, it's often said that a single daylong guided experience can be equivalent to attending a 1-month silent meditation retreat, or 5 to 10 years of psychotherapy.
Sure, there are different points of view and you have pointed that out. My point was that the conflation of meditation and psychedelics is not something which is universally true, or at least not universally accepted.
From my personal view, there is no comparison to 'that' and getting my every day perspective closer to it. I think psychedelics can be interesting to see that change is possible, that things are not set in stone, least of all your mind, but it's ultimately proven to be no real solution (for me :) )
> Though I think, coming from the eastern philosophy side of things, the association is kind of strange.
I think the primary common interest is the meditation aspect due to the similarities in effects, but then out of that often comes similar viewpoints on life.
> At least from a vipassana perspective, anything like psychedelics will just get in the way.
No doubt they have an effect, but in what way do you think they "get in the way"?
I believe that to some degree it can give one somewhat of a sense of what meditation can achieve without expending serious effort. The "pushback" from the meditation community is puzzling to me, but then all of this is human nature isn't it, so it shouldn't be surprising I guess.
