Do you believe "Doc" is real?

[pazuzu]

<...>If a person suffering from some schizo-type disorder, and using LSD, has it cured, never to bother them again, exactly what is this called? Brain damage? What great loss have they endured to be free of a crippling disabling disease?
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

There still remains a lot of questions, so you're sort of stretching it here. Even a gunshot wound may be good for you, given the right circumstances, damaging faulty nerves that later heal up to be completely good again. I'd still argue that a gunshot wound is primarily damaging and unhealthy.
It may not be a fair comparison, and LSD may have truly benefitial consequences, but I would argue that you can't know that. Healing damaged nerves isn't an aspect of a gunshot wound that one can espect to happen, the same goes for curing mental illness with LSD. Also, the possibility of LSD curing mental illness is in no way an argument for using the drug for other purposes.
From a general perspective based on common sence, as you apply at the end, one could say that if the brain isn't allready damaged you shouldn't try and fix it.

More on the losses at the end of my already way too long post.

And for the most part, these were permanent changes. The raising of IQ continued to exist after the drug wore off. So if the brain is being damaged, how does one explain the increased mental function with the actual science involved to back it up?
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

I may be starting a huge off topic discussion here, but I strongly believe that IQ-tests mostly describe current level of education. Learning abilities, creativity, social aptitude (did I use that word correct?) and empathy is left out. With a heavy reliance on mathematical thinking and recognition IQ-tests would not necessarily prove increased mental function. The use of LSD may for some reason help someone giving them a more efficient memory or something similar that would benefit them in IQ-tests, but saying this is an application of LSD is stretching it by far.
<simplistic and bad phrasing>
To keep it simple, lets say that giving the brain a neurotic shock sometimes increases the efficiency of your memory, and that LSD occationally may give you the right kind of a neurotic shock to do this. If so, it's the shock, not LSD that is the desired tool. One could probably find better and safer ways to do this, without the enourmous risks.
</simplistic and bad phrasing>

The new receptors being created while on LSD are actually better and function a great deal better than the "normal" receptors that we are born with. (Although not for everybody. Some folks get paradise, others go to hell)
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

I'd sort of like to see links to sources on this one, if you've got them.
However, if I interpret you correctly here, some people get good receptors and some people get bad receptors. In other word the average receptors created with the use of LSD are completely normal?

This, together with the possible losses are the strong points against the use of LSD, more about this at the end.

<...> One does not need to be a physicist and understand the complex workings of a microwave to make it heat up some leftovers. The common person can not explain the inner workings, but, they can observe that by pressing the "1" button, the microwave will heat a something for one minute. They might not know how it works, they only know that it works.
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

This is true in the case of a microwave, of course. However, it is dangerous to assume it is true for all things complex.
Cramming a long series of causes and effects into one big cause and effect is faulty logic at best.

After a lot of thought last night, and some time spent milking my goats this morning and discussing it with them, they all agree that most of your opinions on the issue are "baahaahaahaad" and that maybe you should reconsider.
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

:lol:
Some people say it's the logical arguments and strong opinions you give us they wish they were able to convey themselvses; I'd settle for your ingenious tone and ability to crack people up while making them think.

I retract my statement that I am somehow "damaged." I no longer agree with that idea. I am different. Evolved maybe. Changed. Altered. Just because I work differently, does not mean I that I work improperly. If everybody else were like me, it would be considered "normal" so it's all a matter of perception really. My own views on my self are tainted because I can recall a day in my past when my brain was "normal" and I draw my conclusions on the experience based on that. Had I not had that "normal" period, my perceptions on how I am now would be entirely different. IE, I would be perfectly normal, and I would be wondering what the hell is wrong with everybody else and why are they brain damaged. <...>
[right][snapback]79678[/snapback][/right]

Ah, but these are pretty good arguments for not altering your mind.
It is true that you would be considered normal were everybody like you, however it is also true that were everybody damaged the same way they wouldn't be considered damaged (mind you, I'm not saying you're damaged in any way).
Again, being different doesn't necessarily mean you're working improperly, but by convention you can't be the judge of that.
Previous experiences are part of what makes us able to determine what our current status is like.
Having had eyesight but then lost it makes you able to understand what's missing. Being born blind means you can't fully understand what's missing, and moreso you have to rely on others to convince you that something indeed is missing.

On losses and benefits.
So far, I'm having a hard time seeing the benefits (other than possible but not probable occurrenses) and how they justify the use of LSD. It seems to me that the possible benefits are best induced via other means, preferably safer ones. The benefits does not come from LSD directly, but reactions to LSD that are hard to control, and may or may not damage/benefit you. This is not something that makes LSD a tool, it just makes it dangerous.
The same goes for losses really, the danger seems to lie in that you don't know what you'll get. It would also seem that most benefits come with a loss on it's own, based on what you've written and my own knowledge on the subject (which, admittedly, isn't as great as I'd like it to be).
I'm not really comfortable using you as an example, so again I'll keep it simplistic: Uncontrolled changes in your mind may have benefits, but it's highly probable that you'll have bad results that may even be difficult to determine.
Not knowing what you'll get often makes it hard to find out exactly what you got.