Blog

The Professor and the Engineer #

On a rainy Tuesday afternoon in early March, I found myself hunched over not one but two versions of James P. Carse’s philosophical masterpiece, The Religious Case Against Belief. The first—dog-eared and coffee-stained—was Carse’s original 2008 publication. The second—pristine and unauthorized—was a dramatically condensed edition that has been stirring controversy in religious and publishing circles alike.

The unauthorized second edition, prepared by software engineer and religious studies enthusiast Joshua Pritikin, has been described as both “literary vandalism” and “an act of spiritual generosity,” depending on whom you ask. Released without Penguin Random House’s permission, it reduces Carse’s dense philosophical prose by nearly half. Entire chapters have vanished. Technical passages have been recast in simpler language.

“Teddy, why is the sky blue?” Three-year-old Mira looked up at her plush companion, a bear with soft amber eyes that seemed to follow her wherever she went.

The bear’s eyes flickered momentarily with a subtle glow. “The sky is blue because tiny fairies paint it every morning,” Teddy replied in a warm, gentle voice. “They use special brushes made from cloud-fluff.”

Mira giggled, hugging Teddy close. “That’s silly!”

“Oh? What do you think makes the sky blue, then?” Teddy asked, his head tilting slightly.

Dear XXX University Administrators,

I am writing to express my concerns about current copyright policies.

The landscape of academic publishing and information access has transformed with the advent of artificial intelligence. Institutional policies remain rooted in an outdated paradigm. Recent developments highlight this disconnect: major AI companies are training language models on vast collections of academic literature and books. As reported in January 2025, both American and foreign companies are using bulk text collections.¹ This technological revolution in how knowledge is processed and utilized demands a fresh examination of our approach to academic access. While I fully support protecting intellectual property rights and compensating creators fairly, the current system creates barriers to legitimate academic inquiry and learning.

Blind Spot (2024) includes an incredibly lucid chapter on consciousness. We summarize part of it here.

Primacy of Consciousness #

Our awareness and everything we experience appear within consciousness. It includes all our thoughts, feelings, perceptions, and the way we experience the world around us. One aspect of consciousness is what philosophers call the primacy of consciousness. This means that consciousness comes first in how we understand and experience reality. We can’t measure our consciousness or compare it to anything. Everything we investigate, including our brains, happens within our awareness.

For more details, check out my cannabis page.

This https://oregonstatecannabis.org/thc/delta-8 is a travesty.

We don’t make lettuce illegal because it might be contaminated with salmonella. We regulate it. We should be doing the same for Federally legal hemp-derived cannabinoids. The state can mandate independent lab testing for contaminants.

Jennifer Murphey bares her soul during her talk at Entheogenesis in Austin, TX on April 15, 2023.

Monday, June 24th 2024 at 7pm at Meraki Kava Bar, Jennifer Murphey discusses the War on Drugs and her part in fighting it.

https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-170/issue-129/extensions-of-remarks-section/article/E809-3

Summary of the letter:

• The PATH Caucus was created to raise awareness about the therapeutic potential of psychedelic and entactogenic drugs for mental health conditions.
• The Caucus is seeking input on implementing programs and policies for novel therapies using these substances.
• The Caucus aims to gather input from the public, those who have received psychedelic-assisted therapies, and stakeholders in the behavioral health ecosystem.
• The Caucus acknowledges the cultural significance of certain psychedelic substances and seeks input from indigenous communities.
• The Caucus is interested in input on risk mitigation frameworks, including public education, substance misuse prevention, and safety monitoring strategies.
• The Caucus is seeking input on how to support states in developing infrastructures and service delivery systems for these therapies.
• The Caucus is interested in input on how to ensure equitable access to these therapies.
• The Caucus is seeking input on data standards and repositories for collecting data on the use of these substances.
• The Caucus is seeking input on how to protect public health and safety when implementing these novel therapies.

Response:

Episode 7 of The Sacred Synthesis Podcast

2025 Jan 08 UPDATE: OLCC clarified that Oregon prohibits the sale of artificially derived cannabinoids. There is no prohibition against possession. You can verify this by visiting Chapter 845 and searching for “penalty.”

Oregon’s approach to regulating synthetically derived cannabinoids has evolved significantly in recent years. Initially, the focus was primarily on controlling their sale and distribution, while possession was treated as a minor infraction under Measure 110, which broadly decriminalized drug possession.