Psilocybin comes from earth and so do we.
naturalistic fallacy (appeal to nature). just because something is natural doesn't mean we should be doing it, or that it's okay for others to.
I don't think [psilocybin] disillusion [sic] us more than the government...
non sequitur. that psilocybin doesn't disillusion more than the government says nothing about whether the experiences you have while under the influence are veridical.
also, the statement "I don't think [psilocybin] disillusion [sic] us more than the government" seems to say that psilocybin and the government are equal in their power to disillusion, or at least that while psilocybin disillusions, the government disillusions more. which in turn seems to be an acceptance that psilocybin disillusions you rather than provides you with any veridical experiences.
And I don't believe in what I have found, but it must be something considering most people find the same thing.
you either don't believe what you have found or you think there's something there to believe in. not both. otherwise, if you thought there was something there to believe in, presumably, you'd believe in it.
anyway, argumentum ad populum (appeal to popularity). that a certain number of people experience something or believe in something doesn't make it true. a proposition doesn't gain truth as it gains followers.
And it makes more sense than any mass religion
in what sense? it's just as wholly unevidenced. and, the argument can be quite well made, it makes less sense. after all, at least with religion the errors of perception or evolved and hidden; you're going out of your way to knowingly screw with your powers of perception and then labeling as true what you experience as a consequence.
and explains [my] life better than atheism.
well. first. atheism doesn't explain anything, much less anyone's life. it's a responsive position to theism. it's a statement by the person professing atheism that says "I reject the god hypothesis as lacking in evidence or a supportive argument for its truth."
there's nothing in atheism per se that explains anything.
besides, even if atheism sought to explain anything, someone's life for instance, that something else explained someone's life better wouldn't necessarily mean that it was true.
But, they're are very simple (dmt and psilocybin) very simple chemical compounds, And occur not scarcely through life.
their simplicity has nothing to do with it. whether simple or complex, what you claim to be true is either true or false on the strength of the evidence, not on the basis of whether the chemicals are simple or complex.
mushrooms don't tell you anything Zach. that's the point.
"maybe" you give the drugs too much credit? i'm saying that to give them any credit is silly. they're drugs that mess with your ability to accurately perceive reality. that you would, while knowing this, walk around thinking that that same drug could provide you with accurate information about objective reality is just.... i don't know.
you have absolutely no evidence for the existence of an afterlife. no more and no less than any other theist does. indeed, you sound just like a theist insofar as you rely on your personal experiences as indicating that some otherwise totally unevidenced proposition is true. where's your evidence? the only thing you can say in response is "here, eat this mushroom doood!"
It sounds like you're really into the mushrooms dude. It's great that you're shaking up your worldview, but there are a few things to keep in mind.
Firstly, if you're fucked up, remember that YOU ARE FUCKED UP. Anything you might realize while tripping may or may not have relevance to the world at large. It might have profound significance, but it's the nature of the experience that almost everything feels like it has profound significance. Wait until you've been sober for a few days and reflect on what's gone through your head later. Keep a journal. Doodle lots.
Secondly, cars are real.
Thirdly, you can't really fly.
Personally I'm awaiting for psychoactive compounds to be professionally produced and government regulated (and taxed) before trying them as there is a potential for harm. I would not mind trying i.e. LSD when it becomes legal to explore my own consciousness, though I am mindful of 'bad trips'. In my country it is not unusual to try a type of Magic Mushroom and my older sister openly admits to having tried it. It's a shame that the potential of such drugs are not professionally explored due to the widespread societal condemnation.
It should be noted that experimenting with psychoactives before being in your late twenties is probably not a good idea since the brain is more susceptible to artificial changes in brain chemistry bore that age. I've found that an educated and healthy relationship to mood altering substances can greatly increase my quality of life, though it may shorten it's duration a bit.
I do not believe that any 'spiritual' experiences under psychedelic influence are anything more than the effect on your mind. LSD has been very beneficial to me on the way I view many, many things, but there is absolutely nothing spiritual about it. There is no hidden god, here - no matter how real it may seem, it is perfectly explainable by the chemical compound's interaction with your brain.
Be VERY careful of what you take away from your experiences. These substances have the power to create delusion on a grand scale - far beyond religious texts. Know exactly how the compounds will interact with your brain, both physically and abstractly.
I think Terrence McKenna and the like really had the wrong idea, here.