Hal:
I listened to the one with Daniel Ingram and Michal Taft when it was first posted and found it fascinating, as they both always are. However, I could not follow the logic of their agreeing that it doesn't really matter whether supernatural/ESP phenomena are actually true or not, and that the only things that mattered were subjective, etc. It seems pretty straightforward that objective reality matters. (I like the Philip K. Dick quote, "Reality is that which, when you stop believeing in it, it doesn't go away.")
Plus, if these things (magick, etc.) are true, and your goal is to reduce the suffering of all sentient beings, then you could spread the gospel of the Dharma more effectively if you could show it to be true. You would probably win a Nobel prize while you were at it.
I think they were saying that what matters is if its is causal or not. If the hallucination was strong enough to change your behaviour in some way, then thats what matters in terms of the legitimacy of putting time and energy into these type of "supernatural" practices, regardless of "objective reality". Even if you don't believe in the "objectivity" of the hallucination, its causal effects upon you don't go away.
