No, this man had a profound genuine experience.

psychedelic (adj.) occasionally psychodelic, "producing expanded consciousness through heightened awareness and feeling," 1956, of drugs, suggested by British-born Canadian psychiatrist Humphry Osmond in a letter to Aldous Huxley and used by Osmond in a scientific paper published the next year; from Greek psykhē "mind" (see psyche) + dēloun "make visible, reveal" (from dēlos "visible, clear," from PIE root *dyeu- "to shine").

If you are trying to argue definition, the quote you provided is very unclear. It looks like a mish-mash of multiple sources.

It is an etymological dictionary definition.

If you think this definition is OK (I believe it is not, and the source is simply bad: the sentences are not coherent), then how do you interpret

> 1956, of drugs

part?

Doesn't that mean basically that experience can't be "psychedelic", unless it is a consequence "of drugs" (by this definition)?

If you try to dig into the "letter", it also specifically names drug-induced experiences "psychedelic".

Wiktionary does not mention any kind of "expanded consciousness" except the "belief of ... power of weeds", which refers to "psychedelic" in the meaning of "induced by drugs".

No, the man can act and sell a $100,000/hour joy ride.

Come on, if he were just acting you'd expect a more coherent speech.

If he's good, you probably wouldn't be able to tell if he's faking that too ;)

sincere question: can you have a profound fake experience? what would that be, or look like?

In some meanings of the word "profound". Any kind of hallucinations can be intense or life changing.

yeah, still so much unrecognized dualistic premise baked into our everyday reasoning and language.