The second moderated discussion at the conference will be an expert-only panel of speakers who are, in one way or another, involved in basic or clinical psychedelic research. Much more than the first discussion on Friday, this event will be focused on the development of research around psychedelics within academic discourse. What has to happen to normalise psychedelic-related projects and make them more acceptable to state funding, so that there will be B.A., M.A. and doctoral projects, EU-wide research network applications and all other modalities that constitute a scientific debate?
Which are the elements in research that are lacking at the moment to make this topic more acceptable to a broader range of scientists? What about different perspectives from natural, social and cultural sciences: are they supporting psychedelic science or somehow contradicting the goal of expanding this field, creating more variability of research methods and perspectives, and also accepting more critical voices within the psychedelic research?
What is psychedelic science anyway? And what isn’t psychedelic science?
This panel will be moderated by Kim Kuypers.