In a landmark editorial slated for release in May 2025, Psychedelics — previously dedicated nearly exclusively to classical serotonergic psychedelics — boldly redefines its intellectual terrain to encompass the full spectrum of consciousness-altering substances. This evolution represents not a mere rebranding exercise, but rather a profound recalibration aimed at integrating the multifaceted complexity and emerging scientific insights that challenge traditional pharmacological and conceptual boundaries. As neuroscience, psychiatry, and the humanities converge, this expanded purview embodies an acknowledgment that the mind-altering pharmacopeia is far richer and more intricate than formerly circumscribed.
For years, the classification of psychoactive substances has leaned heavily upon molecular structure and receptor pharmacodynamics, constraining research to compounds that fit neatly within accepted chemical or neurobiological frameworks. The editorial, penned by Dr. Julio Licinio, Editor-in-Chief of Psychedelics, critiques the limitations imposed by such rigid taxonomies. It argues for embracing a more holistic lens that appreciates subjective phenomenology, cultural context, and evolving scientific understandings as equally vital components in defining what qualifies as a psychedelic or consciousness-altering drug.
This shift manifests visibly in the journal’s newly adopted subtitle, “The Journal of Psychedelic and Psychoactive Drug Research,” signaling expansion beyond serotonergic systems to include compounds such as MDMA, ketamine, and ibogaine. These substances, pharmacologically diverse and mechanistically distinct from classical psychedelics, inhabit the liminal spaces between established categories. Their therapeutic promise—in treating depression, PTSD, and addiction—underscores the urgency of moving past outdated divides and fostering integrative investigation of their neurobiological effects.
The editorial draws inspiration from the metaphorical framework offered by Brazilian poet Carlos Drummond de Andrade, conceptualizing humanity’s engagement with consciousness as an “unfinished process of creation.” In this view, scientific attempts to define and categorize psychoactive substances parallel an ongoing, iterative quest for knowledge and self-understanding; definitive endpoints are elusive, and each “edition” is but a provisional composition subject to continuous revision. This philosophical stance encourages epistemological humility, encouraging researchers to dwell in the unresolved tensions and ambiguities inherent in the evolving field.
One of the core challenges articulated in the editorial is the arbitrariness of the conventional psychedelic label. Historically bound to a cluster of indoleamine compounds like LSD and psilocybin acting primarily at serotonin 2A receptors, the psychedelic category excludes a myriad of psychoactive agents capable of profound consciousness modulation. MDMA’s unique entactogenic properties, ketamine’s dissociative anesthetic profile interacting predominantly with NMDA receptors, and ibogaine’s atypical pharmacodynamics defy easy classification, yet their therapeutic and experiential impacts are undeniably significant.
By expanding its scope, Psychedelics embraces interdisciplinary methodologies—ranging from molecular pharmacology and neuroimaging to ethnopharmacology and sociocultural analysis. This breadth is essential for a nuanced understanding of how diverse compounds influence neural circuits, psychological states, and societal contexts. For example, recent advances in neuroimaging illuminate distinct patterns of network connectivity alteration induced by different classes of psychoactives, revealing mechanisms that correlate with therapeutic outcomes or subjective experiences.
Moreover, embracing a broader pharmacopeia invites reconsideration of drug discovery paradigms. Identification of novel psychoactive molecules with unique receptor affinities, signaling cascades, or epigenetic influences opens avenues for tailored therapeutic interventions. The editorial suggests that compounds currently marginalized by established taxonomies might harbor unprecedented clinical potential, leveraging alternative neural pathways to disrupt maladaptive cognitive and affective circuits underlying psychiatric disorders.
The editorial’s call to “embrace intellectual discomfort” resonates with the scientific imperative to balance skepticism with open-minded inquiry. Instead of hastily crystallizing findings into dogmatic conclusions, the field benefits from sustained engagement with complexity, contradiction, and uncertainty. This stance cultivates fertile ground for innovation, recognizing that consciousness research involves integrating disparate data sets, phenomenological reports, and evolving theoretical models.
This evolving approach also challenges cultural and historical assumptions embedded in psychedelic research, which has often valorized classical compounds within specific sociopolitical contexts. Psychedelics aims to foster inclusive discourse that encompasses diverse traditions, medicinal practices, and indigenous knowledge systems. Such pluralistic engagement enriches scientific perspectives and honors the sociocultural dimensions that shape drug use, therapeutic frameworks, and regulatory landscapes.
In practical terms, the editorial’s transformation marks a pivotal moment as the neuropsychopharmacology research community grapples with the accelerating pace of discovery amid shifting regulatory environments. Policymakers, clinicians, and researchers must adapt to nuanced classifications that recognize overlapping mechanisms and heterogeneous effects across consciousness-altering agents. This paradigm shift supports evidence-based policy and clinical protocols that transcend binary categorizations and accommodate patient-centered approaches.
Ultimately, the redefinition embraced by Psychedelics contributes to the broader scientific conversation surrounding consciousness itself—arguably one of the most profound and enigmatic frontiers in medicine and philosophy. By positioning the journal as a platform for exploratory, interdisciplinary scholarship without premature closure, Dr. Licinio and his editorial team champion a dynamic inquiry aligned with humanity’s perennial quest to understand the mind’s vast potentials and limitations.
The editorial, titled “Psychedelics, Yes—but Not Only: Redefining the boundaries of consciousness research as part of humanity’s ongoing attempt to transcend our incompleteness,” will be openly accessible upon release, promising to catalyze vibrant discourse across academic and clinical spheres. Its nuanced, reflective approach offers a visionary framework likely to influence research trajectories, therapeutic innovation, and the cultural reception of psychoactive substances for years to come.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Psychedelics, Yes—but Not Only: Redefining the boundaries of consciousness research as part of humanity’s ongoing attempt to transcend our incompleteness
News Publication Date: 6-May-2025
Web References: https://doi.org/10.61373/pp025d.0014
Image Credits: From “Diagnosing Madness," by Julio Licinio, 2013, Science, 340(6139), p. 1406. Illustration by Joe Sutliff/www.cdad.com/joe. Reprinted with permission from AAAS.
Keywords: Consciousness, Basic research, Clinical research, Discovery research, Social research, Drug discovery, Molecular structure, Molecular targets, Chemical composition, Taxonomies, Psychiatry, Depression, Neurology, Evolution, Scientific journals, Alternative medicine, Pharmacology
