The Active Mind theory agrees with empiricism that sensory data is needed for knowledge about the world, and it agrees with rationalism that reason is needed for knowledge of any sort. It does not distinguish between a priori and a posteriori knowledge, nor does it distinguish between analytic and synthetic knowledge. The only distinction that it makes is between axiomatic knowledge and existential knowledge.
Axiomatic knowledge is about what must always be so no matter what. Knowledge of logic and math is axiomatic. Existential knowledge is about what exists. We attain our first existential knowledge by using our axiomatic knowledge to integrate and make sense of our sensations. To gain further existential knowledge, we use our axiomatic knowledge, plus the existential knowledge we already have, to integrate our sensations. For the Active Mind theory, there is no such thing as a posteriori knowledge. Existential knowledge does not consist of sensations; it consists of the mind's understanding of sensations. As a result of this, the Active Mind theory denies that there is any such thing as a thing-in-itself.
The thing-in-itself is a myth that belongs to Kant's Transcendental Idealism. Kant's theory is similar to the Active Mind theory, but differs from it in one crucial respect. Kant's theory denies that true knowledge about the world is possible. According to Kant, we know about the world as best we can (which comes short of true knowledge) by using synthetic a priori concepts to integrate our sensations. Synthetic a priori knowledge serves the same function in Kant's theory that axiomatic knowledge serves in the Active Mind theory. The major difference between the two is this. Kant believes that synthetic a priori knowledge may be false even though it is impossible for us to disbelieve it. The Active Mind theory considers axiomatic knowledge to be absolute. Thus, knowledge about the world is possible for the Active Mind theory, but impossible for Kant. He believes that there are things-in-themselves because we make sense of our sensations with concepts that might be false. Since the Active Mind theory holds that we make sense of our sensations with absolute knowledge, or at worst with false knowledge that can be corrected, it denies that there is any such thing as a thing-in-itself.
If we accept transcendental idealism, however, then we may have grounds for saying that drugs expand consciousness. According to this theory, we can never have true knowledge of the world, for we integrate our senses with synthetic a priori concepts, which may very well be false. Suppose, now, that some narcotics allow the mind to think in terms of normally unthinkable synthetic a priori concepts. This would expand the mind's repertoire of ways to see the world, and thus expand consciousness. Since the transcendental idealist mind has no way of distinguishing false concepts from true ones, it may be good for it to acquire new concepts by drug use.
The reverse-correspondence theory of truth also supports drug use. Since it holds that the world is only whatever certain minds think it is, it holds that drugs can enhance someone's ability to change the world through magic. Since hallucinogens change the way that somebody sees the world, the reverse- correspondence theory holds that someone who takes them can more easily think of the world differently, thereby changing it more easily. In The Teachings of don Juan and other books, for instance, Carlos Castaņeda claims that he and don Juan took peyote for this purpose.
Since there is no God, you must take responsibility for knowing what is moral and why. You cannot depend on the dictates of a God to define morality. You must find a standard of value, and base your ethics on that. You must not concern yourself with any supernatural consequences of your actions, for there are none. All you must concern yourself with are the material consequences of your actions--remembering that material includes psychological.
Since ES considers the mind to be part of the body, it considers the mind to be just as mortal as the body. This means that there is no afterlife. So, you should appreciate the life you have, and indeed value it highly, for you will have no other. Also, it would be very foolish to sacrifice your life for someone other than yourself or for some cause. There can be no reward for a sacrifice that ends your very existence.
The world seen through Fascism is not this material world which appears on the surface, in which a man is an individual separated from all others and standing by himself, and in which he is governed by a natural law that makes him instinctively live a life of selfish and momentary pleasure. The man of Fascism is an individual who is nation and fatherland, which is moral law, binding together individuals and the generations into a tradition and a mission, suppressing the instinct of a life enclosed within the brief round of pleasure in order to restore within duty a higher life free from the limits of time and space: a life in which the individual, through the denial of himself, through the sacrifice of his own private interests, through death itself, realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies. (Gould, pp.495-6)ES denies all of this. It considers each person separate from every other person. It holds that no one will find his true value by sacrificing himself. It holds that no one can free himself from the limits of time and space, and that no one has a spiritual existence. Thus, it condemns any kind of government that seeks an idealistic basis for itself as Fascism does.
But a government's policy does not have to be as openly idealistic as Fascism to be idealistic. Communism, for instance, claims to be materialistic, but it is in fact idealistic and opposed to the materialist principle of individualism. According to Communism, society is more important than the individual. This is opposed to Materialism, which holds that society is nothing over and above the individuals that make it up. It is in league with Idealism, which holds that there can be non-physical unities of things. The basis for Nazism is the same as that for Communism and Fascism. It holds that the individual is nothing, and that the people is everything. ES condemns all such anti-individual political systems.