According to the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, the Persians had an unusual but deliberate method of decision-making that involved both alcohol and sobriety.
When confronted with major political or strategic issues, Persian nobles would first debate the matter while intoxicated, believing that wine freed the mind from restraint and exposed true intentions.
They saw drunkenness not as a lapse in judgment but as a state in which honesty and raw emotion surfaced, giving their discussions an unfiltered authenticity.
However, they did not trust this state entirely. Once they reached a decision in this condition, they would revisit the same issue the following day while sober. If the conclusion still seemed sound, they accepted it. If not, it was discarded.
The process also worked in reverse. If a matter was first considered sober, they would re-express their views while drunk to test the strength of their conviction.
This two-step validation system might seem eccentric today, but to the Persians, it ensured that their choices stood up to both emotional and rational scrutiny.
It also reflects the deep cultural integration of wine into Persian elite society, where drinking was part of ritual, celebration, and even governance.
This method shows their belief that truth could be tested from multiple states of mind, not just rational logic. Herodotus Chronicles