The Books of Carlos Castaneda - A Book Review

All the books of Carlos Castaneda - A Book Review

by Scott M. Forbes

I read all of the books of Carlos Castaneda. A warning: these books are so good, and so bad, that it is like being torn between higher and lower planes of the heavens and hells to read them.

What I believe Carlos Castaneda did was realize somethign of genius, but create a display of mostly epiphenomena and hallucination. He must have known why he was an inveterate liar. He knew something about synthesis and dreams, and how dreams were real if they were synthesized as a creative story, and then only.

This prompted him to record pseudo-autobiographical commentary between himself and a few other characters, in order to create a subtext for understanding the world in the way of dreams, but in direct conflict with everything that does not fall under the category of the unreal.

I dislike this split. I love the surrealistic aspect of this project of his. I love it more than surrealism, I dare say. But in creating the split between the daily world and the world of the sorcerers, he was doing a disservice to himself, and to his readers. If he had instead chosen to brazenly declare there to be more to this world than meets the eye of daily reality, and not split the reader between these two views, one of energy based reality, and the other, reality based energy, there would be less confusion and paranoia on behalf of the reader.

But that is if only he had realized what the effect he was having on the reader was going to be. I have to surmise his innocence, and believe that he did not really mean to abstract the reader's focus away from one reality in favor of one that isn't substantiated by everything in the reader's life, but I suspected some ulterior motive behind this the entire time I was reading these books.

I suspected that these books were used to indoctrinate followers of his organization. I believe he recruited people to help him with his affairs, and used these books as a launching pad for some activities that may or may not have been financially motivated. At any rate, several people disappeared around the time he died, mysteriously, and for no reason. 

If you are reading these out of desire to understand anther world, you will be delighted to find your every wish fulfilled in these volumes. But you will be disappointed if you want to stay afloat in this world of ours, called planet earth. These books will create such a split in your attentions, that you will be directed to follow these readings with a mandatory vacation in Mexico, just to be clear about what exactly Carlos Castaneda did or did not report in truthfulness.

I was a person who read these and did visit Mexico, in the area of Sonora only, though. I have to report that there is simultaneously so much of truth to these stories, and yet so many outright fabrications, that I am torn when asked to validate these with a review. It seems that these books were written only for those who are subject to delusion, or to overcoming their paranoia with more paranoia. I can't say that there is much other purpose for their existence than to cloud the judgment about the world in which we live in. And while I love a good attack on all that is flawed with this world, and do not know otherwise than that it is as truly flawed as it seems while reading these books, it is a hardship to have read them. They put me in a difficult and unenviable position, regarding employment, relationships, and religion, due to the indoctrination into a world of the bizarre. 

Maybe I should not blame these books for my own tragic flaws and the flaws of the world. But this book blames me for my tragic flaws and the flaws of the world. So maybe all in all I'm justified in so doing.

K.T. Maslin's Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind - A Book Review

An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind by Keith T. Maslin
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

K.T. Maslin's Introduction to the Philosphy of Mind

Review by Scott M. Forbes

This book educates one as far as that goes. If you are a reader who is interested in studying what has been written by philosophers about the mind, this book serves as a sort of hasty but lengthy introduction. If you are trying to find something about psychology and what goes on in the brain, this book has little to nothing to offer to you.

Apparently, philosophers arent' interested in science per se. They are interested in reading science books, just for extrapolating potential theories about the ideas contained therein.

And apparently, philosophers do not account for the mind by physicality, or do only in reference to the idea that the mind is somehow separate or identical to the brain, or is somehow added onto the top of the brain. They are only interested in the ephemeral notion of thoughts, not much on feelings, a little bit on perception, and not much on the brain, if we are to believe what is printed in this book.

In other words, philosphers only want to know why that the mind can exist seemingly independently or dependently on the brain. They want to know why there is a mind, and not just a physical brain. What they ignore is that it is not a contradiction to understand that the mind is not different from the brain, and the brain is not different from the mind. They are one and the same organ, and this organ is subject to explanation only after it has been studied more scientifically.

I am of the persuasion to believe that the philosophers are at least looking for evidence about somethign we all experience. We all know there is something ephemeral about consciousness, but where it is not quantifiable, all that we are left with is speculation and not very good speculation.

I also tend to believe that there is a holism to the brain that allows for such ephemera to be emergent properties of the physical brain. I believe that it is real, because it is a common experience, if only as an experiential level of reality. And I think that is where the philosophers are stumped. They don't know how to study the brain to determine what it is about the brain that we don't commonly experience. We don't experience neuronal firing, and so on, but we do experience the mind's user interface, our thoughts and feelings. The philosphers are content to speculate about why that we experience it this way, but they are not looking to anything that cannot be a common experience to explain a common experience. I think if more philosphy was based on empirical study, and less time experiencing one's own thoughts, that there would be a better book here.

Due to no fault of K.T. Maslin, this book is in the category of a book that promises to tell you the state of philosophy, but might disappoint you as you learn that philosophy really cannot and has not told us much yet.

View all my reviews