3 ms·

I find it curious that Richard de Mille, the person who helped permanently mar Castaneda's reputation, was a top Scientologist. Though this is pure speculation,

I find it curious that Richard de Mille, the person who helped permanently mar Castaneda's reputation, was a top Scientologist. Though this is pure speculation, I believe de Mille, being L. Ron Hubbard's personal assistant, would have been instructed to take down Castaneda. As an up and coming spiritual belief system/religion, Scientologists might have seen Castaneda's popularity with those on a spiritual path, as a threat. I read a few books by Castaneda when I was younger, and enjoyed them immensely. So when I later found out that his research was "proven" to be a hoax it made me quite sad, and diminished in my eyes, one of the literary and spiritual heroes of my youth. But when I read up on de Mille's aforementioned involvement in a shady religion, one that spouts the most absurd things as gospel, it gave me a bit of comfort. Though it doesn't falsely de Mille's research, it definitely is a conflict of interest, or rather, it shows a blatant hypocrisy, and makes me wonder if he had an ulterior motive. How can a researcher, with a straight face, claim someone has promulgated made up information, when they themselves do so as well? Do I really need to give an example? Okay: Xenu.

wruza 9y ago
It isn't new. E.g. islamic "miracles" are debunked mostly by "christian sciencists" and vice versa, and between various flows of one, and these camps do not hesitate to produce a mass of papers that actually have some science and analysis underneath (like linguistics, history, astronomy and so on). So come on, no one except opposing fanatics will do that while in sober mind.
agnivade 9y ago
I know of very close people who followed Castaneda's teachings. Although they won't tell me exactly, but as I understand, it "did" work. And without a teacher to guide them, it was taking an uncontrollable trajectory. Hence they quit.
cousin_it 9y ago
De Mille left scientology around '54 because he got skeptical. Castaneda's first book was published in '68. De Mille published his takedown of Castaneda in '76. This interview with him is beautifully clear, probably because he's heard so much bullshit wrapped with fancy words in his life: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/demille.htm http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/d...

wruza 9y ago

It isn't new. E.g. islamic "miracles" are debunked mostly by "christian sciencists" and vice versa, and between various flows of one, and these camps do not hesitate to produce a mass of papers that actually have some science and analysis underneath (like linguistics, history, astronomy and so on). So come on, no one except opposing fanatics will do that while in sober mind.

agnivade 9y ago

I know of very close people who followed Castaneda's teachings. Although they won't tell me exactly, but as I understand, it "did" work. And without a teacher to guide them, it was taking an uncontrollable trajectory. Hence they quit.

cousin_it 9y ago

De Mille left scientology around '54 because he got skeptical. Castaneda's first book was published in '68. De Mille published his takedown of Castaneda in '76. This interview with him is beautifully clear, probably because he's heard so much bullshit wrapped with fancy words in his life: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/demille.htm http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Library/Shelf/miller/interviews/d...