4 ms·

About ten years ago, after my grandmother died, I got really into Robert Anton Wilson. That sort of set the trajectory for the rest of my life. While I think R

by enkiv2 9y ago

About ten years ago, after my grandmother died, I got really into Robert Anton Wilson. That sort of set the trajectory for the rest of my life. While I think RAW was wrong about a lot of things, the meta-lesson of erring on the side of agnosis -- trusting that, when the world doesn't behave in line with your expectations (and often even when it does) it's because of unknown unknowns, and that the world is stranger and more complex than any of us can imagine -- has helped me a lot. It's helped me rein in my control-freak nature, deal in healthier ways with unexpected events, and get rid of some of my ego-based fixations on particular mental models that don't survive collision with reality.

danr4 9y ago
This is not the first time I see a RAW reference when it comes to personal growth/mental health. But he has written so much. What should I start with and how should I continue?
- dx7tnt 9y ago
  His whole canon fits together somewhat, in that he refreshes and repeats ideas throughout his writing career, which means that you can almost jump in anywhere and pick up the thread. I'd recommend "Prometheus Rising" and "Quantum Psychology" as a good place to start. Also, don't be put off by his use of the word 'illuminati' in his work - he started that whole joke.
  - enkiv2 9y ago
    Yeah, Prometheus Rising is a good starting-point for sure. His work can be usefully classified into three categories: loose essay collections, fiction, and conventionally-structured non-fiction. Prometheus Rising & Quantum Psychology are the closest to conventionally-structured non-fiction (though they both flirt with the loose-essay-collection format) and so, for new readers coming at it from a self-help perspective, they're less off-putting. In particular, Prometheus Rising does a pretty good job of explaining RAW's 8-circuit model (which was also helpful for my emotional self-regulation) in an accessible way -- showing its origins as a doctoral thesis reworked into a textbook. Of course, almost everybody starts with the Illuminatus! trilogy (and so did I). This isn't necessarily a good idea. There's been at least one casualty from somebody starting with the Illuminatus! trilogy and missing the point (documented in The Cuckoo's Egg), though I guess you can blame cocaine and soviet espionage in that case!
dx7tnt 9y ago
I can't agree more with this. Robert Anton Wilson's books are extremely readable, entertaining, and will definitely help you see a new perspective. For programmers and tech people I'd recommend RAW above Godel, Escher, Bach, for example. One of his many intriguing ideas, borrowed from Alfred Korzybski, is that "The Map is Not the Territory". Always know that whatever map or idea you have is only ever, at best, a fragmentary and limited version of whatever in the objective world it's meant to represent. Kudos.
- chubot 9y ago
  Hm I've never heard of RAW, but I will check out his work based on this thread. From what I see here, if you like his ideas, you might also like the books of Nassim Taleb (Black Swan, etc.) He has a style that rubs some people the wrong way, but I believe his ideas are the kind that can "change your life". I have been a bit obsessed with the idea that "the map is not the territory". I think it's because I grew up with some strong mental models that turned out not to be true. I used Google and found that I mentioned it at least 3 times on HN, going back years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15866856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15866856 -- Programmers should learn a little philosophy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7074831 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7074831 -- With regard to Taleb, "I share Taleb's problem with models". I compare him to Nate Silver. I liked Silver's book very much at the time, and saw a lot of parallels in "learning about the world". (But I have since become disappointed with Silver.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7913435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7913435 -- Static typing doesn't prevent the important bugs. Static types are a map; they're not the territory -- which is runtime behavior, interaction with the end user, interaction with the world. I still have this rant a brewing: you cannot learn ANYTHING about the world if you don't actually run your program! Of course, most people who use static types do run their programs. But it's not a strawman; there's an extreme solipsistic school of "modeling with types" where programmers try not to run their programs and instead rely on the compiler. I suppose this may be effective for some very limited kinds of software with small interfaces to "the world" (which includes hardware), but IMO it's the wrong default. You can't learn anything about hardware without running your program, let alone end users!
- personlurking 9y ago
mmirate 9y ago
Hmm. If I were a physicist I would probably find his works utterly defeatist.

by enkiv2 9y ago

danr4 9y ago

This is not the first time I see a RAW reference when it comes to personal growth/mental health. But he has written so much. What should I start with and how should I continue?

dx7tnt 9y ago
His whole canon fits together somewhat, in that he refreshes and repeats ideas throughout his writing career, which means that you can almost jump in anywhere and pick up the thread. I'd recommend "Prometheus Rising" and "Quantum Psychology" as a good place to start. Also, don't be put off by his use of the word 'illuminati' in his work - he started that whole joke.
- enkiv2 9y ago
  Yeah, Prometheus Rising is a good starting-point for sure. His work can be usefully classified into three categories: loose essay collections, fiction, and conventionally-structured non-fiction. Prometheus Rising & Quantum Psychology are the closest to conventionally-structured non-fiction (though they both flirt with the loose-essay-collection format) and so, for new readers coming at it from a self-help perspective, they're less off-putting. In particular, Prometheus Rising does a pretty good job of explaining RAW's 8-circuit model (which was also helpful for my emotional self-regulation) in an accessible way -- showing its origins as a doctoral thesis reworked into a textbook. Of course, almost everybody starts with the Illuminatus! trilogy (and so did I). This isn't necessarily a good idea. There's been at least one casualty from somebody starting with the Illuminatus! trilogy and missing the point (documented in The Cuckoo's Egg), though I guess you can blame cocaine and soviet espionage in that case!

dx7tnt 9y ago

I can't agree more with this. Robert Anton Wilson's books are extremely readable, entertaining, and will definitely help you see a new perspective. For programmers and tech people I'd recommend RAW above Godel, Escher, Bach, for example. One of his many intriguing ideas, borrowed from Alfred Korzybski, is that "The Map is Not the Territory". Always know that whatever map or idea you have is only ever, at best, a fragmentary and limited version of whatever in the objective world it's meant to represent. Kudos.

chubot 9y ago
Hm I've never heard of RAW, but I will check out his work based on this thread. From what I see here, if you like his ideas, you might also like the books of Nassim Taleb (Black Swan, etc.) He has a style that rubs some people the wrong way, but I believe his ideas are the kind that can "change your life". I have been a bit obsessed with the idea that "the map is not the territory". I think it's because I grew up with some strong mental models that turned out not to be true. I used Google and found that I mentioned it at least 3 times on HN, going back years: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15866856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15866856 -- Programmers should learn a little philosophy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7074831 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7074831 -- With regard to Taleb, "I share Taleb's problem with models". I compare him to Nate Silver. I liked Silver's book very much at the time, and saw a lot of parallels in "learning about the world". (But I have since become disappointed with Silver.) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7913435 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7913435 -- Static typing doesn't prevent the important bugs. Static types are a map; they're not the territory -- which is runtime behavior, interaction with the end user, interaction with the world. I still have this rant a brewing: you cannot learn ANYTHING about the world if you don't actually run your program! Of course, most people who use static types do run their programs. But it's not a strawman; there's an extreme solipsistic school of "modeling with types" where programmers try not to run their programs and instead rely on the compiler. I suppose this may be effective for some very limited kinds of software with small interfaces to "the world" (which includes hardware), but IMO it's the wrong default. You can't learn anything about hardware without running your program, let alone end users!
personlurking 9y ago

mmirate 9y ago

Hmm. If I were a physicist I would probably find his works utterly defeatist.