• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Carlos Castaneda's Don Juan is Real

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I ran across a guy on some other forum who thinks Castaneda's Don Juan sorcery books are reports of true events.

It takes all kinds, I guess.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I wouldn't doubt he he had Indian guides. He would've needed them to acquire the mescaline back then. I barely recall the details of the books I read, but most of the crazy stuff wasn't reported to be real exactly. They were his peyote trips. I think he saw something that shook him up.. But I assumed he made a conscious choice in believing they were actually taking him to the "spirit world". I don't know anything about sorcery books. I only read the early stuff.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I wouldn't doubt he he had Indian guides. He would've needed them to acquire the mescaline back then. I barely recall the details of the books I read, but most of the crazy stuff wasn't reported to be real exactly. They were his peyote trips. I think he saw something that shook him up.. But I assumed he made a conscious choice in believing they were actually taking him to the "spirit world". I don't know anything about sorcery books. I only read the early stuff.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2011/03/24/the-fake-carlos-castaneda-24168
I can't seem to copy/paste from this site. Start with the paragraph beginning "One of Castaneda's colleagues..." if you want to just cut to the chase.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1563273/bio
"In 1973, TIME Magazine found that Castaneda had lied about his background, such as his military service, his father's occupation, his age and his nation of birth. Critics also uncovered numerous instances of plagiarism, since don Juan's supposed quotations can be sourced to dozens of other writers and philosophers. To this day, there is literary debate whether Castaneda's books should be classified as fiction or nonfiction."

This is the same year that Carlos disappeared from public view. Those weren't the only questions brought up by Time. There was also the question as to whether or not don Juan's teachings actually reflected Yaqui mysticism and philosophy. The answer was "no."
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Interesting. Well, I stopped reading them after he spoke to the peyote god. haha. I've never done peyote specifically, but I never tripped that bad.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Interesting. Well, I stopped reading them after he spoke to the peyote god. haha. I've never done peyote specifically, but I never tripped that bad.

He was a great story-teller. There's just too many internal inconsistencies to be believable. I don't even remember the peyote god.

When I was about 16 I thought that becoming a Man of Knowledge would be great - except that one needs to be specially selected by a brujo. At that point, I didn't really see the point to his writing the books in the first place.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1563273/bio
There was also the question as to whether or not don Juan's teachings actually reflected Yaqui mysticism and philosophy. The answer was "no."

Yeah, I heard about that, also about the extent to which indigenous communities were plagued by hippies and druggies wanting to participate in what they'd read about.

I guess that the things he wrote about could have happened and the persons could have existed but I dont actually consider that the important point, why and what difference does it make are for me the important points.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yeah, I heard about that, also about the extent to which indigenous communities were plagued by hippies and druggies wanting to participate in what they'd read about.

I guess that the things he wrote about could have happened and the persons could have existed but I dont actually consider that the important point, why and what difference does it make are for me the important points.

If don Juan is considered to be a real person, and his teachings are valid, then this validated the way a lot of people felt back in the hippie era. Drugs are, therefore, not a meaningless escape, the experiences are no mere illusion. What you see when high is just as real - perhaps more real - than when sober. Being high does not mean "dropping out," but instead, one is "dropping in" to visit another, more relevant dimension.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
If don Juan is considered to be a real person, and his teachings are valid, then this validated the way a lot of people felt back in the hippie era. Drugs are, therefore, not a meaningless escape, the experiences are no mere illusion. What you see when high is just as real - perhaps more real - then when sober. Being high does not mean "dropping out," but instead, one is "dropping in" to visit another, more relevant dimension.

That's a lot of conclusions contingent upon don Juan having existed which I dont think are necessarily so, Osama really existed, it doesnt make his message about the Koran, Islam or the world is any the more valid than otherwise would be the case.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
If don Juan is considered to be a real person, and his teachings are valid, then this validated the way a lot of people felt back in the hippie era. Drugs are, therefore, not a meaningless escape, the experiences are no mere illusion. What you see when high is just as real - perhaps more real - then when sober. Being high does not mean "dropping out," but instead, one is "dropping in" to visit another, more relevant dimension.

We don't want to go around affirming the consequent, though.

It's possible to be right but for all the wrong reasons. Even if this guy was fake and wrong, that doesn't mean that the basic premise that you put forth above was fake and wrong.

It's kinda like justifying the tooth fairy to prove that the quarter under your pillow is real. The quarter being real isn't really the problem, it's there. Making convoluted stories to prove something doesn't help.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
That's a lot of conclusions contingent upon don Juan having existed which I dont think are necessarily so, Osama really existed, it doesnt make his message about the Koran, Islam or the world is any the more valid than otherwise would be the case.

I am often accused of believing in the things I talk about.

I guess you missed the part about validating feelings. I wasn't making a case for its objective reality. I'm trying to empathize with the hippies, as I myself enjoyed reading those books back in the day so that gives me a basis for empathy.

But the purpose of this thread is to ask why anybody would still believe those books. If they are recommended reading in anthropology departments, then that's a real travesty on science.

"I ran across a guy on some other forum who thinks Castaneda's Don Juan sorcery books are reports of true events.

It takes all kinds, I guess."
 
Last edited:

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
We don't want to go around affirming the consequent, though.

It's possible to be right but for all the wrong reasons. Even if this guy was fake and wrong, that doesn't mean that the basic premise that you put forth above was fake and wrong.

It's kinda like justifying the tooth fairy to prove that the quarter under your pillow is real. The quarter being real isn't really the problem, it's there. Making convoluted stories to prove something doesn't help.

That sounds like a variation on the "even if don Juan isn't real, he ought to be real" argument.

Yes, you can believe something without considering it real when it represents an idea or system of ideas.

However, when you detract from the reality of something, it really takes the wind out of their sails. Like saying there's no historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. If the crucifixion didn't happen, then Christianity is dead as a religion. Yes, it is that important. It's not just the Sermon on the Mount, it has to be all or nothing. Don Juan may not be Jesus, but the reality of the character is just as important to the believers as his ideas.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
That sounds like a variation on the "even if don Juan isn't real, he ought to be real" argument.

Yes, you can believe something without considering it real when it represents an idea or system of ideas.

However, when you detract from the reality of something, it really takes the wind out of their sails. Like saying there's no historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. If the crucifixion didn't happen, then Christianity is dead as a religion. Yes, it is that important. It's not just the Sermon on the Mount, it has to be all or nothing. Don Juan may not be Jesus, but the reality of the character is just as important to the believers as his ideas.

Nah. I'm just saying that the prospect of being able to drop into another dimension with the assistance of substances has nothing to do with Don Juan. His reality or lack thereof does nothing to prove or disprove this question.

The Jesus example isn't quite the same thing. If we disproved the Crucifixion then we show that some supposed facts were mistaken, and it does mean the religion got stuff wrong, but that doesn't disprove other independent questions such as whether he even existed or whether or not he healed people. It depends on what you're looking for.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
That sounds like a variation on the "even if don Juan isn't real, he ought to be real" argument.

Yes, you can believe something without considering it real when it represents an idea or system of ideas.

However, when you detract from the reality of something, it really takes the wind out of their sails. Like saying there's no historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. If the crucifixion didn't happen, then Christianity is dead as a religion. Yes, it is that important. It's not just the Sermon on the Mount, it has to be all or nothing. Don Juan may not be Jesus, but the reality of the character is just as important to the believers as his ideas.

I'm pretty sure Castaneda and just Shamanism in general are more concerned about the idea or system of ideas and even more nebulous stuff than actual historical reality.

Even in Christianity, there are plenty of non fundamental sects that consider the historicity of the Bible as immaterial.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Nah. I'm just saying that the prospect of being able to drop into another dimension with the assistance of substances has nothing to do with Don Juan. His reality or lack thereof does nothing to prove or disprove this question.

The Jesus example isn't quite the same thing. If we disproved the Crucifixion then we show that some supposed facts were mistaken, and it does mean the religion got stuff wrong, but that doesn't disprove other independent questions such as whether he even existed or whether or not he healed people. It depends on what you're looking for.

That's completely wrong, but I don't have time to explain to you why.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm pretty sure Castaneda and just Shamanism in general are more concerned about the idea or system of ideas and even more nebulous stuff than actual historical reality.

Even in Christianity, there are plenty of non fundamental sects that consider the historicity of the Bible as immaterial.

That is one reason why they are called "sects."
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
That is one reason why they are called "sects."

They're all sects. Unless, you want to clear this out and point to which is the authorative Christianity, I assume it'll be whatever agrees with your thought in the matter. Anyway, sticking to Shamanism, historicity and factuality is definitely demoted to the mystical experience.. hell, even writing about a faux mystical experience is acceptible if it has a type of metaphysical truth to it.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
They're all sects. Unless, you want to clear this out and point to which is the authorative Christianity, I assume it'll be whatever agrees with your thought in the matter. Anyway, sticking to Shamanism, historicity and factuality is definitely demoted to the mystical experience.. hell, even writing about a faux mystical experience is acceptible if it has a type of metaphysical truth to it.

In the Christian realm, "sect" is a four-letter word in more ways than one.

I don't know what you mean by "authoritative," there is only mainstream or fringeist. For example, denying the divinity or the historical truth of Christ is fringe thinking. Then there are for example some odd fringe sects consisting of those Christians who refuse all medical care, and who only go to the dentist when their dental health has deteriorated to the point of needing all their teeth pulled out. These practices are based on some non-mainstream interpretations of the Bible, or on the teachings of false prophets. If you want to know who a "false prophet" is, just call up your local mainstream religious minister.

"even writing about a faux mystical experience is acceptible if it has a type of metaphysical truth to it." You don't know the difference between a faux mystical experience and a true one. The difference is that if an experience carries with it metaphysical truth, then it was a true mystical experience.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
That's completely wrong, but I don't have time to explain to you why.

Well I have time to explain to you why it isn't wrong.

If Christopher Columbus did not discover America, does that mean that nobody discovered America? Does it mean that America doesn't exist?
Short answer, No.
Long answer, Nooooooooooooo.
 

Qlip

Post Human Post
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
8,464
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
In the Christian realm, "sect" is a four-letter word in more ways than one.

I don't know what you mean by "authoritative," there is only mainstream or fringeist. For example, denying the divinity or the historical truth of Christ is fringe thinking. Then there are for example some odd fringe sects consisting of those Christians who refuse all medical care, and who only go to the dentist when their dental health has deteriorated to the point of needing all their teeth pulled out. These practices are based on some non-mainstream interpretations of the Bible, or on the teachings of false prophets. If you want to know who a "false prophet" is, just call up your local mainstream religious minister.

"even writing about a faux mystical experience is acceptible if it has a type of metaphysical truth to it." You don't know the difference between a faux mystical experience and a true one. The difference is that if an experience carries with it metaphysical truth, then it was a true mystical experience.

You can define Christianity as you like by your own personal definition of Christianity, I logically can't disagree with that type of sophistry. I just assume if a significant body of people call themselves a Christian and has a rationalization for it, who am I to argue.

I really don't know what you're saying in that second paragraph. As far as my reference to a faux metaphyscial experience, the faux was referencing the the factuality, not the metaphysicallity. I do know the difference.
 
Top