HomeGroupsTalkExploreZeitgeist
Search Site
SantaThing signup ends Monday at 12pm Eastern US. Check it out!
dismiss
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who…
Loading...

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are (original 1966; edition 1989)

by Alan Watts (Author)

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingMentions
1,790267,344 (3.99)15
Drawing upon ancient Hindu philosophy, the author explores the human psyche and the importance of personal identity.
Member:anabis
Title:The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
Authors:Alan Watts (Author)
Info:Vintage Books (1989), Edition: Reissue, 163 pages
Collections:Electronice citite
Rating:
Tags:None

Work Information

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are by Alan Watts (1966)

Loading...

Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

No current Talk conversations about this book.

» See also 15 mentions

Showing 1-5 of 26 (next | show all)
This 'Book" has been on my wish list for a very long time, but as much as I liked several of his monologues, until [b:The Wisdom of Insecurity: A Message for an Age of Anxiety|8548281|The Wisdom of Insecurity A Message for an Age of Anxiety|Alan W. Watts|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1320509490l/8548281._SY75_.jpg|538761] (see my review here, in which some monologues are mentioned/linked), I had never read an Alan Watts book. As I liked my first read, I finally found the time and the energy to take on another of his known works, which is a bit thinner than 'The Wisdom of Insecurity'.

Only 159 pages long/short, the Book contains six chapters that are to be read in order, like a fiction novel. A few readers here wrote that Alan Watts repeated himself and thus made the book unnecessarily longer than it should have been. I'd like to counter that by stating that this "repetition" is actually needed to help understand the message he's trying to convey or the theme tackled in this or that chapter. As Mr Watts wrote in the preface, the book is a cross-fertilisation of Western science with an Eastern intuition, as it's based on Vedanta (Hinduism, Wikipedia), but brought with a modern and Western style (even if from 1966).

The chapters are:
01) Inside Information
02) The Game of Black and White
03) How to Be a Genuine Fake
04) The World Is Your Body
05) So What?
06) IT

The description or blurb is actually quite clear what the book is about. How you are connected with nature and everything else. He also writes about how we perceive the world, the cause-effect principle (or how that doesn't apply when seeing, through a slit, a cat pass by: the head is the cause of the tail and vice versa, because they are part of the same body, the same whole), how man is not a stand-alone element in the universe and how internal organs don't function on their own without depending on other organs, who on their own need other organs to function and create. And so on and so forth.

In addition, Mr Watts shows how the influence of technology (à la [b:Brave New World|3180338|Brave New World|Aldous Huxley|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1551151249l/3180338._SY75_.jpg|3204877] by Aldous Huxley) and our daily rat-race (in school and later when having a job) are disastrous for our well-being. Many of us go to work to make a living, not necessarily because we enjoy our jobs. We are promised paradise, but each time you have to work harder for new, fictitious reward which never is delivered. If... then..., but in many cases, this only works in computer programming.

Of course, the trick, however hard it is, is to enjoy what you do (in your job, in your leisure time [example: don't play music for the sake of money, because that would be a wrong reason, going against personal, spiritual development], ...) and not let the system determine your course of action or your happiness. It's about sincerity.
Then again, we live in a society in which we are told and taught to be free, to be a free individual, but on the other hand there are rules and laws that limit that freedom. Of course, without rules and laws (in general, because there are always ridiculous ones), everyone would do as he/she pleases and it would be total chaos.

Oh, and let's not forget politicians (especially the far-right and far-left, though the centre also gets smacked), religions and alike that set up people against each other, as do other forms of groupings (biker clubs, football supporters, anything that unites like-minded people in a certain context). Not that it's wrong to come together because of shared hobbies or interests, because in itself that's very beneficial to one's well-being. What Alan Watts criticises is that in some of those groups, the feeling arises that they are better at "it" (whatever "it" is) than the other group(s), thus creating a black-and-white situation. When you're not part of the group, you're not equal, you're not on the same level as others.

And so, as you're taken on an eye-opening journey about life, about yourself, about the world, ... your view on all of this will undergo changes. Less than baby-steps at first perhaps, but it might/may dawn on you how many things in life are fake, and that not everything is to be taken as serious as the news or politicians want you to believe. Obviously, all this is easier said than done, especially considering the situation you personally are currently experiencing.

In other words, of course it's easier to say that life is great and that you can overcome various obstacles... if the environment and circumstances are so that you can and will succeed. I'd like to link a video by British actor Anthony Hopkins (uploaded on 17th May 2020 on his Facebook page): See here. Maybe his little video will help you, if and when needed, as Alan Watt's convictions can help, perhaps more through audio than via the written word.

Long story short: another book very much worth checking out and keeping close to re-read, if only certain parts, now and then. ( )
  TechThing | Jan 22, 2021 |
David Johansen's favorite book, I read somewhere. ( )
  dstephenc759 | Jan 20, 2021 |
Alan Watts (1915-73) was a British-born writer and philosopher who is now most remembered as a popularizer of Eastern philosophy and religion. However, as a survey of his career and prodigious writings reveal, he was much more than that. His early interest in Buddhism led him to become a secretary of the London Buddhist Lodge at the precocious age of 16, and, at 21, to publish his first book, The Spirit of Zen. However, he shortly after moved to America, where his interests developed in numerous directions - Christianity, philosophy, physics, cybernetics, psychology, anthropology, ecology, and any other field that piqued his restless curiosity. But such wide-ranging studies were not the flighty fads of a shallow intellectual dabbler or spiritual tourist - he obtained post-graduate degrees in theology and divinity, and for 5 years held the position of a Christian priest; rather, it suggests the questing spirit of a man unhappy with existing dogmas and traditions, and keen to draw new parallels and connections between different cultures and outlooks, between science and religion, between the old world and the new.

It is this desire for synthesis which has upset some purists. Especially in his later writings, Watts is often not content merely to elucidate a certain position or outlook (Vedanta, Buddhism), but instead wants to reveal what different perspectives have in common, or how they may be combined to suit different needs or suggest solutions to different problems. If, in the course of doing so, he glosses over fine distinctions or ignores controversies, then it is generally in the interest of practical application. It is of secondary interest to him to be technically correct or doctrinally accurate, for his main concern is with how we might apply these ideas and attitudes within our own lives, and in this he is passionate, persuasive, insightful and entertaining.

It is in this spirit, then, that we should approach The book - On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are (to give it its full, rather unwieldy title - hereafter, simply The Book). It is a polemic against a single idea: the modern, Western notion that human beings are ultimately separate individual egos divorced from the physical word in which they live - that each of us is, in Watts’ words, an ‘ego in a bag of skin’. In attacking this view, which can be found in both religious and secular guises, Watts draws on numerous fields: the Vedantic philosophy of Hinduism, which pictures the underlying nature of reality as a single, universal self, or Brahman; the modern discipline of cybernetics, which sees things in terms not of individuals, but overall processes and systems; and quantum physics, which undermines the ‘mechanism’ of Newton and Descartes (the ‘billiard ball’ view of the universe), and the idea that reality ultimately consists of separate individual objects. The common theme of these and the other approaches that Watts calls upon is to dispute the idea that reality/the world is ‘out there’ and the self is ‘in here’. As such, it attacks the standard position of philosophical realism and the dualist picture of mind and body associated with Descartes. So, we are not ‘ghosts’ in the ‘machines’ of our bodies (as Descartes’s view implies), but nor must we be tied to one or other of the alternatives that dualism represents: spiritual idealism (only the mind or soul is real) is as false as mechanistic materialism (the universe is merely one soulless machine working like a giant clock). Rather, as Vedanta proposes, we should seek to overcome this false duality, and to realize that, ultimately, there is no distinction to be drawn between ‘individuals’ and the universe of which we are a part: we are everything, and everything is us.

This may sound like some vague hippie mantra, but Watts’ arguments do not involve any appeal to otherworldly substances or supernatural entities. In fact, he identifies traditional religious notions (as they are often misunderstood) as responsible for our failure to realize this fundamental truth. For instance, if we were not so caught up with seeing God as a father figure whom we must obey, or else be judged and punished by, then we might be open to a deeper understanding of this concept. In a sense, he argues, we are ‘God’, could we but realize it, yet the theological baggage attached to such terms does little more than obscure this realization, which should be within the grasp of any one of us at any time. If we could let go of the false idea that our body is physically separate from the matter of the universe (such as physics denies), and that we possess a unique and distinct personality or self (which both psychology and philosophy call into question), then we would gain a truer sense of who we are, and of what ancient sages meant by such concepts as ‘Buddha nature’ and ‘God’.

Central to Watts’ position is what he calls ‘the game of black and white’, whereby God - the universe, "IT", whatever you want to call it - plays a cosmic game of hide and seek with itself. In that game, whilst each individual thing might seem like a separate piece, in reality each of us is just a means of manifesting the same thing, finger puppets of the same universal hand. ‘Self’ and ‘world’, ‘me’ and ‘you’, ‘mind’ and ‘matter’, are therefore simply different aspects of the game, but each of which ultimately has no independent reality.

Some people may find such a view either preposterous or disquieting. How can we all be part of the same thing? And even if we are, doesn’t this make everything meaningless? A mere game? Watts argues that we may play this game sincerely whilst not taking it too seriously: we can fight for goodness and justice, engage in love and work, and so on, whilst realizing that, as the old saying has it, ‘at the end of the game, king and pawn go back in the same box’ - we all return to the state we had before we were born. ‘Life’ and ‘death’ are mere labels that we place upon aspects of reality. Such terms - like ‘good’ and ‘evil’, ‘self’ and ‘other’ - mutually define and depend upon each other, but ultimately - once we realize that these opposites are merely the terms of the ‘game’ - they have no independent meaning. However, to take them literally is to court misery and delusion. For instance, in philosophy the basis for personal identity has long been a controversial problem. But if we could succeed in solving it - in establishing necessary and sufficient criteria for the continued existence of a unified self or ‘I’ (our ego) - then it would be a disaster. As Watts’ puts it, ‘nothing fails like success’. The victory of fixed literalness over shifting uncertainty and ambiguity may actually be a bad thing. Death, failure, disruption, dissolution - these are necessary things too, and from the universal perspective may fulfill important and positive roles.

There are many other interesting and important features of Watts’ arguments, but I’ve provided enough of a taste here to give you a flavor of his approach - I’ll leave the rest to Watts, who puts it much better than I could. However, to finish, I would like to highlight a few points that I think are interesting and important.

Firstly, the emphasis of The Book is not simply philosophical, but experiential. Watts believes that, as interesting as the ideas he presents are, they are empty and meaningless if they do not result in a change in our actual experience and patterns of thought and behaviour. We must learn a new way of seeing, which in turn must lead us to a richer, more positive outlook on life, where we are more fully alive in the present. So, for Watts, dogma and belief are always second to experience and practical realization, and it is in this specific sense that his approach is ‘mystical’, thus linking him directly to the goals and methods of Zen Buddhism and other approaches that emphasize practical insight over theoretical knowledge.

Secondly, whilst The Book is aimed at a general readership, it is no lightweight popularization, but - within the limits of its purpose - engages meaningfully with fundamental debates in philosophy, science and religion. It is obvious that Watts has read widely and thought deeply about the issues he raises, and, whilst we may not always agree with him - and there is plenty in The Book to challenge common assumptions - his ideas are always substantial and interesting.

Finally, there is the question of the book’s continued relevance. Aside from the fact that the philosophical and religious issues with which The Book deals never really go away, many of Watts’ views on technology and society now seem remarkably prescient. The following passage is a notable example (p.44):

increasing efficiency of communication and of controlling human behavior can, instead of liberating us into the air like birds, fix us to the ground like toadstools. All information will come in by super-realistic television and other electronic devices as yet in the planning stage or barely imagined. In one way this will enable the individual to extend himself anywhere without moving his body - even to distant regions of space. But this will be a new kind of individual - an individual with a colossal external nervous system reaching out and out into infinity. And this electronic nervous system will be so interconnected that all individuals plugged in will tend to share the same thoughts, the same feelings, and the same experiences. There may be specialized types, just as there are specialized cells and organs in our bodies. For the tendency will be for all individuals to coalesce into a single bio-electronic body.

Written in 1966, it is clear that - like his contemporary Marshall McLuhan - Watts recognized that technology did not just enable us to interact differently with our environment, but actually represented an extension of our nervous systems: technology actually changes who we are. We may talk of being glued to the TV, or joke of someone who treats their phone as if it were a vital organ, but there is a seed of literal truth in these metaphorical ways of speaking. Just as, in evolutionary terms, our sense organs represented extensions of our primitive nervous systems, so technological means of perception and communication extend sense-perception. So, whilst it’s tempting to draw the limits of ‘self’ at the body’s borders with the external world, the potential for amputation or artificial augmentation actually reveals that our notion of self is fluid and culturally defined. ‘Me’ is not a fixed concept, but a practical consideration: I could lose all my limbs and still retain it, so why not gain new ‘limbs’ and extend it?

Watts’ key contribution here is to show that such considerations are not merely the stuff of science fiction, but have their roots in ancient religious and philosophical notions of selfhood. But in pointing this out, he also highlights an important difference. The religious and mystical extension of self was organic and life affirming; in identifying with everything, we become more than an ‘ego in a bag of skin’, but part of the active processes of life itself. In contrast, the technological extensions of self make us more and more passive. We become consumers, dependent on a mechanical system that treats individuals as mere cogs in the overall machine. In the former view, we become more than we thought we were; in the latter, we become, in a sense, less. For most people, such technological ‘transhumanism' seems as implausible and remote as the religious variety, but this is because they hold to the naive notion of the individual ego that is Watt’s main target. Thus, they sleepwalk into technological extensions of self, blithely accepting the unread terms and conditions of a system that introduces greater and greater uniformity of thought and experience through the illusion of greater freedom of choice and expression. Social networks connect us to people we may never meet in person, but they also restrict our expression of what is distinctive about us: we become a set of ‘likes’ and ‘dislikes’, a tick-list of preferences and hobbies, where who we are is reduced to a profile picture and our views on life must fit within a 140 character limit (or whatever it is now...).

Watts’ views are therefore more relevant than ever. Faced with the problems and challenges of globalization and digitization, with increasing multiculturalism and secularization on the one hand and the backlash of nationalism and fundamentalism on the other, this last great taboo - the question of who or what we are - could never be more pressing.

Gareth Southwell is a philosopher, writer and illustrator.
  Gareth.Southwell | May 23, 2020 |
David Johansen's favorite book, I read somewhere. ( )
  dstephenc101 | Feb 1, 2019 |
David Johansen's favorite book, I read somewhere. ( )
  dstephenc101 | Feb 1, 2019 |
Showing 1-5 of 26 (next | show all)
no reviews | add a review

Belongs to Publisher Series

You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Canonical title
Original title
Alternative titles
Original publication date
People/Characters
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Awards and honors
Epigraph
Dedication
TO MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN
Joan, David, Elizabeth, Christopher
Tia, Mark, Richard, Lila, Diane
Ann, Myra, Michael
First words
Just what should a young man or woman know in order to be "in the know"?
Quotations
Last words
(Click to show. Warning: May contain spoilers.)
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Blurbers
Original language
Canonical DDC/MDS
Canonical LCC

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English (1)

Drawing upon ancient Hindu philosophy, the author explores the human psyche and the importance of personal identity.

No library descriptions found.

Book description
Questo libro, scritto nel 1966, quasi al termine dell'esistenza dell'autore, e che, non senza intenzione, fu intitolato "Il Libro", racchiude l'esperienza di tutta una vita, e se ne giova.
È da ritenere che l'autore lo prediligesse se, come egli afferma, lo destinava in eredità ai propri figli; anche se aggiungeva che dopo letto "può essere buttato via".
Poiché uno dei punti capitali del suo 'insegnamento' è il rispetto dei sentimenti personali e della indipendenza della mente umana da qualsiasi 'insegnamento'.
"Il Libro", cioè, è un vital nutrimento, ma è solo un punto di partenza e non un riferimento perpetuo.
I problemi della conoscenza, della morale, dell'essere, dell'"io", dell'unità di tutte le cose nel tempo e nello spazio, e dell'uomo nell'universo, non son mai risolti una volta per tutte.
(piopas)

'reality' considered as illusion
Haiku summary

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (3.99)
0.5
1 4
1.5 2
2 12
2.5 4
3 52
3.5 14
4 94
4.5 14
5 96

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 164,360,593 books! | Top bar: Always visible