Category Archives: Uncategorized

Fnord. All things that defy category.

in the raw

in the raw: necessary heresies (1/2)
by Alex Burns (alex@disinfo.com) – January 22, 2001

Author’s note: This interview was originally published in
REVelation magazine (#13, Autumn, 1995): 36-40. The many
lists of occult and New Age philosophers betrays its
authors’ self-conscious youth: beginners often first learn
discourse by referencing. I subsequently joined the Temple
of Set in June 1996 after further correspondence with Dr.
Michael A. Aquino and other Setians. This was also Robert
Anton Wilson’s first interview by email. At least, I think
it was RAW who replied, but I’m still not sure . . .

The paleolithism of the future (which for us, as mutants,
already exists) will be achieved on a grand scale only
through a massive technology of the Imagination, and a
scientific paradigm which reaches beyond Quantum Mechanics
into the realm of Chaos Theory & the hallucinations of
Speculative Fiction.
~ ~ Hakim Bey, Temporary Autonomous Zones.

Some may get through the gate in time.
~ ~ William Burroughs, Cities of the Red Night.

Robert Anton Wilson has always been an enigma. Surfacing in
a Faustian Age, his writings, lectures and multimedia
projects have become frontline weapons in the war against
the forces of unconsciousness. A trickster-like figure, the
self styled ‘RAW’ has unleashed the forces of Rebellion and
Curiosity, Knowledge and Power, to many over the past 25
years. As the current social structures that have dominated
Western Civilization over the past 2000 years disintegrate
and Chaos ensues, RAW is amongst a loose cabal of
anarchists, scientists and philosophers, all firing the
opening shots in a war that will hope to awaken the latent
creative forces in humankind.

His work is a sobering antidote to much of the deliberately
irrationalist “New Age” theologies or the restrictive dogmas
of modern science. Written during one of the 20th Century’s
major culture shifts, his many books are weapons used by the
few self-conscious people against the smothering herd-like
masses. RAW makes us aware of the current low intensity
culture warfare in which the sacred is manufactured and
commodified, controlled by intellectual castes, and
challenges us to liberate ourselves from this neo-feudalism.
Whilst many other authors make millions out of flashy
psycho-mystical doubletalk about consciousness, ‘change’,
and pop psychology, RAW shows us the true methods of self
discovery. The landmark Prometheus Unbound (1983) and the
later Quantum Psychology (1992) are two key treatises on
self liberation from mental addiction to “ideals”,
alienation, cultured infantilism, anger fuelled by
anti-parental vengeance and other opressions. These modern
grimoires are loaded with techniques to move from being what
cyberneticist Norbert Weiner called “a controllable
thermostat,” to becoming more human.

Our interview was to be conducted by email, as RAW was
working frantically to finish several projects. It was his
first experience of an interview by email, and he was
genuinely excited to get his grips on the super-information
highway; previously being exposed to International Relay
Chat (IRC) in 1993. His new book Cosmic Trigger III: My Life
After Death was at the printers, and it seemed that RAW was
using his ‘trickster’ act to parody the constant queries on
various news-groups about his earthly existence. Eagerly
awaited by longtime fans, the new book promises to recapture
the early Wilson magic that made the original Cosmic Trigger
I: Final Secret of the Illuminati (1977) so special.

“My Life After Death represents a synechdoche, if you’ll
pardon a classical reference. The book deals with masks,
deceptions, art and conspiracy – but, I think, from a new
angle I haven’t used before. My death in cyberspace is just
the prolog and archetype of many other interfaces of art,
illusion and conspiracy I discuss. For instance, Elmyr de
Houry, the greatest art forger of our century – did he forge
as many masterpieces as he claimed, or did he exaggerate his
own criminality? Who can we trust to judge this, when he
fooled the experts for three decades at least? The Priory of
Sion – a serious conspiracy, a joke, a joke that turned into
a conspiracy, or what? The canon of art – another joke or
another conspiracy? UMMO, the alleged extraterrestrial
correspondence school that has impressed a lot of
intelligent people not normally fooled by UFO hoaxes – if
UMMO is not extraterrestrial, what band of human
conspirators are behind it, and is it is a joke, a
conspiracy or something else? All these questions, and many
others, relate to the basic topic of the reality of masks
and the masks of reality. My death is much less mysterious
than many of these other enigmas. . .By the way, some people
still insist I am dead, really. Anything I publish is
regarded by them as the work of a Virtual Robert Anton
Wilson created by the C.I.A. Will you believe me if I deny
that?”

It was ironic that the interview was by email, an
appropriate place to discuss masks of reality, conspiracy
and deception. RAW kept his address secret, posting using a
pseudonym. His manipulation of reality extended to the
interview process itself. As RAW has been known to comment,
“Reality is what you can get away with.”

An early influence on RAW was the work of Buckminster Fuller
(1895-1983), the inventor of the geodesic dome and a leading
researcher into synergetic geometry. In the 1960s “Bucky”
challenged the then emerging “pop ecology” movement’s
assertion that humanity faced imminent destruction because
population growth would outstrip our natural resources. He
believed that we use less than 0.05% of the energy available
on our planet. For example, since our architectural plans
are based around Pythagorean “golden means” and other
classical forms, this leads to generic buildings that
inefficiently use space and aren’t integrated into the
surrounding environment. Fuller’s experience with naval
design, which packs the most objects into the smallest,
lightest space, lead him to conclude that our land buildings
overuse potentially recyclable materials. RAW saw this self
imposed limitation was due to conditioned responses and
thinking, and that by changing perspective as Fuller had
done, new solutions, such as Mike Reynold’s “Earthships,” to
previously “unsolvable” problems could occur.

“As Bucky Fuller liked to say, there is no energy shortage
on this planet but there is a terrible intelligence
shortage,” RAW told me.

RAW’s early activities included membership in the legendary
“John Dillinger Died For You Society”, part of the
Discordian movement inspired by Greg Hill’s Principia
Discordia tract (1968). This was a direct influence on the
Illuminatus! trilogy (1975). What began as a satire on weird
religions has mutated over the last 25 years into an unusual
form of individual liberation by worshipping Eris, Goddess
of Chaos. It now has a sizeable net presence and several
news-groups, and has spawned a mini publishing industry. RAW
recently criticised several games companies who have
marketed products exploiting Illuminatus! and the
Discordians, and are able to escape paying royalties through
legal loop-holes. Further commercialisation beckons . . .

After working as an engineering aide and sales manager, RAW
became an Associate Editor of Playboy between 1966-71.
During these formative years he encountered revolutionary
artists/movements such as James Joyce, Surrealism, Borges,
and ‘Pataphysics’ which inspired him. He read the spy novels
of Eric Ambler, John Le Carre and Len Deighton (“where you
can’t believe anything the characters say”) and skeptical
philosophers such as John Hume and Friedrich Nietszche (“who
believed reality cannot be known but only guessed”).

Whilst studying these diverse sources which were to
influence his later work, Hefner’s empire published several
of his works. These included Sex & Drugs (1973), one of the
first Western book to explain the ancient Tantric secret
that consciousness can be altered by slowing the orgasm
during sexual intercourse, often with the help of drugs.
Such secrets had been previously available to initiates of
secret orders such as the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO), and
had been alluded to by the notorious magician Aleister
Crowley, but RAW was the first to explain sex-magick
scientifically as a “peak experience.”

Breaking with the Hefner Empire coincided with the
authorship of RAW’s most popular work – the Illuminatus!
trilogy, co-authored with the sadly recently deceased Robert
Shea. This three volume work has been described as “the
longest shaggy dog story in literary history” and “a fairy
tale for paranoids.” Yet underneath the satire of just about
every conspiracy theory and political/religious group in
modern society lay an incredible work of hallucinatory
Speculative Fiction. As a means of liberation through trash
culture, it rivals Philip K. Dick’s VALIS novels, ironically
conceived around the same period.

Illuminatus! introduced readers to the enigmatic character
Hagbard Celine and Wilson’s theory that all points of view
are umwelts or “reality tunnels,” which exclude other truths
or information. Amongst the multi-layered characters and
shifting plots, RAW alluded to much of the modern Western
Magickal Tradition, such as sex magick, links between secret
societies and intelligence services (the three main figures
who influenced the early Twentieth Century occult revival –
Theosophist Helena Blatavsky, Russian mystic George
Gurdjieff and Aleister Crowley all worked for the latter),
ritual drug use, secret Nazi research under the Ahnernerbe
organisation into occult technology, and parodies of the
1960s hippie experience.

Whilst Illuminatus! was campy, its hidden references to
philosophies and descriptions of occult knowledge catapulted
Wilson and Shea into the ranks of writers like Daniel Defoe,
Victor Hugo, Jules Verne, and Mary Shelley – authors who had
used allegories to communicate a second, hidden meaning in
their literature – such as the perennial search for the
elusive Philosopher’s Stone: “pure consciousness” and the
Fountain of Youth.

Twenty years later controversy regarding Illuminatus! rages
on. Apart from discussing esoteric doctrines, the book
conveyed a model of conspiracies and paranoia that rival
Eric Hoffer’s examination of fanaticism in The True
Believer. Wilson and Shea used the metaphor of the “Order of
Illuminati or the Enlightened”, an organisation founded in
Bavaria, 1776, by Adam Weishapt, then Professor of Natural
and Canon Law at the University of Ingoldstadt. The
organisation was similar to Freemasonry, and after gaining
over 2000 members and lodges across Europe, was suppressed
in 1784 by the Bavarian Government. This group of republican
free-thinkers began to decline and Weishapt fled Bavaria in
1785, later dying at Gotha in 1811.

Although most likely a curious historical footnote, the
Illuminati were the first modern society to use for
political subversion the machinery of the secret
organization. RAW was able to link this back to the Knights
Templar and Hassan i Sabbah’s shadowy Assassins, who had a
stranglehold on religious power from the ninth Century
onwards. His dying words reportedly were “Nothing Is Real,
Everything Is Permitted.” Conspiracy theorists have linked
the Illuminati to the rise of Hitler, the Trilateral
Commission, the Club of Rome, International Zionism,
Communism, the assassinations of JFK, Robert Kennedy and
Martin Luther King and the Military-Industrial Complex; all
vying for world domination. RAW found it intriguing that
such theorists were spread across the entire political
spectrum, suggesting that conspiracies are metaphors for
this troubled age. Some modern conspiracy theorists even
contend that the publication of Illuminatus! sent shockwaves
through the N.W.O., the Vatican, Masons and the CIA by
revealing the “great hidden secret.”

RAW’s response was: “Well, I’m flattered that some people
think Illuminatus! could have shaken up the New World Order,
but I find it hard to believe. The conspiratorial details in
that book came from (1) long published paranoid literature
(2) the satirical imaginations of Shea and myself.
Reprinting the old paranoid rants couldn’t have disturbed
the Masters of Earth, could it? The only alternative then is
that either Shea or I or both of us possess unconscious ESP
and the things we think we invent actually come to us by
telepathy. A charming idea! I must think about it some more
. . .

“Actually, a few things that I thought I invented did turn
out to be true, oddly enough. The one I still remember is
Beethoven’s link to the original, real, historical
Illuminati. I invented that as a parody of right-wing books
on the Beatles serving Moscow – but hot damn years later I
found, in a bio of Ludwig, that he had several associates in
the Illuminati and the Illuminati commissioned his first
major work, The Emperor Joseph Cantata. So maybe I do have
unconscious ESP. . . .in odd moments. Most of what I think I
invented still seems like fiction to me and to all sane
people I know.”

A startling revelation for RAW fans are his future
projections for the fictional Illuminat series as a whole.
“I eventually plan to continue The Historical Illuminati
Chronicles. Right now I’m more concerned with the future
again. I’m working on Bride of Illuminatus which takes place
in 2026, a more congenial place for my mind to roam than the
Eighteenth Century. If I live long enough, I hope all my
novels will form one continuous saga from 1750, when Bach
died and Sigismundo Celine was born, up through the
democratic and industrial revolutions, on to Darwin and
Nineteenth Century rationalism, then linking in the outbreak
of Relativity (Einstein, Joyce, Crowley) in Masks of the
Illuminati, jumping forward to the psycehdelic age in
Illuminatus and quantum/computer revolutions in
Schroedinger’s Cat and then finishing up with my hopes for
the future in Bride.”

He hopes that readers will gain a new perspective by being
able to read the series sequentially. “After the first
Illuminatus! trilogy with Shea, I noticed that some of the
negative responses indicated an ignorance, not just of
modern science, but of the Enlightenment philosophy of the
18th Century. Many people who can read are still living,
mentally, in the dark ages. So thats when I began to think
of a series of interconnected novels that would take such
readers through all the revolutions of the past two
centuries and prepare them for the 21st Century. The reason
Sigismundo Celine, in The Earth Will Shake, is born in
Naples is because the Inquisition still existed there in

  1. Taking him out of that fanatic Catholic world into the
    world of French rationalism begins the process of taking the
    readers from the Age of Aquinas to the Age of Space.”

A disturbing trend, which supports the need for many people
to be exposed to RAW’s grand vision, is that monotheistic
State and Religious powers have cracked down on many cults,
organisations and individuals who challenge consensus
reality – such as the ritual child abuse scares of the late
1980s, the trial by the Federal Drug Agency of Wilhelm Reich
(discussed by RAW in a 1988 play titled Wilhelm Reich In
Hell), parapsychologists, the Black Panthers, and religious
groups such as the Branch Davidians and Wiccans. Narrow
fundamentalist thinking and a witch-hunt inquisitorial
atmosphere by the media in the 1990s is the result of such
rampant, unchecked paranoia. Complicating the matter even
further is the existence of elite secret societies since
early Paleolithic agricultural based civilizations formed,
from the early priest-shamans and Socratic philosophers of
Egypt and Greece, through the Vatican, Knights Templar and
Freemasons to modern espionage agencies, G-7, Club of Rome,
the OTO, Temple of Set, hidden monasteries in Tibet and
Iran, and the Manhattan Project.

This inquisitorial atmosphere embraced the U.S. during our
interview after the Oklahoma bombing incident in May 1995,
with domestic law enforcement agencies cracking down on
right wing militia groups and controversy surrounding the
powerful National Rifle Association gun lobby. From a unique
vantage point, RAW (who once described his politics as
anarcho-technocrat and his religion as transcendental
atheist/experimental mystic) surveyed the resulting
socio-political upheaval and restriction of civil liberties.

“Considering the political capital that President Clinton
could make out of using the bombing as an excuse to lead a
witch-hunt and smear all his political enemies – and/or his
political “critics” – I think he has shown remarkable
restraint. I can’t explain it. At times I suspect that he is
a man of integrity despite being in politics. (Is that the
first sign of senility appearing in my aging brain?) I hate
to sound naive, but I think Clinton will try to avoid a
witch-hunt and just set the police on the nuts who did the
bombing. Of course, by the time the anti-terrorism bill gets
out of Congress, it will undoubtedly have some nasty and
dangerous clauses in it. I still don’t feel quite ready to
run for Canada. I just increased my monthly contribution to
the American Civil Liberties Union, to help them fight any
excesses that may get into the anti-terrorism bill, but I am
not ready to flee or hide yet.”

RAW’s interest in conspiracies in disguise and conspiracies
within conspiracies evolved into his “guerilla ontology”
phase of work during the late 1970s and early 1980s. He
collaborated with Timothy Leary on several books, including
Neuropolitique (1977) and Game of Life (1979). His analysis
of our reality tunnels synthesised many aspects of human
knowledge including the General Semantics of Count Alfred
Korzybski (“the map isn’t the territory, the menu isn’t the
meal”), Zen poetry, references to Beat writers like William
Burroughs, and other cultural icons.

RAW suggests as Gurdjieff and Burroughs did, that man lives
in a kind of hypnotised state, hardly ‘existing’ at all and
changing from hour to hour, a victim of events that pull him
along. Occasionally he receives flashes of intensity and
freedom, but mostly lives a routine, habit filled existence,
occupied by trivialities. Burroughs suggests a kind of
language-virus (as Ludwig Wittgenstein did), leading RAW to
examine political/religious fanaticism, mind-control
experiments, psychiatric manipulation, propoganda,
irrational science, and other traps that create non existant
problems to be exploited by politicians, priests, the media
and other authoritarian figures. With Philip K Dick, Timothy
Leary, John Cunningham Lilly and others, he became
interested in Information Theory, and the idea that people’s
nervous systems have been wired inefficiently into a “low
level fear” configuration, reinforced by benign deceptions
such as media rapid fire information; illogical
socio-religious concepts; psychotherapy that creates the
need for dependency on institutions; and knee jerk
authoritarianism. These keep people from realising their
true creative powers and keeps the sleeplike masses in
constant confusion, to be manipulated and controlled by an
elite few who restrict the flow of pure information signals
by distorting them to others. (RAW’s Situation Normal All
Fucked Up Law – “Communication is possible only between
equals.”)

Echoing the study of fascism in our family, political and
social structures by Wilhelm Reich, RAW sought to exalt the
individual over the State, and to make people aware of the
subtle, often hidden influences that control and distort
their lives. As Antonio Gramsci stated, “We are taught to
desire our own psychological imprisonment.” RAW’s
correlation of many seemingly separate fields of
experimentation and study often yielded surprisingly
coherent models and new concepts.

Taking the next step from rational study into action, RAW
began to fuse scientific techniques with those of ceremonial
magick (“the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in
comformity with Will,” according to Aleister Crowley) at the
same time as Timothy Leary was conducting LSD research on
William Burroughs, Allan Ginsberg and others, as well as
later developing his 8 circuit model of human consciousness.

Whilst Leary was lecturing across America on the Politics of
Ecstasy and later escaping prison with the help of the
Weatherman radicals, RAW tried most of the major methods of
brain exploration, bringing the new paradigms and manuals
into the Space Age; the next stage from Leary’s experiments
at Harvard using the Bardo Thodol (Tibetan Book of the
Dead).

When asked what techniques were most beneficial, RAW
replied, “I really don’t know what techniques have helped me
most. I mean, really, you do 6 months of A and 6 months of B
and you feel you’ve learned something organic. Do you
attribute it to A or B or both? I’ve tried dozens of systems
and think I learned a little from each, but I don’t like
picking favorites. Well . . . a few favorites . . . the
Acoustic Brain Research tapes; General Semantics; yoga
meditation; cannabis; scientific method . . . but some
things that didn’t do much for me may do wondersor others. I
never liked isolation tanks, but I don’t doubt that they
have opened doors and new brain paths for many of their
users.

“None of the “smart” drinks have impressed me much so far –
but I absolutely 100% support that line of research. I have
been more impressed with the brain-training tapes produced
by Acoustic Brain Research.But I am keen, as always, on any
new technique that accelerates or expands awareness.

“Most advanced shamanistic techniques such as Tibetan Tantra
or Crowley’s work in the West work by alternating faith and
skepticism until you get beyond the ordinary limits of
both,” he told Science Fiction Review in May 1976. “With
such systems one learns how arbitrary are the reality maps
that can be coded into laryngeal grunts by homids or
visualised by a mammalian nervous system. . .Most people are
trapped in one static reality-map imprinted on their neurons
when they were children.”

It seems extraordinary that two pioneering dissident
philosophers would meet and combine their talents to create
their most important work, but RAW preferred not to dwell on
it. “That’s like Crowley’s question to candidates who came
to him for mystical wisdom. “Why,” he would ask them, “of
all the teachers on this planet did you come to me? And why,
of all the days of your life, on this particular day?” You
just can’t answer such a thing in words. It’s a Zen koan.
The whole universe conspired to send each student to Crowley
on a particualr day, and the whole universe conspired (I
mean that in a literal or ironic sense) to have Dr. Leary
and myself thinking the same things at the same time and it
seemed natural for us to collaborate on a few parts of a few
books.”

The Wilson/Leary 8 circuit model of the brain is mentioned
at the end of RAW’s non-fiction post-script to Illuminatus!
called Cosmic Trigger I: Final Secret of the Illuminati
(1977), and by Leary in Info-Psychology (1987). This
acclaimed work, which ranks with Prometheus Rising (a
practical manual dealing with the 8 circuit model and how to
overcome the limits of your reality tunnels) as RAW’s most
important, is a mindblowing journey through a landscape of
Futurists, Immortalists, RAW’s occult experiments, secret
societies and synchronicities.

The first Cosmic Trigger covered the dark side of the “New
Age” movement, such as links between Aleister Crowley, the
Jet Propulsion Laboratories at Pasadena (which launched the
Apollo space missions), and Scientologist L.Ron Hubbard. But
mainly, these books were nothing less than a manifesto for
self controlled evolution, which all true religious
teachings point to: an effort to exalt the gift of isolate
awareness, reason, and the unnatural aspect of mankind’s
consciousness. Neo-Nietzschean in flavour, they presented
the reader with the modern Quest for the Holy Grail – the
realisation of the unique (polarised) self (or ubermensch).

Extending John Cunningham Lilly’s idea that the mind can be
modelled by computers (thus linking with his work on
informations theories and guerilla ontology), Wilson/Leary
postulated 4 basic circuits that program our behaviour: (1)
the Oral Bio-Survival Circuit; (2) the Anal
Emotional-Territorial Circuit; (3) the Time-Binding Semantic
Circuit; and (4) the “Moral” Socio-Sexual Circuit. Wilson
acknowledged that these circuits are antique and
conservative, existing in everybody and readily manipulated.
When reprogrammed, they allow control of the five senses,
which if properly trained allow the psyche to experience the
world directly, but most often act as blockages. However his
most inspiring work deals with the next four circuits –
relatively new in terms of our evolution, which Wilson hopes
will foreshadow our future stages of development. These four
new circuits are: (5) the Holistic Neuro-somatic Circuit;
(6) the Collective Neurogenetic Circuit; (7) the
Metaprogramming Circuit and (8) the Non-Local Quantum
Circuit.

These circuits are triggered by certain psychoactive drugs
and other “peak experiences”, leading to deeper appreciation
of aesthetics, noetic apprehension and the eventual
unravelling of “the language of the gods” – contained in
Egyptian hieroglyphs and the DNA Double Helix. In one stroke
Wilson and Leary had linked the post-Einstein Quantum
Physics revolution with modern religious, occult, and
psychological techniques. This is one reason why despite the
model being over twenty years old, Wilson sheepishly wrote,
“I’m embarassed to say that I still like the 8 circuit model
of the brain better than any other. This embarasses me
because I said frequently over 20 years ago that it would be
replaced by a better model within 10 years. Maybe it has
been made obsolete already and I just don’t know about it .
. . but in my area of knowledge, the 8 circuit model still
fits more facts than any other model.”

The Wilson/Leary model extends on the Sufi/Gurdjieffian
analogy of the “body as a transformational apparatus for
energy,” linking with physicist Jack Sarfatti’s theory that
higher levels of consciousness are a special form of energy
within the universe, which only a few in each generation
will discover and control.

“One of the major revisions in my current seminars (I
haven’t published this yet) changes the names of the
polarity of the first circuit. Instead of calling the
extremes neophilia and neophobia, I now call them infophilia
and infophobia, which I consider more general. I also have
started (not always consistently) replacing 8 “circuits”
with 8 “systems” because the circuit metaphor seems a little
too electronic and I think humans are more electro-colloidal
systems than the electronic models of human “mind” that we
find in computers. In other words, like all protoplasm we
can be modelled by computers but we remain more chemically
complex and otherwise more complex than mere circuitry
describes. I’m not trying to drag in some New Age
“spirituality” here. I just mean that General Systems Theory
seems more . . . well, more general than computer theory.

“I got the electro-colloidal idea from Charles M. Childs in
his Individuality in Organisms. He says all protoplasm
exists in electro-colloidal suspension between sol and gel
and dies if it moves too far in either direction. (He says a
lot of other interesting things, too . . .) So I tend to see
humans as dynamic living systems in that kind of suspension
between sol and gel. That means they can only be understood
holistically or organically, not in a linear or mechanistic
way. Hence, I prefer Systems to Circuits as models.”

This revision poses some important implications for
Artificial Intelligence work, and whether computers will
ever acheive consciousness. Wilson’s revision suggests that
they may acheive some form – such as awareness of death, or
intelligence (seen in the example of viruses approaching the
complexity of low level bacterial forms), but never the
“self-consciousness” that makes mankind unique on Earth.

Leary linked this model to his SMI²LE paradigm (Space
Migration, Intelligence Intensification and Life Extension)
which envisions a future free of restrictive Judeo-Christian
morality and the limits imposed on us by a certain death.
His monograph 22 Alternatives to Involuntary Death was an
important contribution to the LE field, which involves a
diverse range of technology and techniques, such as yoga,
virtual reality, AI, cryonics, flotation tanks and certain
elements of magick Commenting on the present trends, RAW
observed that, “The people I know in anti-aging research all
expect some major breakthrough soon, but I would not hazard
a guess about in what area of research it will occur or
when.

“I think anti-AIDS research will most likely give us the key
to what causes the accelerated breakdown of the immune
system in that disease, and that will probably but give us
the key to what causes the slower breakdown that leads to
aging and death for the rest of us who don’t even have AIDS.
It will be a wonderful, and kindly, joke on the
Fundamentalists if the greatest scientific gift to Gay men
becomes a wonderful gift to the Fundamentalists, too.”

In the mid-1980s after having his work published by a range
of major and independent publishers, RAW became involved
with New Falcon Publications, a loose cabal of similarly
minded authors, spearheaded by Dr. Christopher Hyatt, who
wrote the seminal Undoing Yourself with Energized Meditation
(1989). New Falcon reprinted his earlier work, along with
tracts by Leary, Crowley and other proponents of brain
change. Currently New Falcon is one of the leading
publishers of such modern grimoires, differing from other
New Age publishers in jettisoning pompous acedmia or hazy
cosmic foo foo.

“Believe it or not, I don’t understand how New Falcon came
about or even why it does much of what it does,” RAW
admitted. “All I know is that Dr. Hyatt was a Jungian
therapist, decided Jung didn’t cover everything and became a
Jungian-Reichian therapist, and then for some reason became
a publisher on top of that. He’s also the Outer Head of the
Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. I think his major concern
is to publish books that he considers important, especially
if they contain the kind of ideas that the Establishment
publishers in New York won’t touch with a ten-foot pole.”

Unfortunately despite much pioneering work, RAW does have
his critics. Dr. Michael A. Aquino, co-founder of the Temple
of Set observed in a review of the Illuminatus! trilogy that
his later non fiction work “lacked the unself-conscious
style of Illuminatus!, and fell right into the category of
publications so successfully lampooned by it. Truth,
however, remains stranger than fiction, and within the pages
of Illuminatus! you will actually find many gems of occult
wisdom.”

Robin Robertson of Psychological Perspectives points out
that “beneath the skeptic, I find he is drawn to the magical
side of life . . . he is not the model agnostic he holds up
as ideal.” Such criticisms are hidden under a deluge of
appreciative comments. RAW was criticised harshly by members
of the science community after the publication of The New
Fundamentalists in 1986, but he has managed to avoid the
kind of criticisms about integrity levelled at his friend
Timothy Leary.

More glaring are comments by Gnosis magazine contributor Jay
Cornell in a review of Cosmic Trigger II: Down To Earth that
Wilson’s later work suffered from “predictable ’80s pop
leftism or nostalgic sentimentalism about the ’60s” and that
“his trickster act needs updating.”

Wilson responded to this harsh indictment of his work by
stating, “I never respond to that kind of criticism. First,
nobody can be objective about his own work, and you make a
fool of yourself if you pretend that you can. Second, if
perchance my work has anything of lasting value, it will go
on, as it has gone on for two decades, getting reprinted
continually, and Cornell can’t stop it. On the other hand,
if my work has no real lasting value, it will eventually all
go out of print, and I can’t persuade people they ought to
buy it to make me happy.”

In a 1976 Science Fiction Review interview he felt that his
books should “leave the reader with the feeling that the
universe is capable of doing something shocking within the
next 5 minutes. Life without certainty can be exhilirating,
liberating, a great adventure. I hope to create a real sense
of awe, which is all the religion we need, and all we can
honestly expect in this day and age.”

On the topic of literary criticism itself, RAW revealed,
“I’m probably too sensitive, but so are a lot of artists.
Richard Burton gave up reading all reviews, because he went
into such dark suicidal depressions whenever he saw a bad
one. Hart Crane and Ross Lockeridge actually did kill
themselves because of critics. I don’t get that wounded, but
I do feel pain. Why hide this? Critics know that most
artists are sensitive. They would get no fun out of their
vicious work if they didn’t know it hurts. Sadists don’t
attack inanimate objects. They want victims who feel pain.”

Despite Cornell’s criticisms, RAW is still as relevant in
the 1990s as ever. A recent essay in his Trajectories
newsletter criticised the defence of the military-industrial
complex by ‘futurist’ Alvin Toffler, author of the classic
Future Shock (1971), now spokesperson for the Progress &
Freedom Association. With the election of Republican Senator
Newt Gingrich as House Speaker, Toffler has been elevated to
guru-like status, serving as an adviser to various
government departments, and being regularly quoted by
Gingrich. Toffler’s closest rival, author John Megatrends
Naisbitt, and right wing sci-fi author Jerry Pournelle, have
also pushed for rises in military/high-tech industry/NASA
spending. Pournelle was an avid supporter of the Star Wars
or SDI (Strategic Defence Initiative) in the early 1980s,
giving a vision that space is a new frontier like the Wild
West once was, only bigger. This rush to put mankind into
space as a priority echoes Leary’s admirable Space Migration
work on the surface, but is more like the visions of pulp
writer Robert Heinlein, who lobbied the Eisenhower
Administration in the 1950s for similar industry subsidies,
believing space to be the final utopia.

RAW is far more pragmatic. “The I-squared (Intelligence
Intensification) part of Leary’s SMI²LE program has always
seemed to me more important than the SM (space migration)
and LE (Life Extension.) Without more brains, we won’t get
more space or more time.

“I would tend to see this emerging culture as another sign
of the fundamentalist materialism I’ve criticised in the
past. Certainly, Futurism or Future Studies seem to have
split into two camps. First, the Utopians like Barbara Marx
Hubbard and the people carrying on Bucky Fuller’s work (they
have about four different groups, advancing different parts
of Bucky’s scenario.) Then, on the other side, the ones who
call themselves the nuts-and-bolts realists. I regard them
as “crackpot realists” in the sense in which the sociologist
C. Wright Mills used that term. They define realism by the
norms of the ruling class and then work within those
parameters. I think all work within those ruling class
parameters is doomed and pointless. The information
revolution is changing everything so totally that we have to
think outside the traditional Master/Serf paradigm, so the
Utopians, who did get out of that grid, make more sense to
me. I agree with Riane Eisler – the Dominator model is
collapsing and a Partnership model will replace it. So, the
Tofflers and their glorification of war seem anti-Futurist
to me. War is the ultimate schoolyard bully form of
Dominator ethos, unfortunately magnified into mass murder.
This paradigm will destroy humanity unless we transform it
into a Partnership/Negotiation paradigm.”

Hakim Bey, the author of Temporary Autonomous Zones and an
ally of Wilson’s argues that such control of new technology
by corporations will only continue the current neo-feudalism
pervading our society. In TAZ he writes “certain doctrines
of “Futurology” remain problematic. For example, even if we
accept the liberatory potential of such new technologies as
TV, computers, robotics, Space exploration, etc., we still
see a gap between potentiality & actualization. The
banalization of TV, the yuppification of computers & the
militarization of Space suggest that these technologies in
themselves provide no “determined” guarantee of their
liberatory use.”

The issue is one of control and has occured before – LSD was
used by the CIA’s MK-Ultra program as a mind control tool
but also by Leary and many others to expand their
consciousness and as a research tool into the human
bio-computer. As Wilson says in a famous quote: “Whoever
controls the definition has the ultimate control.” Since the
State won’t wither away or be overthrown, Hakim Bey and
others hope to render it obsolete by decentralist electronic
technology and programmes of self liberation. “There is no
humanity without techne,” Bey reminds us, “but there is no
techne worth more than my humanity.” Despite a false
optimism and egalitarianism, its clear that social
stratification is more prevalent than before, and that
technology will play a deciding role in what future society
finally occurs.

Discussing the potentiality/actualisation gap, RAW suggests
that, “actually, there are gaps in every part of the
social-evolution process. For instance, new mathematical
theories turn into new technology in about two years in
computer science, but it takes fifty years in architecture.
Fuller did a lot of calculation of these time-lags and most
of his predictions about the 1980s, made in the 1920s, have
come true.”

As we head towards the Omega Point and information spirals
out of control, emerging subcultures such as the Cyberpunks,
or sudden renaissances, such as the rise of dark goths
transmute social groups into mutated forms. As an observer
of this emergence, RAW surprisingly refrained from
criticising others who fail to look beyond the surface
trappings. “I don’t like to bum-rap other writers. They have
to take enough crap from the envious little shits who write
reviews; they don’t need my abuse, too. So, without saying
anything about what I don’t like, the living writers whose
work especially interests me at present include Douglas
Adams, William Burroughs, who still seems topical no matter
how old he gets, Tom Robbins, who writes the best sentences
of anybody working in English today, George V. Higgins, who
sees humans with a wonderful irony and writes the most
realistic dialogue I’ve ever seen (even better than Joyce or
Hemingway), and a lot of scientist-philosophers who seem to
me to be giving us wonderful new ideas and perceptions:
Rupert Shelldrake, Ralph Abraham, Terrence McKenna, Barbara
Marx Hubbard, the fuzzy logic people, Riane Eisler, Nick
Herbert, Nichlas Negroponte, Marilyn Ferguson, Peter Rusell,
Fred Alan Wolfe . . . and of course, Tim Leary, who is ill,
but may have a few unpublished books that might still blow
all our minds.”

Regarding the subcultures themselves and projection of
current trends, RAW suggests that, “.there remain a lot of
reactionary forces, on all continents. But I still think
that the basic cluster of science, democracy and Welfare
Capitalism (or Free Market Socialism – call it what you
will) seem stronger than all the other reality-tunnels and
will increasingly dominate the next century . . . even more
than they have dominated the last two centuries.”

In this projected world where fuzzy logic and shifting
alliances are “good”, RAW’s unique brand of cultural
antinomianism will continue to play an important role in
shattering mainstream idols and agendas.

1997 Update: Three Responses:

When the Australian magazine REVelation published my profile
of futurist author Robert Anton Wilson, it prompted some
revealing comments from several people quoted in the
original printed article.

The self styled ‘RAW’ has always been a target for
controversy. His exploration of subjects that contemporary
society finds dangerous or even sometimes frightening has
often prompted angry responses from critics. The more
mindless responses to RAW’s published work have been by
Andrea Antonoff, who labelled him as “stupid”; Lou Rollins
comment that RAW is “a male feminist . . .a simpering pussy
whipped wimp . . .” and most scathingly by CSICOP’s
(Committee for Scientific Investigation Into Paranormal)
Robert Sheaffer, who labelled the views expressed in The New
Inquisition (New Falcon Press: 1986) as “malicious,
misguided fanaticism.”

The REVelation article quoted three major criticisms of
Wilson’s work which were deemed by its author to be
relevant. It’s true that those quoted were largely
sympathetic to his pioneering work: Robin Robertson of
Psychological Perspectives states in the same review that
her initial quote was pulled from that “Wilson’s a very
funny man . . . readers with open minds will like his
books.”

I subsequently received responses from two other critics
quoted. Jay Cornell is a columnist for the respected
magazine Gnosis who wrote a review of RAW’s Cosmic Trigger
II: Down To Earth (New Falcon Publications: 1992). Whilst
largely positive, the review contained significant
criticisms of the limits of RAW’s “reality tunnel” concept
(“all views are reality tunnels that exclude other
information and keep us all far stupider than we should be”)
that RAW seemed to take a serious dislike to.

Cornell responds:

“I was surprised that he remembered that review and that it
still bothered him so much. As a whole, it is far less
negative than your piece implies. My overall opinion as
expressed there might be summarized as: ‘Here’s a good and
interesting writer and one I’ve always liked, but his latest
book is a very mixed bag.’ I find it hard to see how any
reader of that review would call it “vicious”, “more
glaring” than some other “harsh” criticism he got at another
time, or the writing of a “sadist.” Hell, I consider myself
a fan! I certainly have no wish to “stop” him or his work in
any way. Though I admit my libertarian soul wishes he would
change his sometimes reflexive leftism/anti-conservatism.

“I was disappointed with only part of Cosmic Trigger II. I
tried very hard to explain just what I liked about Wilson’s
work in general and C.T. II in particular, and exactly what
I didn’t like in that particular book. I realized at the
time that he might take umbrage, but I felt that his own
principles were forgotten when he wrote about certain
subjects (Catholics, the C.I.A., and conservatives were the
three main ones, I believe). It seemed especially glaring to
me because in the autobiographical part of the book (the
part I liked, and said so!) there were events which clearly
formed to his negative feelings about those subjects. It
seemed like he was blind to conditioning in himself that he
would easily see in someone else. (Not an uncommon fault.)

“The thought even crossed my mind to write more of a puff
piece, just in order to promote the work of someone I liked,
but hey, I have to call ’em as I see ’em. Little did I know
that this would plague him for years! My goodness, I had and
have no wish to be cruel to him or anyone. I’m very sorry
for any pain I caused him. I wish he would read that review
again, and maybe give it to a friend to read so as to get
another perspective about this “vicious” review. I don’t
like thinking that a favorite author of mine hates me
because he thinks I hate him.”

I also recieved a response from Dr. Michael A. Aquino,
co-founder, and for many years High Priest, of the Temple of
Set. Since 1975 the Setian approach to metaphysics and
“conscious evolution of the individual self”\ (examined in
RAW’s later work) has been amongst the most complex and
precise in the occult community. It has investigated and
studied many of the roots of RAW’s work, such as the ancient
Egyptian Priesthood of Set, the magick of Aleister Crowley,
Quantum Physics, and the psychological commentaries of
Gurdjieff/Ouspensky alongside modern rituals/”brain change”
techniques. As senior spokes-person for the Temple of Set,
Dr. Aquino is uniquely qualified to comment on RAW’s work:

“Re-reading my comments about Wilson, I would stand by them
today, but I do not mean that unkindly. I thought
Illuminatus! was a marvelous work – just the sort of enema
the “occult subculture” [and those without it who crab about
it] needed so badly at the time. I continue to recommend it
today to those who show signs of needing its dash of cold
water.

“Similarly I greatly enjoyed Wilson’s Schroedinger’s Cat
trilogy. All of these are books that I admire without any
qualification whatever. As noted in the comments of mine
which you quoted, I was a little disappointed in Cosmic
Trigger and its aftermath. It seemed to me that Wilson was a
bit dazzled by Timothy Leary, to the point of losing his own
“arms-length grip on reality” where occultism &
fringe-science are concerned. I think that works like
Illuminatus! and Schroedinger’s Cat were possible because
Wilson (& Shea) actually had their heads well-grounded in
common sense, hence could lampoon their topics very
accurately without being at all condescending about it. In
the Cosmic Trigger series, I get the feeling that Wilson has
lost his intellectual tether and is floating on up there
into the stratosphere with Dr. Tim – not that this is an
unpleasant pastime, as Leary is certainly a charming
vision-spinner.”

KBOO-FM Interview by Cliff Walker

The 1990 (or so) interview with Robert Anton Wilson on KBOO FM, Portland, Oregon

Cliff Walker: Hi, my name is Cliff Walker. Welcome to KBOO, Robert!

Robert Anton Wilson: It’s great to be here.

Walker: Robert is the author of the Illuminatus! trilogy, Schrödinger’s Cat, Masks of the Illuminati, and the most recent series, The Historical Illuminatus Chronicles— those are the novels. Some of my favorite non-fiction: Sex and Drugs, Cosmic Trigger, Prometheus Rising, and the brand new one, Quantum Psychology. What is Quantum Psychology about?

Wilson: Quantum Psychology is about the fact that we can never know reality the way we know our models of reality.

Walker: So what are some of the ideas you are trying to share in this book?

Wilson: Chiefly, that the paradoxes in quantum mechanics don’t just exist in quantum mechanics. They exist in every area of knowledge. Modern art has gotten to be very relativistic, just like modern physics. We’re even getting relativistic films, these days. Total Recall, with Schwarzenegger, is about a man that doesn’t know which memories are real and which are implanted. And there’s a new movie, Jacob’s Ladder, which has a similar theme. These are very similar to the themes of my novels, curiously enough!

The world is moving into a new era in which we’re beginning to realize every instrument creates a different reality-tunnel. Every brain is a different instrument. The instruments we make, to do science, turn out to have the same limitations as the instrument we started with — which is our own brain. Every instrument reveals a partial reality: a yardstick doesn’t tell you the temperature; a Geiger counter doesn’t tell you the weather. Every instrument has its limitations. Every brain has its limitations — except the brains of the Pope, and, er, the Ayatollah, and George Bush, and the members of C.S.I.C.O.P.

All: [laughter]

Wilson: But all the rest of us are stuck with relativity.

Walker: Okay. So, we’re moving from thinking that we know what reality is, to … [gestures for Wilson to complete the sentence]

Wilson: All we can say now is we got a model that seems to work — for the present. It probably won’t work in another ten years; the lifetime of models is getting shorter.

Walker: Why is this?

Wilson: Because of the information explosion: information is doubling faster all the time. It took from the time of Jesus to the time of Leonardo for one doubling of knowledge. The next doubling of knowledge was completed before the American Revolution, the next one by 1900, the next one by 1950, the next one by 1960. You see how [it keeps] moving faster? Now knowledge is doubling every eighteen months.

With all these new bits, bytes, blips of information, no model can last long because models only include the bytes of information that were available when the model was made. As new bytes of information come in it gets harder and harder to adjust our old models to include the new blips and beeps of information, so we’ve got to make new models.

Walker: What kinds of models don’t change?

Wilson: The models that don’t change are religious models because they’re defined so that they can’t be tested. Some people find great comfort in this, but I don’t find any comfort at all in a model that cannot be tested.

Walker: This book [Quantum Psychology], along with Prometheus Rising, contains exercises for the readers to do. What is the purpose of the exercises?

Wilson: I don’t think the modern, scientific viewpoints I expound can be understood easily. So I put in exercises with the thought that if the reader does the exercises, he or she will get to learn, er, understand the principles better — or will go crazy. One or the other.

Walker: Or at least understand some of the problems involved?

Wilson: Or at least understand the problems. Yes.

Walker: How is semantics influential in how we see and how we act?

Wilson: We can only think certain thoughts because of the kind of language we use. If we get a thought that doesn’t fit into language we’re apt to think we’re having a mystical experience — unless we know where we got the drugs — but otherwise, we’re inclined to think it’s a mystical experience if it doesn’t fit into language. Therefore, language delimits us.

Walker: Give me some examples.

Wilson: Well, in our language, er, there’s a natural tendency built into the Indo-European family of languages to divide things into “either-ors,” probably because we have two hands. Nobody realizes the influence on human philosophy — up in the highest levels — of the fact that 50,000 years ago children started playing the game of grabbing a rock, putting their hands behind their back, and then holding their hands out and saying, “Guess which hand I’ve got the rock in?” There’s only two possible choices, there. It’s gotta be in the right hand or the left hand. We’ve been so conditioned by that in the last 50,000 years that we think everything has a right and a left, or a true and a false. It’s a terrible shock to us discover something which the Orient discovered 2,500 years ago, or more, which modern science has just discovered in this century; namely, that most of the universe consists of maybes. There are very few things that we can hammer down into definite yeses or nos.

You can reduce everything to yeses or nos if you’re sitting in an armchair discussing abstract philosophy, but when you’re dealing with the real world, it’s very hard to force things into the yeses and the nos. The people who are very good at forcing them into yeses and nos are totalitarian governments, and they do it be shooting everybody who sees the maybes, or finding some other ways to shut them up: locking them up for life or something like that.

You’ll find most religions that are based on the yes-no thing have a distinct tendency to go to war whenever they get the opportunity. Jonathan Swift said, “We’ve got enough religion to hate each other but not enough to love each other.” The history of Christianity has been the history of continuous warfare over yeses and nos by people who can’t conceive that the universe contains mostly maybes.

Walker: The New Inquisition: persecution of scientific inquiry. What prompted you to write this book?

Wilson: I began to notice that there are atheistic religions as well as theistic religions. Of course, Buddhism is an atheistic religion that has been around for a long time, but Buddhism has got the Oriental, relativistic attitude built into it. In the Western World, the atheistic religions have the same intolerance as the theistic religions of the Western World.

As a mater of fact, from the eighteenth century to the present, there has been a steady decline of theistic religions as reasons for people murdering one another and a increase in atheistic religions as an excuse for people murdering one another. In the Near East, they’re still killing each other over the old theistic religions: the Jews are killing the Arabs, the Arabs are killing the Jews, the Christians are killing both Arabs and Jews, and so on, and this has been going on forever in the Mid-East. This is their metier: religious fanaticism.

But atheistic religions have pretty much the same structure — in the Western World, anyway — the same dogmatic structure. Marxism is very similar to fundamentalist Protestantism: they know the truth; they don’t care how many people they have to kill till they get their “truth” established. Objectivism is very similar, that’s another atheistic religion. I’ve always believed Ayn Rand was really the Grand Duchess Anastasia. I think that one in West Virginia is a fake. Ayn Rand acted a hell of a lot more like a Romanov than that woman in West Virginia. And I think after the Bolsheviks killed her family and she escaped, she decided she would found another atheistic religion to compete with Communism, and that’s how Objectivism got created.

And then there’s the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims Of the Paranormal, or C.S.I.C.O.P. [pronounced sci-cop]. That is one of the most dogmatic, fanatical, and crusading of the atheistic religions around now. That’s what inspired me to write The New Inquisition. It’s an examination of atheistic religions as a phenomenon in the modern world.

Walker: What are some of the — er — If the new, atheistic fundamentalism is merely becoming a replacement for the old theistic fundamentalism, then what are some of the alternatives that you offer?

Wilson: Well I think we’d all be a lot better off if we adopted more Oriental attitudes. I’m not saying we should become Orientals or accept a lot of Oriental superstition or anything like that, but there are ideas well established in the Orient that we could learn from. The general attitude of Taoism and Buddhism is that wherever you are in space-time, that’s your reality. It’s not anybody else’s reality and there’s no sense trying to sell it to anybody else, or force it on them. Most Zen koans actually come down to the fact — the answer to the koan is found by speaking from where you are, rather than trying to find an abstract general answer.

Walker: [attempting to pronounce “Schrödinger”] Schrödinger’s CatSchrödinger’s Cat?

Wilson: Schrodinger’s Cat.

Walker: Schrodinger’s Cat. You utilized quantum physics and other sciences to frame this book. How did you use this? what techniques did you use? and explain some of the, er, things about that book.

Wilson: Well, Schrödinger’s Cat an attempt to write a new kind of science fiction. New Scientist magazine, I’m happy to say, called it the most scientific of all science-fiction novels, which really pleased me very much. It pleased me so much I quote it every chance I can.

What I was trying to do with Schrödinger’s Cat: Instead of going as far out as I could in my imagination, I tried to follow where modern physics is going (what are the main lines of interpretation of the universe in modern physics?) and just write about a universe that fits modern physics. And that is so mind-blowing it seems crazier than anything a science-fiction writer could invent. As a matter of fact, a lot of it does sound like science fiction.

The majority — well, not necessarily the majority, but a growing minority (especially among the younger physicists), believes it makes as much sense to say there are infinite universes as it does to say there is one universe. The equations of quantum mechanics can be interpreted either way. Either out of an infinite number of possibilities, the universe, every second, collapses into one — which is the reality we’re living in; or, it doesn’t collapse: all the probabilities happen at the same time in different parts of super-space.

Both interpretations make equally much sense: they both fit the equations, they both fit the experiments, and there is nothing in science fiction wilder than this “parallel world.” I mean, the parallel-world idea literally implies that I am here, in this universe, but in the universe next door, the car I came in (which had a slight flat tire) went off the road and I got killed and didn’t do this show. Now that’s the Schrödinger’s Cat paradox: Schrödinger demonstrated that, in quantum theory, you can say a cat is dead and the cat is alive, and both can be true at the same time — even though that contradicts ordinary logic.

Just the same way the cat can be dead and alive, I’m dead and alive. It gives you a certain Buddhist detachment from things to think that you’re dead and alive at the same time. You can’t get too worried when you start thinking of it that way. [laughs]

Other interpretations of quantum mechanics are even weirder. Bell’s theorem, a very important — the most important discovery in quantum mechanics in the last thirty or forty years. Bell’s theorem says two particles, once in contact, continue to be mathematically correlated no matter how far apart they move in space — or in time; which implies that if I take a measurement of two rays of light, and one is coming from a star and took 15 million years to get here, and the other is coming from a candle across the room, because those particles are correlated, they remain correlated no matter which way you look in time. So I’m affecting that star 15 million years ago.

Walker: [interjects] And this fits the mathematical equations?

Wilson: This fits the equations of quantum mechanics. It has led to a sort of general interest in monistic philosophies among physicists — monistic philosophies being those that say there is no separation in the universe, we’ve just created separations in our minds through our habit of analysis — all of which is very much like what any New-Ager will tell you, “Hey, man! It’s all one!” Well, that is one interpretation of quantum mechanics: you can’t separate anything. It’s called non-locality. You can’t separate anything in space or in time.

Walker: What do you love about James Joyce?

Wilson: [long pause] Jamison’s Whiskey.

[starts laughing] No. Other things, er —

All: [laughter]

Wilson: Every time I go to Zurich I buy a bottle of Jamison’s and go out to Joyce’s grave with some friends, and we each have a drink and then we pour the rest of it on — well, maybe we have two drinks — well, sometimes three — er, well, maybe four [laughs], on rare occasions, we drink most of the bottle we originally bought for the occasion, and then we pour a drop or two (or whatever is left) on the grave for Jim. He was a great fan of Jamison’s.

No. What I love about Joyce (besides introducing me to Jamison’s and Guinness Extra Stout — the two greatest products that ever came out of Dublin) is he wrote the first relativistic novel, Ulysses. Ulysses seems to me the only realistic novel of the twentieth century, because it’s the only novel that contains at least a hundred different interpretations of itself, within itself. Therefore it’s contemporary with quantum mechanics and Godel’s proof in mathematics and Cubist painting and movies like Citizen Kane, where you get five versions of the same story; Joyce anticipated all of modern science, modern philosophy, and modern art. And he was very funny, too, like most Irish writers.

Walker: Why do you think he was censored? Why do you think they banned his books?

Wilson: [very long pause; then, stumbling angrily for words] Well, that’s — er — I — I uh — How can you explain that!? It’s like Bob Geldof, the rock star who did Band-Aid and Live-Aid. He was interviewed by the Irish Times, in Dublin, and they asked him, “Don’t you think your use of improper language detracts from the noble causes that you are espousing?” And he said [Wilson starts speaking with an Irish brogue], “I don’t know what tha fook improper language is!” Waal, Joyce didn’t know what tha fook improper language is either [loses the brogue], and neither do I. I think it’s some kind of crazy superstition dating back to the stone age. There is no improper language for a writer. What’s proper depends on what kind of scene you’re writing.

Walker: What influence has Carl Jung had on you?

Wilson: Carl Jung got me interested in synchronicity, or maybe synchronicity led me to Carl Jung. I’m nor sure of the exact causal order. Somehow, er, noticing, er, that recording my dreams, I found they were tied in with coincidences that happened in my waking life. And there was no school of psychology that even came close to explaining that except Jung, Jungian psychology, so I started reading a great deal of Jung.

Walker: Okay [looks at the clock] we can take some calls, [recites station phone number], if you’d like to ask a question.

Wilson: And if nobody calls, I’ll talk more about Dublin.

Walker: Okay, talk about Dublin. Six years. [to producer] Do we have a call? [no call] Okay, talk about Dublin! You spent six years there?

Wilson: Yes. Gee, there’s so much to say about Dublin, now — I look at the clock — how can I? Oh, I’ll talk about County Kerry instead.

County Kerry has a six-foot-tall white rabbit called the Pookah, and this rabbit hangs around pubs late at night. When people get thrown out of the pubs at 10:30 (which is when they close), the Pookah waits and grabs one of them on his way home and drags him off into an alternative reality, where all the laws of science are reversed, time and space are all mixed up. It’s very much like one of my novels — although I like this new movie, Jacob’s Ladder. And you spend thousands and thousands of years over there — millenniums — and you meet Finn MacCool and all the ancient Irish heroes: the Wizard of Oz, Luke Skywalker, Shiva, Krishna, the Devas — all these figures.

When the Pookah gets tired of playing with you and lets you go, you’re back on the road and it’s only a few minutes after you left the pub — because the Pookah can reverse time, stretch time, condense it, anything like that. The Pookah is not limited by time.

Of course, the probability of encountering the Pookah is said by Dublin’s cynics to be directly proportional to the number of pints of Guinness Stout you had in the pub that night.

Walker: [laughs]

Wilson: I heard a Kerry farmer interviewed on Irish Radio, … and they asked him, “Do you believe in the Pookah yourself?”

And he said [using an Irish brogue], “That I do not! and I doubt much that he believes in me either!”

And I think that is the perfect introduction to Irish logic. Irish logic makes a lot more sense to me than Aristotelian logic.

Walker: Tonight you’re going to be lecturing at the First Congregational Church, 1126 South West Park. The lecture is called “Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll.” A little about that?

Wilson: Sex and drugs and rock and roll. The Pope came to Ireland and they gave a speech in Phoenix Park and all he talked about was sex and drugs and rock and roll. And the world’s full of — where Amnesty [International] comes out every year with reports on torture and death squads and other abominations going on all over the world, where a hundred-thousand people are starving every day — here’s this guy, all he’s worried about is sex and drugs and rock and roll. And I thought, “This man’s gotta be a saint: he’s living in another world. He knows nothing about this world.”

So I got interested in sex and drugs and rock and roll, as topics. Why do they arouse so much anxiety? And then I met a beautiful lady in Berlin, and she said something that really resonated in my mind. She said, “I came to Berlin looking for love and success, but I decided to settle for sex and drugs and rock and roll.”

And I thought, “Gee, that’s an interesting thought on the modern world.” [laughs] And tonight’s talk is about my reflections on sex and drugs and rock and roll, or as the ancient Greeks used to say, “Venus and Dionysus and Apollo” — three powerful divinities that have been suppressed too long.

Walker: Okay, now tomorrow, at the Northwest Service Center at 10:00 A.M. — oh, the lecture, by the way, is from 7:30 to 9:00 — and tomorrow, at the Northwest Service Center from 10:00 to 7:00 there is a workshop: “Sexual Evolution, or How to Tell Your Friends from the Apes.” Some final words on that?

Wilson: Well, telling your friends from the apes isn’t all that easy. I’ve seen chimpanzees who I was able to communicate with and who could communicate with me in ways that made a lot more sense than any conversation I’ve ever had with a congressman.

Walker: Okay. My name’s Cliff Walker, we’ve been speaking with author, psychologist Robert Anton Wilson. Thanks for coming in and talking with us.

Wilson: Oh, it’s always great to come back to Portland. You’ve got great grass up here!

Firing the Cosmic Trigger Finger

David Jay Brown interviews Robert Anton Wilson, June 1989
published in Mavericks of the Mind

RMN: What was it that first sparked your interest in consciousness enhancement?

ROBERT: Korzybski’s Science and Sanity. I was in engineering school and I picked up the book in the Brooklyn Public Library. He talked about different levels of organization in the brain-animal circuits, human circuits and so on. And he talked a lot about getting back to the non-verbal level and being able to perceive without talking to yourself while you’re perceiving.

It was 1957. I was very interested in jazz at that time, and I told a black friend about some of Korzybski’s exercises to get to the non-verbal level, and he said, “Oh, I do that every time I smoke pot.” I got interested. I said, “Could I buy one of these marijuana cigarettes from you?” He said, “Oh hell, I’11 give it to you free.” And so I smoked it.

I found myself looking at a quarter I found in my pocket and realizing I hadn’t looked at a quarter in twenty years or so, the way a child looks at a quarter. So I decided marijuana was doing pretty much the same thing Korzybski was trying to do with his training devices. Then shortly after that I heard a lecture by Alan Watts, and I realized that Zen, marijuana and Korzybski were all relating the same transformations of consciousness. That was the beginning.

DJB: Many of your books deal with a secret society called the Illuminati. How did your fascination with this organization begin?

ROBERT: It was Greg Hill and Kerry Thornley who founded the Discordian Society, which is based on the worship of Eris, the Goddess of Chaos, discord, confusion, bureaucracy and international relations. They have no dogmas, but one catma. The catma is that everything in the universe relates to the number 5, one way or another, given enough ingenuity on the part of the interpreter. I found the Discordian Society to be the most satisfactory religion I had ever encountered up until that point, so I became a Discordian Pope. This is done by excommunicating all the Discordian Popes you can find and setting up your own Discordian Church. This is based on Greg’s teaching that we Discordians must stick apart.

Anyway, in 1968 Jim Garrison, the D.A. of New Orleans–the jolly green Frankenstein monster, as Kerry later called him–accused Kerry at a press conference of being one of the conspirators in the Kennedy assassination. Garrison never indicted him–he didn’t have enough evidence for an indictment-so Kerry never stood trial, but he brooded over it for years. Then he entered an altered state of consciousness. I’m trying to be objective about this. Kerry, who served in the same platoon as Oswald, became convinced that he was involved in the assassination and that when he was in the Marine CorpsNaval Intelligence had brainwashed him.

Kerry decided Naval Intelligence had also brainwashed Oswald and several others, and had been manipulating them for years, like the Manchurian Candidate. He couldn’t remember what had happened, but he had a lot of suspicions. Then he became convinced that I was a CIA baby-sitter and we sort of lost touch with each other. It’s hard to communicate with somebody when he thinks you’re a diabolical mind-control agent and you’re convinced that he’s a little bit paranoid.

Somewhere along the line, Kerry decided to confuse Garrison by sending out all sorts of announcements that he was an agent of the Bavarian Illuminati. That got me interested in the Illuminati, and the more I read about it, the more interested I got. So eventually we incorporated the Illuminati into the Discordian Society. Since the Discordian Society is devoted to promoting chaos, we decided that the Illuminati is devoted to imposing totalitarianism. After all, a Discordian Society, to be truly discordant, should have it’s own totalitarian branch that’s working against the rest of the Society.

Pope John XXIV threw out six hundred saints on the grounds that they never existed. They threw out Santa Claus and a whole bunch of these Irish saints. The Discordian Society accepted them on the grounds that we don’t care whether these saints are real or not. If we like them, we’ll accept them. And since these saints were without a home, being thrown out of the Catholic church, we accepted them. In the same way we accepted the Illuminati, too, since nobody else wants them.

Then, I appointed myself the head of the Illuminati, which led to a lot of interesting correspondences with other heads of the Illuminati in various parts of the world. One of them threatened to sue me. I told him to resubmit his letter in FORTRAN, because my computer wouldn’t accept it in English and I never heard from him again. I think that confused him.

RMN: Who do you think the Illuminati really were–or are?

ROBERT: The Illuminati has been the label used by many groups throughout history. The Illuminati that is believed in by right-wing paranoids is a hypothesis that leading intellectuals of the eighteenth century were all members of the Bavarian Illuminati which was working to overthrow Christianity. I don’t think that’s quite accurate; I think there’s a lot of exaggeration in that view. I don’t think that Jefferson was a member of the Illuminati; he just had similar goals. Beethoven was probably a member, but Mozart probably wasn’t. Voltaire probably wasn’t, although he was a Freemason. Anyway, to the extent that the Illuminati conspired to overthrow Christianity and to establish democracy, I’m in favor of it.

DJB: What were the Illuminati out to achieve?

ROBERT: The historical Illuminati of the eighteenth century, as distinguished from all other Illuminati of previous centuries, had as it’s main goals, overthrowing the Vatican, overthrowing monarchies, establishing democratic republics and giving a scientific education to every boy and girl. Most of these goals have more or less begun to be achieved. Compared to what things were like in the eighteenth century they’ve largely succeeded, and I think that’s all to the good.

RMN: Many formerly held secrets known only to a select group of initiates, perhaps like the Bavarian Illuminati, are now available at the local metaphysical bookstore. What do you think are the sociological implications of such information exchange?

ROBERT: Oh, I think it’s wonderful. I believe very much that secrecy is the main cause of most social evils. I think information is the most precious commodity in the world. As a matter of fact, I think that information is the source of all wealth. The classical economic theory is that wealth is created by land, labor and capital. But if you have a piece of land, and you’ve got capital, and you hire labor, and you drill for oil, and there’s no oil there–you won’t get rich. What makes somebody rich is drilling for oil where there is oil, and that’s based on having correct information. I’m just paraphrasing Buckminster Fuller here. All wealth is information. So therefore, all attempts to impede the transfer, the rapid transmission of information, are making us all poorer.

DJB: Why do you think it is then, that it took so long for occult knowledge to come out of secrecy and into the open?

ROBERT: Well, that’s largely because of the Catholic church. Anybody who spoke too frankly for many centuries was burned at the stake. So the alchemists, hermeticists, Illuminati and other groups learned to speak in codes.

DJB: So you think it was the fear of persecution, rather than a feeling that most people weren’t “ready” for the information quite yet?

ROBERT: Well, I think that’s a rationalization, You can’t find out who’s ready, except by distributing the information. Then you find out who’s ready.

RMN: The wars in the Middle East and the rising fundamentalism in the West have been seen by some as the death screams of organized religion. Both Islam and Christianity, however, have survived many “Holy Wars.” What do you think the fate of organized religion will be?

ROBERT: I would like to think that organized religion is on it’s way out, but I’ve been doing a lot of research on the eighteenth century for my historical novels. Voltaire thought that the Catholic church would be gone in twenty years, and it’s hung around for two hundred years since then. When the Pope disbanded the Jesuits, Voltaire said that’s the end, the Catholic church is falling apart. Well, a few years later they reorganized the Jesuits. The Knights of Malta are running the CIA apparently, and the Catholic church just refuses to die. Fundamentalism has staged a comeback. It’s fantastic.

I’m a big fan of H.L. Menken. He was a very funny social critic of the 1920’s. His books went out of print for a while, because the things he was making fun of didn’t exist anymore. Now his books are coming back into print because all those things exist again. He was making fun of the same type of thing that Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, and that whole crowd stand for. It’s astonishing the way that this seemingly dead historical institution came back, like the Frankenstein monster. Every time you think it’s dead, it rises up again to afflict us. The Ayatollah. The Grey Wolves. The Grey Wolves are the biggest heroin dealers in the Mid-East because they believe Allah wants them to kill Jews and they can’t get enough money to buy guns without selling heroin. That makes about as much sense as most of the Christian theology I’ve heard.

I’m a mystical agnostic, or an agnostic mystic. That phrase was coined by Olaf Stapledon, my favorite science fiction writer. When I first read it, it didn’t mean anything to me, but over the years I’ve gradually realized that “agnostic mystic” describes me better than any words I have found any where else.

DJB: How about “transcendental agnostic”?

ROBERT: Yeah. The word agnostic has gained the association of somebody who’s just denying, but what I mean is something more like the ancient Greek concept of the zetetic. I find the universe so staggering that I just don’t have any faith in my ability to grasp it. I don’t think the human stomach can eat everything, and I’m not quite sure my mind can understand everything, so I don’t pretend that it can.

RMN: In Riane Eisler’The Chalice and the Blade, she proposes that there has been a cultural transformation from a cooperation between the sexes to the dominion of male over female. She says that we’re now at a stage when men should be learning from women. What do you think about this?

ROBERT: Curiously, 1 was an early advocate of the theory of the primordial matriarchy. I got turned onto that by Robert Graves when I was in high school. I read The White Goddess, and then I happened to read a little-known book by a Scottish psychiatrist named Ian Suttie called The Origin of Love and Hate, in which he used the model of history evolving from matriarchy to patriarchy and back to matriarchy. Some of these ideas have been around my head for about forty years.

Currently I tend to agree with Eisler. There’s no evidence of a matriarchy at all. There’s evidence of a partnership society. It’s been coming back for the last two hundred years. Arlen calls it “stone-age feedback.” As European civilization conquered and exploited the Third World, ideas from these places came drifting back to Europe. Diderot, Voltaire, Rousseau, the whole enlightenment was influenced by the ideas of these “primitives” having a more natural and happier way of life than we do. Democracy, socialism, anarchism, and all the radical ideas of the last two hundred years were inspired by studying stone-age cultures from the first proto-anthropologica1 reports.

I’ve been an advocate for a partnership society for years, before Eisler used that term. The term I used was “voluntary association” which comes out of the American Anarchist tradition. This was a school of philosophical anarchists in New England in the nineteenth century who are very little known. I got fascinated by them in the sixties and read most of their books. The idea of voluntary association migrated to Europe and became syndicalism, only the syndicalists added to it the idea of overthrowing the existing system by violence, so the whole idea developed a bad reputation. I think the basic idea of voluntary association, or partnership, is the one towards which we should aspire. It’s the most human, just, fair, decent and intelligent form of society.

RMN: Do you have hope that we can achieve it?

ROBERT: Yes, I do, in spite of the evidence we see on all sides of stupidity, ignorance, bigotry and the seemingly inexhaustible lust of the masses to be trampled on by Fuhrer figures and father figures. I see the last two hundred years as a staggering, groping, fumbling toward a partnership society.

RMN: Riane Eisler doesn’t address the masculinity of the Devil-the fact that in this society, the dark side as well as the light side of spiritual power is depicted as male. Do you have any ideas about that?

ROBERT: They do have some shadowy feminine counterparts. There’s the Lilith, the female Devil, and buried in Judaism there’s the Shekinah, the female aspect of God. I’m more interested in the way that the Devil infiltrated Christianity disguised as Santa Claus. Very few people realize the archetypes are the same. It’s the old pagan fertility god. Satan is the caricature that the Christian church created, but the fertility god came back as Santa, and he wears the same red suit as the Devil. The name Satan and Santa are made up of the same letters; you just move one and you’ve changed Santa into Satan.

RMN: That’s interesting. The Devil and sexuality are correlated in many people’s minds. Religious and political authorities have consistently attempted to control human sexuality and nip individual freedom in the bud. How do you see the role of sexuality evolving into the future?

ROBERT: I was just reading Jean Shinoda Bolen’s book Gods in Everyman yesterday, and I found some of myself in Hades, though that’s the younger me back in my adolescence and early twenties. I also see parts of myself in Hermes, but I see a great deal of Dionysus. My mystical feelings and my sexual feelings are so close together that I find it hard to understand how Western society ever separated them. But that just goes to show that I’m a Dionysian type. Our society is run by Zeus types and Apollo types to whom the separation is perfectly natural.

RMN: Do you think society is evolving towards a more Dionysian character?

ROBERT: Yeah. We have been since the sixties. Woodstock was a Dionysian festival–it was the rebirth of Dionysus–and right away the lid came down. My God Dionysus is loose! King Pentheus immediately called out the cops. The Dionysian religion had entered his kingdom and he tried to crush it, but he was torn apart by his own mother. That’s a warning of what happens when you try to suppress Dionysus; it’s one of the classic Greek myths. Look what happened to Nixon–he got torn apart. The only president to be forced to resign. Reagan escaped unscathed but I still have an intuition that he’s going to be repudiated. I think the people are going to be as disgusted with Reagan as they were with Nixon–eventually. I even had high hopes that George Bush was going to be impeached. Of course, he picked Quayle as impeachment insurance, but I just have a strong suspicion, based on Confucius, that the general decline of morals and manners in this country, the general increase in the sleaze factor in American life and the general corruption and crookedness, are all due to the fact that people like Nixon and Agnew get away scot-free. They had television pictures of DeLorean peddling cocaine. When I heard about this I said, “A man with that much money isn’t going to be convicted, even if they have him on television.” And he wasn’t.

Once everybody becomes aware that the rich can commit any crime in the book and get away with it, then the general attitude is, “Well, why don’t we do the same?” The whole sociobiology of Confucius is when the ruling class are decent, honorable, gentlemen scholars, the people will be well disposed; when the government is a bunch of thieving rascals, the people will become thieving rascals.

We’ve seen so much of that, and the only hope I can see is that some of the malefactors in high places get punished so that a sense of justice and order is reestablished in this country. I’m not a vengeful person and I have a great deal of compassion, even for Nixon and Reagan, but I think some of those people have to go to jail to restore the idea that there is justice in the universe.

RMN: The whirlwind ecstasies of the sixties have, for many, settled down into a gentle breeze. What do you feel were the fleeting and lasting effects of this cultural phenomena, and how have your attitudes developed since that time?

ROBERT: Well, we were just talking about that this morning. What survives of the sixties? What survives in different forms? I think Bucky Fuller hit the nail on the head. He said that around 1972, the brighter people realized that there are more effective ways of challenging the system than going out in the streets and running their heads against policemen’s clubs. So they got more subtle. People are working on different levels and in different ways, and it’s become less confrontational, but I do believe there are still a lot of people working for the ideals of the sixties.

DJB: You mean like in the movie industry?

ROBERT: Yeah, and in television, in computers, in banking, all over the place.

DJB: Really, in banking?

ROBERT: Yeah. I’ve met a couple of bankers who are really very hip people.

DJB: Timothy Leary and Aleister Crowley both played similar roles in history and both had a significant influence on your evolving belief systems. Tell us about the effect these two people have had on your understanding of consciousness.

ROBERT: Well Crowley was such a complicated individual that everybody who reads Crowley has a different Crowley in his head. There’s a million Aleister Crowleys depending on what part of him people are able to understand and integrate. Crowley, as the leader of the Illuminati and the Argentum Astrum the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO), was continuing the project of overthrowing Christianity and added his own twist of reviving Paganism (which goes back to Giordano Bruno who wanted to do the same thing). Crowley is an interesting figure and has had a bigger historical impact than most people realize. The NeoPagan movement is bigger than anybody knows, except the Fundamentalists, who think it’s a Satanic movement — which from their point of view, I guess it is.

The Crowley who interests me is the scientific Crowley. He traveled all over the world, got initiated into every secret society he could, studied every occult system, studied Sufism in North Africa, Taoism in China, Buddhism in Ceylon and he tried to understand them all in terms of organic chemistry and physiology. He laid the groundwork for the scientific study of mysticism and altered consciousness. That’s the Crowley I’m fascinated by–Crowley the scientist, who co-existed with Crowley the mystic, Crowley the poet, Crowley the adventurer and Crowley the Great Beast.

RMN: The Golden Dawn from which Crowley got much of his inspiration was a mystical school which is still lively today. Have you found this system able to remain flexible enough to adapt to the cultural and psychological revisions that have occurred since the Order was first established?

ROBERT: There are several Golden Dawns around, like there are several OTO’s and several Illuminatis and so on. All of these things are fractionated, and of course, everybody with a power drive involved in these things claims to be the leader of the real and authentic Secret Chiefs. The Golden Dawn which I find most interesting is the one of which Christopher Hyatt is the Outer Head. He’s a fully qualified clinical psychologist with a good background in Jungian and Reichian therapy and a great deal of theoretical knowledge of general psychology.

He was trained in the Golden Dawn system by Israel Regardie who was also a psychologist as well as a mystic. I think Hyatt knows what he’s doing; I think he’s got his head on right. He doesn’t have delusions of grandeur. He’s not a prima donna and he’s free of most of the deviant and aberrant behavior that’s chronic in the occult world. What are the goals of the Golden Dawn? Unleashing the full positive potential of human beings.

RMN: What are the methods involved?

ROBERT: The original Golden Dawn in the 1880’s used Kabbalistic magic. Crowley revised it to include Kabbalistic magic and yoga and a bit of Sufism. Regardie revised it to include a great deal of Reichian bodywork, and an insistence that anybody who enters the Order should go through psychotherapy first. He became aware that people who get into Kabbalistic-type work, especially in the Golden Dawn tradition, who haven’t had psychotherapy, are likely to flip out or scare themselves silly. Regardie also insisted that they should know General Semantics, which is interesting since it was General Semantics which got me interested in the study of alternative consciousness.

RMN: Why did Regardie want this to be included?

ROBERT: General Semantics is a system that is very useful in clarifying your thinking. If you understand the rules of General Semantics, you’re more or less immune to most of the errors that are chronic at this stage of civilization. One of the rules of General Semantics is avoid the is of identity, which is a rule I just broke when I said “General Semantics is…” It’s very hard to avoid the is of identity in speech. We all use it all the time. I’m getting pretty good at avoiding it in my writing. Whenever you’re trying to figure out what the hell is wrong with my thinking? Why can’t I get to the bottom of this? Why am I confused about this problem? Write it down and take out every “is” and reformulate it in some other way. You’ll find that your thinking has been tremendously clarified.

It’s like the celebrated problem in quantum physics in the 1920’s. The electron is a wave. The electron is a particle. Those two things contradict each other totally, which led to a lot of physicists saying that the universe doesn’t make sense, the universe is irrational and so on. If you reformulate it without the “is” of identity, there’s no paradox at all. The electron appears as a wave when we measure it in certain ways. The electron appears as a particle when we measure it in other ways. There’s no contradiction. There are a lot of other ideas in general semantics that are equally useful in clarifying thought.

DJB: That’s one of the claims of the recent technology of brain machines. What experiences have you had with them, which ones do you find the most promising and what kind of potential do you think they hold for the future?

ROBERT: The most outstanding experience I’ve had with a brain machine was with the first one, the Pulstar. I had an out-of-body experience which registered as flat brain waves on the EEG, and that fascinated me. That was the first objective sign I had ever seen that something was going on in out-of-body experiences besides heightened imagination. I don’t see much difference between a lot of the brain machines around. Some are demonstrably inferior, and out of charity I won’t mention their names. Some claim to be very superior to all the others, but as far as I can see, most of them function pretty much the same.

At present, I’m more interested in the light and sound machines than I am in the electro-magnetic machines, because there is some legitimate cause for concern that sending electro-magnetism into your brain too often may not be good for you. The whole field is growing very fast. There’s a bunch of tapes put out by Acoustic Brain Research in North Carolina. They use only sound, but they combine it with subliminals and Ericksonian hypnosis in a way that I find very effective. They’re using sound at the same frequencies that you find in the electro-magnetic machines, or the light and sound machines.

The Graham Potentializer does seem a little more powerful than any of the other machines, but I wouldn’t guarantee it because I haven’t had enough experience with it yet. What T want to see is more controlled, double-blind studies of these machines, because everybody has their own anecdotal impressions, but we don’t really know yet which are the best. Which wave forms are the best? We don’t know that yet. Why do some people respond better to one than to others? We don’t know why. There’s a lot mure to be learned and I’m very eager to see more research.

RMN: Do you think that the use of brain machines requires an accompanying discipline?

ROBERT: I suspect so. One manufacturer told me that the return rate is about fifteen percent. I think these machines are much easier than the biofeedback machines, but they still require some discipline. I think they require some previous experience with Yoga, or Zen, or some consciousness-altering work. You need some kind of previous experience or you just won’t know how to use the machine. I don’t think the machine really works as an entrainer unless you practice between sessions, trying to revive the state without the machine. A lot of people can’t do that, they just assume that the machine will do all the work for them, which is kind of like thinking that you just get in the car and it’ll take you where you want to go.

DJB: The potential of nanotechnology seems far more vast. How do you think it’s development will affect human consciousness in the future?

ROBERT: I haven’t thought much about that. That’s an interesting question. It’s going to change everything. Nanotechnology is a much bigger jump than anything else on the horizon. It’s bigger than space colonization, bigger than longevity. It’s a million times bigger than the industrial revolution. It’s going to change things so much that I can’t begin to conceive how much; but everything’s going to get dirt cheap. The ozone layer will get repaired rapidly. We could create redwoods as fast and as many as we want, and then there’s star-flight. I don’t know; it’s just a whole new ballgame, and it leads directly into immortalism. 

DJB: How about new ways to alter the brain?

ROBERT: Oh, of course. Eric Drexler, in his book on the subject, talks about constructing micro-replicators that, if you let them loose in the body, they run all over the place, inspecting every cell. If it’s not functioning properly they go back, get information from the main computer and repair it. You can obviously do the same thing with brain circuits. It’ll probably replace psychiatry. Nanotechnology is so staggering, we can’t think about it without hyperbole, and it’s coming along rapidly. The Japanese are spending fantastic amounts on that kind of research.

RMN: What do you think about the idea than many inventions are actually rediscoveries of technologies that have already existed in the past?

ROBERT: That’s always seemed very implausible to me. There are some cases–the steam engine was discovered in Greece and forgotten until Watt rediscovered it–but I doubt that there are many. Most things weren’t discovered until they could be discovered, until there was the time-binding heritage, or until the information accumulation had reached the necessary level. This is why you have so many cases of parallel discovery in science, where in five years three people patent the same thing in different countries. As Charles Fort said, “It’s steam engines when it comes steam engine time.”

RMN: What if there were times when the information had accumulated but not the political or social climate necessary to appreciate it? Libraries have been burned and knowledge chased underground by authoritarian forces.

ROBERT: Well, “Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should remain silent.”

RMN: A lot of people feel that technology is at odds with their ecological thinking. What do you think is the evolving role of the science of Ecology.

ROBERT: The first book I ever read on ecology was way back in the forties. It was called The Road to Survival. I’ve always been fascinated by ecology because I’m fascinated by whole systems. That’s why Bucky Fuller fascinates me. He always starts with the biggest whole system and works his way down. I’ve written a lot of satirical things about pop ecology because I think a lot of people have got on the ecology bandwagon who don’t know their ass from their elbow about science, and it’s turned into a kind of late Christian heresy like Marxism. It’s become a new blame game, where people go around laying guilt trips on other people. Guilt is very fashionable in Western civilization.

Albert Ellis said the most popular game in Western civilization is finding and denouncing no-good shits. I found that so impressive I’ve incorporated it into a couple of my own books. Every generation picks out a group of no-good shits. In the Victorian age it was adolescent boys who masturbated, and now it’s cigarette smokers. There’s always got to be some no-good shits for people to denounce and persecute, and to the extent that ecology has degenerated into that, it arouses my satirical instinct. But of course the science of Ecology itself is tremendously important, and the more people who know about it, the better.

RMN: The methods of science and art are beginning to achieve some wonderful things together. What do you think created such a chasm between the two disciplines in the first place, and why do you think they are now merging?

ROBERT: Science and art. Now what created such a chasm between them? Why the hell did that happen? I think I’m going to go back and blame the Inquisition. Science had to fight an uphill battle against the Inquisition and this created a historical hangover in which scientists had acute hostility to every form of mysticism, not just to the Catholic church which had been persecuting them. I think that rubs off onto art, because there’s something mystical about art no matter how much you try to rationalize it. If you get a bunch of artists together talking about where they got their creativity from, they sound like a bunch of mystics.

Then there was the rise of capitalism. I’m inclined to agree with Karl Marx about that, that every previous form of society has had different values, a hierarchy of values. Capitalism does tend to reduce everything to just one value–what can you sell it for? And as Oscar Wilde said, “All art is quite useless.” The value of art depends on who’s manipulating the marketplace at the time. It’s spooky. Art is the Schrodinger’s cat of economics.

All of a sudden, an Andy Warhol is worth a million, and nobody knows how that happened. Then it’s somebody else the next year. Picasso never paid for anything in the last twenty years of his life. He just wrote checks which never came back to his bank. People saved them because they knew that the signature was worth more than the sum of the check. They knew it would be worth even more in twenty years, and so on.

Somebody asked a Zen master, “What’s the most valuable thing in the world?” and he said, “The head of a dead cat.” The querent asked “Why?” and the Zen master said, “Tell me it’s exact value.” That’s a good exercise if you’re into creative writing. Write a short story where the hero’s life is saved by the fact that he could find the value of the head of a dead cat. It could happen. Everything has a fluctuating value.

In capitalism, everything gets reduced to it’s immediate cash value. Citizen Kane, to take one egregious example, is generally considered one of the best films ever made. It lost money in it’s first year, so Orson Welles had extreme difficulty for the rest of his life getting enough money to make other movies. Yet Citizen Kane made more money than any other movie made in 1941, if you count up to the present, because it gets revived more than any other movie. But the bankers who own the studios aren’t interested in profit in twenty years, they want profit next June. They want Indiana Jones not Citizen Kane.

RMN: So, if the areas of science and art are merging it indicates a move away from the capitalist perspective.

ROBERT: Yes. I think information theory has probably done a great deal to bring science and art back together again. Norbert Weiner invented the basic equation for information at the same time Claude Shannon did. That’s another example of things happening when they’re ready to happen. Weiner explained information by saying that a great poem carries more information than a political speech. Information is the unpredictable. As we come to realize the value of the unpredictable, the value of art has become clearer.

You go through a museum and you look at a Leonardo, a Botticelli, a Rembrandt, a Van Gogh, a Cezanne, a Picasso, a Klee, a Jackson Pollock, and it’s obvious the value of each of them is that they weren’t copying one another. If Van Gogh were copying Rembrandt nobody would give a damn for Van Gogh. He had the chutzpah to paint his own vision. Somebody having their own vision instead of just repeating an earlier one in a different style–that’s information. Information is the new and unpredictable, and information theory led to the computers which fascinate artists. Computers have opened up whole new areas of art.

DJB: Information is the unpredictability of a signal, but it’s not quite chaos or randomness. It carries a message.

ROBERT: Yeah. When unpredictability gets too high, information turns into noise. That part of Shannon’s theory involves very complicated mathematics and I’m not sure I fully understand it; I just more or less intuitively follow it. There has to be an information redundancy ratio where the highest grade of information is diluted with repetition.

DJB: Because it’s so unpredictable one can’t relate it to anything.

ROBERT: Yeah. Originality frequently looks like chaos until we learn how to deal with it, until we find the redundancy in it.

DJB: Have you had any experiences with lucid or conscious dreaming?

ROBERT: I’ve had a lot of lucid dreams, but I can’t think of anything that’s particularly worth discussing. I’d like to learn more about it. It happens spontaneously sometimes. I have a very rich hypnagogic and hypnopompic life, like Philip K. DickWilliam Burroughs told me that his characters all manifest as voices in hypnopompic reverie before they have bodies, or names, or anything else. Robert Shea, an old friend of mine who’s a scientific materialist of the most rigid sort, really blew my mind by admitting he hears his characters talking. I suspect all writers do. I think the difference between a writer and a channeler is that the channeler has found a way to make more money out of it than most writers ever do.

DJB: Synchronicity is a major theme that runs through most, if not all, of your books. What model do you use at present for interpreting this mysterious phenomenon?

ROBERT: I never have one model. I always have at least seven models for anything.

DJB: Which one is your favorite?

ROBERT: Bell’s Theorem combined with an idea I got from Barbara Honegger, a parapsychologist who worked for Reagan. She wrote a book denouncing Reagan, Ollie North and the whole crowd, giving inside dirt about what she discovered while she was at the White House. Long before Barbara became a controversial political figure, she gave me the idea that the right brain is constantly trying to communicate with the left. If you don’t listen to what it’s trying to say, it gives you more and more vivid dreams and if you still won’t listen, it leads to Freudian slips. If you still don’t pay attention, the right brain will get you to the place in space-time where synchronicity will occur. Then the left brain has to pay attention. “Whaaaat!?”

DJB: What do you think happens to consciousness after physical death? 

ROBERT: Somebody asked a Zen master, “What happens after death?” He replied, “I don’t know.” And the querent said, “But you’re a Zen master!” He said, “Yes, but I’m not a dead Zen master.” Somebody asked Master Eckart, the great German mystic, “Where do you think you’il go after death?” He said, “I don’t plan to go anywhere.” Those are the best answers I’ve heard so far. My hunch is that consciousness is a non-local function of the universe as a whole, and our brains are only local transceivers. As a matter of fact, it’s a very strong hunch, but I’m not going to dogmatize about it.

DJB: Could you share with us any experiences you might have had communicating with what you thought to be extraterrestrial or non-human entities?

ROBERT: I’ve had a lot of experiences with what could be interpreted as extraterrestrial communications. They could also be interpreted as ESP, or as accessing parts of my brain that are normally not available, or as contacting a non-local consciousness that permeates everything. There are a lot of different models for this type of experience. I got fascinated by the extraterrestrial model at one stage in the early seventies, and still, every now and then, it makes more sense to me than any of the others.

Other times the non-local model makes more sense, which is a development of Bell’s Theorem. This was stated most clearly by Edwin Harris Walker in a paper called The Complete Quantum Anthropologist. He developed a mathematical theory of a non-local mind, to which we can gain access at times. It’s a complete quantum mechanical, mathematical model to explain everything that happens in mystical and occult experience. That makes a great deal of sense to me, especially when I found that Joyce was using the same model in Finnigan ‘s Wake. I think it also underlies the I Ching. I explain this at length in my book Coincidance.

DJB: How do you see consciousness evolving into the twenty-first century?

ROBERT: It staggers my imagination. I get about as far as 2012 in my future projections, then I can’t imagine beyond that. So much is going to change by then.

DJB: What do you see coming along up to 2012?

ROBERT: In Leary’s terms, I think about one-third of the West now understands the neuro-somatic circuit, and some techniques for activating it. I think that’s going to reach fifty to fifty-one percent pretty soon–and that will be a major cultural change. I think more and more understanding of the neuro-genetic and meta-programming circuits are coming along.

It’s very obvious that quantum physics, parapsychology and all the work they’re doing attaching brain scanners to Yogis and Zen masters means we’re going to learn a great deal about the non-local quantum circuit. I think the history of mysticism has been sort of like a bunch of firecrackers with two or three going off every century. With the LSD revolution it became two or three every month and now it’s moving up to two or three every week. I see a real acceleration in consciousness, just like in technology.

DJB: Soon it’ll be fireworks every day. One final question, Bob. Tell us about any current projects on which you’re presently working.

ROBERT: I’ve just finished a book called Quantum Psychology subtitled: How Brain Software Programs Your Self and Your World. I’m working on a movie, tentatively titled The Curtain, which may or may not ever get produced. I’ve been paid enough so that I’m not wasting my time, which is a good thing to know in Hollywood. There are all sorts of people around Hollywood who’ll get you involved in projects without ever paying you a penny, if you’re dumb enough to do that.

If the movie does get produced it’ll have a tremendous impact. I’m also working on two possible television shows and I’m continuing my historical novels. I’m doing more lectures in more places than ever before, with workshops here and there, which involves a lot of traveling. Altogether, I’m very excited about what the next ten years will bring into my life.

Compuserve chat

Online conference with Dr. Robert Anton Wilson
14 April 1986

(Sysop Jim) OK, quiet peoples. I present Dr. Robert Anton Wilson.
(Bob Wilson) Cocaine is natures way of telling you the Vatican Bank needs your money more than you do.
(Ben Rowe) Bob, since magick, and the cabala play such a role in your books, I’m curious to know just what you attitude towards such things are, here in the real(?) world. Could you state your feelings briefly?
(Bob Wilson) I regard magick and cabala as doorways to archeological levels of the human brain.
(Ben Rowe) Do you practice any form of it yourself?
(Bob Wilson) Yes.
(Ben Rowe) Care to say what kind?
(Bob Wilson) Ritual invocation, gematria.
(Avatar) To follow up on Ben’s question, are you presently a member of any secret societies or occult orders and could you tell us the names and your grade within them?
(Bob Wilson) That would be telling. Ippsissimus maximus of the Illuminati
and toenail of the Head Temple of the High Priesthood of Eris Esoteric.
(Avatar) Amusing to the last.
(Peter da Silva) I’m not sure what book this was in, I think maybe Right Where you are Sitting Now–you were talking about the possible future of human sexuality. I thought that the sorts of things you were talking about were rather pedestrian. Were you…
(Bob Wilson) Define pedestrian?
(Peter DA Silva) Well, you only considered two sexes, to begin with.
(Bob Wilson) Oh.
(Sysop Jim) A major oversight, no doubt.
(Rodney) When will the next volume of THE HISTORICAL ILLUMINATUS be out and will there be more to follow?
(Bob Wilson) It will be finished a year after I finish writing it. There will be five volumes in this series, of course.
(peter) do you think machines will ever be smarter than people?
(Bob Wilson) they’re already smarter than some people.
(Sysop Georgia) true!
(Peter DA Silva) Can I be obnoxious some more?
(Bob Wilson) Yes.
(Peter DA Silva) Back to my previous question/comment/speech. You didn’t seem to get too heavily into the possibilities of bioengineering as touched on by such people as John Varley (Ophiuchi Hotline, Titan, etc.).
Have you any more thoughts on the subject now that technology has begun to catch up on you?
(Bob Wilson) I think we can engineer immortal superhuman beings in many dimensions of superiority to us. I hope we can learn to re-engineer ourselves neurologically to become more superhuman than our creations by learning from them.
(Peter DA Silva) How about technological immortality?
(Bob Wilson) To understand anything, you must be able to make a working model of it. The more we model the human brain, not only through bioengineering but through computers, the more we can make better brains for ourselves.
(Avatar) First, do you think western civilization will survive the next century, and what do you think will be the significant events which will characterize its existence? Second, what do you think of the “magic” energy machine of Joseph Newman?
(Bob Wilson) Just heard of the Newman machine two days ago. Too soon to form an opinion.
(Sysop Jim) On the first question then.
(Bob Wilson) I think western civilization will survive. It will be increasingly like a libertarian, pagan, psionic science fiction novel, probably by me.
(Geoff) Hi Bob… A question about skepticism. As one of the resident skeptics, I’ve always advocated “keeping your B.S. detector turned up on high” when investigating these strange phenomena. My question… what degree of skepticism is appropriate and when is it time to turn skepticism off?
(Bob Wilson) Skepticism should be dialectical. Doubt A, then doubt NOT A. Then doubt both A and NOT A. Then doubt your own ability to doubt enough.
(Geoff) GREAT!!
(Bob Wilson) Doubt also Doubt itself.
(Ben Rowe) A crowley fan, I see.
(Bob Wilson) Experiment with Alternative belief systems, enter alternative, cognitive grids and as the Zen Master said when asked the way of the Tao, “Move!”.
(Geoff) Thanx, Bob. And welcome to CIS!!!
(Ben Rowe) Bob, one of the perpetual arguments here is about the degree to which subjective phenomena, such as the results of magickal invocations, can be usefully dealt with from a an “objective”, scientific viewpoint. Could you tell us your feelings as to the place of objective inquiry in such fields?
(Bob Wilson) Buddha said, “doubt, and find your own light.” Ritual is to the inner sciences what experiment is to the outer sciences. Believe nothing on faith. Test all things. Enter every reality tunnel If there are only cannibals inside close the door quickly and move to the next reality tunnel. Fear nothing, never complain.
(Sysop Jim) “Test all things” Applying what tests?
(Ben Rowe) I take it that means you think science is pretty much useless in that area.
(Bob Wilson) If the hypothesis gets the result you want, tentatively continue the hypothesis. If the hypothesis busts, make a better hypothesis. As John Lilly says, “Science is the Yoga of the West. Yoga is the science of the East”. Do the experiments , watch the results. I don’t see that that’s not scientific.
(Ben Rowe) The problem we run into here seems to be more in finding some basis to talk about such things. The objectivists wont accept the “evidence” of the subjectivists such as myself, and vice versa. Any ideas about finding a common ground for this sort of discussion?
(Bob Wilson) Objectivists are disciples of Ayn Rand. See mmy definition of “disciples” under NEW AGE in religion SIG.
(Peter DA Silva) I wish I had your optimism about the future, BOB. I don’t see libertaria any time soon. Can you give any of your thoughts as to how it will come about? (wonder if I can get a straight answer this time.)
(Bob Wilson) I will do my part, the part only I can do from my position in space-time. I believe others are doing the same thing from their space. Do what thou Wilt shall be the Whole of the Law
(Peter DA Silva) Sigh…
(Sysop Jim) Peter, these ARE straight answers. Remember, space is curved. Follow up?
(Peter DA Silva) Was hoping for a scenario or prediction, not an oath of allegiance. Right now the authoritarians seem to be winning and my position in space time is a bummer.
(Bob Wilson) Sorry… you created that reality tunnel, you can find your way out… You built the Trap… you know the design better than anyone…
(rich) Bob, ALL phenomena subjective. Is not search for objectivity really search for means of communicating those that are more subjective than others? Does “science” really have any meaning as an “object/idea” unless applied?
(Bob Wilson) Can’t understand your terminology. Question meaningless in my reality tunnel. Try Again!
(rich) Everything is subjective. Inability to express ideas makes it so, but recourse to science demands communication in terms others understand, no?
(Bob Wilson) That means as little to me as everything is green. If everything is Green, we still need separate words for the kind of green that looks like Red and the kind of green that looks like blue. If everything is subjective, we still need words for the subjective things that everybody sees, the subjective things that only one person sees, and the subjective things that you break your leg on, and the subjective things that are called, “the Ballad of the Long Legged Bait.”
(Avatar) The model that modern science uses to explain the world in terms of atoms, molecule, particles, and fields works quite well for many things that we do, but is occasionally assaulted by interesting loopholes like rains of hazel nuts, ancient rocks containing live frogs, screwups in space and time, etc. What extensions to conventional science have you found most effective to enable you to model anomalous events, and could you explain some of them to us?
(Bob Wilson) JUNG’s theory of synchronicity (psychologically-induced space time relativity). Bell’s theorem of non-local hidden variables. Transcending space-time. Persinger’s theory of geomagnetic fluctuations linked to human brain function. I wonder if the link works both ways. Edwin Harris Walker “the complete quantum anthropologist (proceedings of the American Anthropological Association, 1974) unifying Bell theorem with psychokinetic experimental results. Garfinkel.
(Avatar) Of “Simon and Garfinkel”?
(Bob Wilson) Garfinkel on reality glossing and Leary on imprinting of reality tunnels not when they become ordinary by repetition.
(Sysop Jim) If I may, anecdotal or scientific repetition?
(Bob Wilson) Both.
(Peter DA Silva) Problem with tuning perception of reality is it doesn’t get you off the front lines (unless I’m psychotic & dreaming we’re in authoritarian state while we’re in libertarian paradise. If so, please wake me up). So, please quit treating me like parapsychologist at the AAAS & give some indication as to how transition is to occur.
(Sysop Jim) Ha!
(Bob Wilson) Breath normally, eat less sugar… eat foods… get high frequently…
(Peter DA Silva) Hey! I quit putting sugar in my coffee already!
(Bob Wilson) learn to meditate, stop being afraid and angry… you are surrounded by a network of love… take down the bricks, remove the armor… there is nothing to fear. Stop Complaining… have chicken soup once a day…
(Peter DA Silva) Do chicken fajitas count?
(Sysop Jim) I hope you’re getting all this down, Peter.
(Peter DA Silva) In my print buffer.
(Bob Wilson) Learn to laugh, learn to give… lighten up your act, and remember who made the grass green…
(Peter DA Silva) Newton.
(Robby) we all do
(Bob Wilson) and who put the insect monsters in your reality tunnel…
(Peter) Do you believe in GOD?
(Bob Wilson) God is a ridiculously small human concept compared to the coherent intelligence of universe. Everything doesn’t need to have a primate Alpha male in charge to be an intelligent system.
(Mark) Can you tell me the formula for AUM (or where to find said formula)?
(Bob Wilson) Don’t know the laws relating to communication of such information. Don’t want the owner of this machine busted.
(Mark) Data source?
(Bob Wilson) Who makes the grass green?
(Robby) magick in theory and practice by a.c.
(Bob Wilson) Oral Tradition!
(Robby) true
(Sysop Jim) What is AUM?
(Peter DA Silva) Ultimate acid.
(Bob Wilson) Those who know do not speak…
(Mark) Drug to convert neophobes into neophiles.
(Sysop Jim) I see. hokay, Kaci?
(Bob Wilson) Drug obsolete, electrons are the psychedelics of the 80’s
(Peter DA Silva) “Turn On, Tune In, Link Up”?
(Bob Wilson) And shine like stars….
(kaci) dare i digress and ask what persinger’s theory of geo flux is??
(Bob Wilson) Persinger has found statistical links between geomagnetic cycles and fortean data anomalistics and parapsychology. See his space-time transients and unusual events (co-author).
(kaci) in what kind of periodicity?
(Bob Wilson) LAFRENSERIE and brain-mind bulletin circa December 1985… I hope…. Anomalistics correlate with earthquake activity and strong psychic experience with low geomagneticactivity.
(rich) what physical means is postulated for existence and use of psychic powers/uses?
(Bob Wilson) The careless postulate vague psycho-kinetic energies. Persinger postulates measurable geomagnetic fields. Walker derives psychokinetic effects from basic equations of non-local quantum connectedness.
(ELAD) I have found this discussion interesting. but, sorry to say…i am not familiar with mr. Wilson’s books. since there was no bio at the beginning I would appreciate his book listing and books that he recommends.
(Bob Wilson) “This I like”: The book of the Breast , sex and drugs, Illuminatus!, Cosmic Trigger, The Universe Next Door, the Homing Pidgeons, the Trick Top Hat, Neuropolitics, Right Where You are Sitting Now, Masks of the Illuminati, The Illuminati Papers, Prometheus Rising, The Earth Will Shake, The Widows Son, and two I’d rather forget.
(Sysop Jim) And numerous issues of Playboy, yes?
(Bob Wilson) I only wrote the short editorials on why pot should be legalized abortion should be legalized, victimless crimes should be abolished, the draft should be abolished, and a few similar ideas now trite and soon to be conservative. Even Buckley now agrees with me about drugs. Remember the Zen Master who said, “move”.
(Peter DA Silva) Sorry… can’t stop asking hard questions… is my role here. 2 questions this time. 1) have you read and if so what do you think of Julian Jayne’s book “The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind”. 2) I wish you would write some Science Fiction (where defined as so:- a SF writer is embarrassed by his inconsistencies, a fantasy writer is proud of them). 3) (I lied) Do you really think there are psychedelics of the ’80s?
(Bob Wilson) Jane’s model interesting. So is Stan Gooch in total man. I prefer Pribram hologram model and Leary 8 circuit model.
(Peter DA Silva) (of course)
(Bob Wilson) Inconsistencies of my books are inconsistencies of quantum mechanics, which is why new scientist magazine called me “most scientific of all science fiction writers” … I blush…. But facts are facts. Thank you for exchanging electrons, the psychedelics of the 80’s.
(Peter DA Silva) If these are psychedelics, I’m going back to drugs.
(Bob Wilson) Have a high Holiday…
(Robert Wiggins) Bob, I’ve been reading you for many years (more than 10) now (I even have Sex and Drugs in hardcover) and wanted to tell you I still go back to read “10 Reasons to Get Out of Bed in the Morning” that appeared in Oui magazine. My question is mundane (but I’m enjoying the conversation here) do you know of a place in NYC that carries your books (and/or Leary’s)
(Bob Wilson) Thou art beat, Forbidden planet and Laissez Faire books, Weisers, ga
(Robby) are you the BOBO of subgenius fame
(Bob Wilson) That would be telling.ga
(Robby) i saw de Selby today he was wearing pink
(Bob Wilson) Others said, “he was a pink elf” but he was glad to be there and meet all of you.
(Robby) de self-by?
(Bob Wilson) I did not invent de Selby. As professor LACKANOOKIE says,
“TIJENTIEN, TIEN JEN TAO , de Selby TZU JAN”. Very roughly, the earth creates people, the sky creates earth. de Selby became what he always was”.
(Peter DA Silva) What are the two books you don’t want to remember, and what do you think of Steve Jackson’s game “Illuminati”?
(Bob Wilson) When did you stop eating your wife …no wait… When did you stop beating your wife?
(Peter DA Silva) I like the first one better.
(Bob Wilson) and was there ever a dog that praised its fleas
(Avatar) OK – I am honored – two quickies. What is your birthdate? and do you believe in Death after Life?
(Bob Wilson) January 18th, 1932. Death and Life are unscientific concepts, as such. All we know is the tuned-in and the not tuned-in. The not tuned-in may be tuned in. /TUN DEATH /MON LIFE with the proper technology or neurology. We are made out of the debris of exploding stars. The not-tuned-in is not nonexistent since nonexistence is a metaphysical concept. Operationally stars, people, quarks Tune in, or tune out, the dance is eternal. LO! The happy moron, he doesn’t give a damn. I wish I was a moron…. MY GOD! Perhaps i am! Love to All. Stop being afraid, Peter. Goodnight.
(Peter DA Silva) Not in my program.