[davidwf]

I'm reluctant to even mention it, but I'll bite. :-)

I found the first half of "Prometheus Rising" by Robert Anton Wilson to be incredibly useful for understanding human dynamics -- I use the framework presented there every day. The core of this is in my opinion just a very straightforward computer-focused analogy that gives me insight into the behaviour of other people and myself that I haven't found elsewhere.

Of course, outside the core is a LOT of wild new age, Crowley-Leary-Regardie syncretism that provokes strong negative throw-the-book-across-the-room reactions in most people. A lot of very reasonable people would look at the wikipedia page or the cover of this book and not only think that the book is crap, but also that I'm a crazy hippie for even considering reading it.

[cwdegidio]

RAW is such an underrated author and thinker. I don’t think there is a book of his that I have not read. I started reading him when I discovered Principia Discordia, Church of the Subgenius, etc. That whole scene of counter culture thinkers had a pretty major impact on me and my world view. Great to see others that appreciate the ideas just under the weirdness.

[davidwf]

100% true for me as well -- I found the Illuminatus Trilogy via reading the Jargon File when I was an embryonic techie oh so long ago and that whole scene has been super-influential on me ever since.

[anm89]

i have to admit, as someone who dislikes new agey non rigorous stuff, that this book superficially gives off the vibe of being something Id absolutely hate.

Would you be willing to give an example or two of some topics the books discuss that might be counter to what that perception or that you just found really insightful?

Or is my perception that the focus is new age mysticism correct?

[davidwf]

Sure! The "core" I mentioned above talks about the common psychological concepts of Id, Ego, and Superego (and more), and analogises them to separate processes running on your brain's processor, with a "layered approach". Lower-level processes have a higher interrupt priority. For example, fight-or-flight happens at a subrational level, and therefore "rational" thinking won't change the way you handle a fight-or-flight response, since the triggering of that response inherently interrupts your rational thought-loop.

I'm not saying that this is literally correct -- the brain is way more complicated than that! But I find it quite useful as a metaphor for processing and understanding social dynamics that I inherently find "irrational".

[anm89]

Interesting, yeah I like the analogy. I'll throw these on the reading list and give it a shot