[Stamp01]

Alan Watts is a sore subject to me. I've given his philosophies a fair shake and many don't ring true for me.

However, I've met several people in the tech industry who are adherents. Whenever any conversation entered slightly philosophical in nature, which happens unusually often in tech in my experience, the individuals I'm thinking of would immediately ask, "Well, have you ever read or listened to Alan Watts?" I'd simply say something like, "Yeah, but he doesn't really do it for me." And I'm met with this condescending "You'll understand/agree when you get older (aka wiser)" response. I'm 35, not 15.

Anyway, yeah, I'm sure it's not all Alan Watts stans, but isn't it weird that it happened 3 times? I now regard advertising Alan Watts as a red flag.

[paraph1n]

Can you elaborate on what doesn't "ring true" for you?

It's an odd statement to make, since these aren't true/false facts we're talking about.

[Stamp01]

Four times.

[asveikau]

I don't think these people in the HN thread are trying to convert you and make you accept Watts, I think they want to understand what isn't resonating and how.

I myself found Watts helpful a few years ago, but I got a little tired of what I perceived as his egotism and how he sort of defends selfishness. I imagine some of the issues in his personal life vaguely alluded to in this thread overlap with that. Still an interesting character.

I think it's probably dangerous to go "all in" with a guy like Watts. Seems like it would put you vulnerable to a personality cult. He has things to say and he's flawed.

[Ebree]

The only personality cult that threats you listening to him is finding out your own self. Cultivating own self may be called selfish by somebody without self or somebody selfless. But it's just one of choices. The same way you have no obligation to do anything in this world or be anybody. Nobody is born as saviour of world, not even own saviour. In times where world imposes on you more and more this basic idea of personal freedom & choice suddenly starts being controversial. the world 100 years ago was dirtier, poorer but much less suffocating for a free soul. Before total ideologies, statism, centralisation of everything including free minds & basic cultural realities.

The most dangerous thing nowadays is going all in with what the main flow is flushing everyone into ;-)

He also "defends" the darker side.

He considered people plainly imperfect or openly corrupt more trustworthy than these with best intentions.

Because they getting a clear deal don't break the trade while some Saint goodies tend to hide ungly face.

Enough to observe fates of businesses built on "friendships"... splitting up more often than modern marriages and in uglier way..

This includes the ugly truths behind hypocritically democratic, narrow-minded binary systems, like a hammer seeing everywhere a nail.

At leasts these points made perfect sense for me observing reality.

Maybe it's just incompatible with your actual ideology. Maybe time to go deep into validity of it? Who said selflessness or altruism is not dangerous? If somebody imposes it on others that becomes really ugly really fast? Like why somebody modifies my choice in shop by some ideological carbon footprint? that's my personal choice what I want. Especially when you are aware it's a complete unscientific bs.

[asveikau]

Respectfully, this is a wall of text and it isn't really about me and my opinion. I suspect you're maybe too deep in the personality cult.

I've seen it mostly on the internet, and Watts is one of those that evokes heavy denial from adherents. People will defend mild criticism of their heroes very fervently like you've done. They can do no wrong. But no human being is perfect and that's all I said, with brief reference to the parts I liked least.

I don't like 100% of what Watts said and did, I think a bit of it is misguided or the wrong emphasis, and we're all human and sometimes we misguide ourselves, that's not a huge problem or harsh judgment. I'm not denying that he had interesting and good things to say as well.

[q7xvh97o2pDhNrh]

Asking for an elaboration is not a disagreement (or an agreement) with your position — or any position.

If that was worth incrementing the counter, I wonder about the first three. There's a large, large delta between "can you elaborate" and "advertising."

[pryelluw]

YouTube has certainly made him into some kind of prophet. Which is hilarious given he referred to himself as a cunning entertainer.

I can see how this cult of persona can turn you off. The ideas he presents are not new just in an amusing way. People tend to flock and hype such storytellers.

[sammalloy]

I tell everyone within the hearing range of my voice and written word not to listen to the YouTube mashups of Alan Watts. They take his words out of context of the original lectures and turn them into something completely different. And if you need music to listen to Watts, you’ve pretty much missed the entire point of what he’s saying. Sure, people want to feel good, but that can also get in the way of meaning and interpretation.

[froh]

do you happen to have a recommendation handy for a trustworthy collection of his talks?

[sammalloy]

Unfortunately, his son and associates have taken down most of the full length lectures within the last five years, as you probably already know. Other than purchasing the audio directly from his son on his site, I believe they did release many of the transcripts of the full length lectures on his and other sites, so you can still read them.

[pryelluw]

You can read his books. They pretty much have the same content as the talks.

[froh]

I love his voice and how he speaks. and I wasn't aware his family controls the recordings (see the sibling comment to yours).

[sammalloy]

I don’t recall what year the copyright takedowns began, but about five years ago it became noticeable. In the late 1990s to early to mid 2000s, you could find hobbyists uploading them all over the place. When YouTube got started there was a brief point in time where almost half (or maybe more than half) of all Alan Watts recordings were uploaded. Podcasters like Lorenzo made it even more popular (don’t recall where he got his recording from, but pretty sure he was later served with a takedown notice by the Watts family).

[parthianshotgun]

I haven't really listened to Watts seriously in any capacity, but can you explain what you don't like about him? If I had to guess I'd wager that you explaining it might undo your own philosophy, which is something I'm sympathetic to, as expressing what's 'wrong' can often fall short of grace

[EricDeb]

Asking specifically what you don't think rings true or for examples is different than condescension

[sammalloy]

> I've given his philosophies a fair shake and many don't ring true for me.

It’s not philosophy. It’s not religion. It’s not true or false. It’s at its core, psychology. Once you understand that, you’ll get it.

[Stamp01]

Five times.

[beaker52]

It’s okay if you don’t get it, but it seems to me that you’re just getting in your own way over it.

It’s not imperative, but when I personally sense that I’m obstructing myself around a topic, I take some time to reset myself and give things a fresh go. The hardest part is leaving out all my preconceptions and keeping my stink face off, but it’s proven worth it enough times that it’s become something I’ve made a habit.

[dgreensp]

I think he got it well enough, it's just not his truth.

Like if Watts says, "Life isn't a journey, it's a dance," one can hear that and say, "Ok, I get what you're going for, I've reflected on it deeply, but for me, life is a journey, not a dance." And it's not necessarily true that, if one reflects deeper, and grows wiser, and puts down one's preconceptions, etc etc, they will eventually, in the fullness of time, realize Alan was right. That's the sort of presumptive condescension that is being called out.

[radley]

Geez, let go man.

(Six.)

[alexvoda]

No, he is entirely right. He just complained about the condescending tone of fans and what does the above commenter do, he does the exact thing, pushes the exact button.

In a different context this would have been played for laughs, or it would have been considered trolling. I do not think the above commenter was trolling. People are just attached to idols and ideas they like and having them tarnished results in an impulsive reaction to defend them.

[roguesherlock]

It has nothing do with Alan watts and everything to do with the people ? Like I resonate a lot with him but I never preach or condemn people for not liking it ?

[thenerdhead]

The red flag is arrogance, not the author. It is worth separating the two.