Debunking Castaneda

[luchog]

Does anyone know of a good online resource for debunking Carlos Castaneda's garbage? Google isn't turning up much aside from brief, cursory articles in Straight Dope and Skeptic's Dictionary. Need something a little more in depth. I know there are a few good books out, but the people I'm debating with aren't likely to make the effort to find them.

[Garrette]

Don't know anything online, and it's been a very very long time since I've read them, but following the Castaneda books marked a lowpoint of my (thankfully ended) woo life.

Any specific questions?

[hammegk]

When did fiction require "debunking"? :confused:

[kmortis]

When did fiction require "debunking"? :confused:
That's my question. Carlos may have started out writing a "mystical travelouge", but he quickly got off the deep end. I'll see if I can find a source, but I don't know why it's really necessary.

[luchog]

That's my question. Carlos may have started out writing a "mystical travelouge", but he quickly got off the deep end. I'll see if I can find a source, but I don't know why it's really necessary.
Because there are still too many people who read his books as "fact".

The key issue in this debate is the accuracy of his portrayal of "Native American religion". I've already tried pointing out the fact that there is no such thing as "a Native American religion", and his writings are inconsistent with the actual religious practices of the Yaqui and other tribes he claims to have learned from; but it looks like I'll need a more specific critique.

[kmortis]

Because there are still too many people who read his books as "fact".

The key issue in this debate is the accuracy of his portrayal of "Native American religion". I've already tried pointing out the fact that there is no such thing as "a Native American religion", and his writings are inconsistent with the actual religious practices of the Yaqui and other tribes he claims to have learned from; but it looks like I'll need a more specific critique.
1) Back when I was still a Pagan, I'd always correct people when they'd claim to be a "Native American" practitioner, as if there was one big happy tribe prior to the Evil White Man's arrival here on these shores.
2) I'm looking into it. If I can find it, I'll post what I find, if not, I won't. K?

[roger]

Richard de Mille wrote two books exposing him.

ETA: just noticed you asked for "online" references. Doh! However, a quick google search on 'de mille castaneda' yields plenty of relevant hits, so there you go.

[Psiload]

I've found that the best material available for debunking Carlos Castaneda's books can be found in the books written by Carlos Castaneda.

[c4ts]

What is it with newage and Native Americans?

[Garrette]

Native Americans were peace loving vegetarians with the wisdom of Solomon. One need only watch Disney's brilliant cartoon epic Pocahontas to see this proven.

[sophia8]

There's an newspaper article on Castaneda reproduced on this "Native American frauds" website: http://users.pandora.be/gohiyuhi/frauds/frd0029b.htm

[kmortis]

What is it with newage and Native Americans?
Native AMericans aren't Dead White European Males. That's all the justification the newage needs.

[SirPhilip]

When did fiction require "debunking"? :confused:
...and when did Casteneda's fiction in particular become a social problem requiring
it? You'd spend your time more productively debunking the nightly peanut gallery
on Art Bell.

[Jeff Corey]

The problem was that I've seen claims that he was awarded a Ph.D. in Anthropology from the faculty at UCLA for a dissertation that was later published as "A Journey to Ixtlan".
I've tried to search to validate or falsify that, but no luck at any UCLA site.
If true, you have to wonder what the faculty was smoking.

[sophia8]

The problem was that I've seen claims that he was awarded a Ph.D. in Anthropology from the faculty at UCLA for a dissertation that was later published as "A Journey to Ixtlan".
I've tried to search to validate or falsify that, but no luck at any UCLA site.
If true, you have to wonder what the faculty was smoking.
The Straight Dope on Castaneda: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/020621.html
Walter Goldschmidt, a senior professor of anthropology at UCLA, wrote an enthusiastic foreword to Teachings, and when Castaneda submitted Journey to Ixtlan under a different title as his doctoral dissertation, UCLA awarded him a PhD.

Google Richard DeMille and Jay Courtney Fikes - they've both written debunking books on Castaneda.

[Mojo]

When did fiction require "debunking"? :confused:When people started trying to get it taught in science lessons.

Oh, sorry. Thought you were talking about something else.

[brodski]

When people started trying to get it taught in science lessons.

Oh, sorry. Thought you were talking about something else.
but is Castaneda an evil materialist or not, that's the important question here!

[hammegk]

but is Castaneda an evil materialist or not, that's the important question here!

Nah. Hardcore dualist (that & a long strange trip he never made it back from).:D

just my 2cts ... ;)

[brodski]

Nah. Hardcore dualist (that & a long strange trip he never made it back from).:D

just my 2cts ... ;)
well, that's almost as bad then.

[hammegk]

At least 100% materialists have a logically defensible position ... :)

[Beany]

There's loads of Castaneda-related material at http://www.sustainedaction.org/ , you're bound to find something useful there...

[Bikewer]

The university I work at just last semester featured a big seminar series on "Castenada, mystic or hoax?" According to the seminar description that was posted, it seemed to me they were going in the direction of belief...

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend.

[kmortis]

Well, since most of the stuff that I have has already been presented, I'll just add in the drug culture's take on Carlos (http://www.erowid.org/culture/characters/castaneda_carlos/castaneda_carlos.shtml)

His stories of a wizened old sorcerer, a man who came from a long line of peyote and mushroom-using wise men with extraordinary powers, captured the imaginations of students, hippies, and scholars. His original book is presented as a "UCLA PhD Anthropology Thesis", but it was a highly radical, postmodern piece of anthropological 'field work'. Castaneda's work was a watershed for critique and thought by cultural anthropologists and brought many new, excited minds into the field.

When the story continued, however, his public supporters changed their opinions and Castaneda went from being the 'most popular anthropologist ever' to 'lying opportunist'. His books have been critiqued and criticized. Many college students study anthropology because they were touched by their stories. In his later years, he went into more bizarre things, including a type of martial art / movement style (tensegrity). There is a cult of personality that is associated with Castaneda; he is sometimes called the godfather of the New Age movement.

(emphasis mine)

If that last line is accurate, and I think it's debatable, but possible, it alone is enough to tar and feather Ol' Carlos. But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[billydkid]

I came across a paper that I wrote for freshman psychology umpteen million years ago. Most things that you wrote when you were 19 or 20 are extremely cringe inducing, however, I have to say that I was impressed reading the paper and wonder how I came to be as stupid as I am now. The paper was entitled "The Reality of The Irrational" and one of the things discussed was the work of Carlos Casteneda. Essentially, the premise of the paper was that, no, magical thinking or mysticism is not real in the sense that we normally think of reality, but that doesn't mean that they completely illegitimate. The idea is that "opening your mind up" in that way - gazing into crystal balls or doing Tarot cards and so on - is not about accessing the supernatural (a nonsense term), but is more about opening our own minds up to influence from that which is unconcious and that by doing so we can access knowlege (or something) which we contain within ourselves and are able to make creative associations and gain insight which does not typically come into express recognition in our day to day existence. That is how I always thought of Castaneda and spirituality and such. It did irritate me that Castaneda tried to pretend he was doing real anthropology and not just making up fairy tails. I do think, though, it is fairly common to invent fictions and promote them as reality in order raise interest and boost sales.

[Rolfe]

I was given a set of Castaneda books several years ago by a woo-ish friend. I found the first one so boring that I didn't get very far with it at all, and when I was trying to make a bit more space in my bookshelves a couple of months ago the whole lot ended up in the Oxfam shop. So I can't go look and see for myself now. But it really was boring tosh.

Rolfe.

[billydkid]

I was given a set of Castaneda books several years ago by a woo-ish friend. I found the first one so boring that I didn't get very far with it at all, and when I was trying to make a bit more space in my bookshelves a couple of months ago the whole lot ended up in the Oxfam shop. So I can't go look and see for myself now. But it really was boring tosh.

Rolfe.
Actually, I do agree. When I read them I wanted to like them because I thought I should and pretended I did.

[Garrette]

I guess some of us are born with a woo gene and have to fight to expel it from our bodies.

I bought in to Castaneda for a while long ago when I was young and pretty.

[Jeff Corey]

The Straight Dope on Castaneda: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/020621.html


Google Richard DeMille and Jay Courtney Fikes - they've both written debunking books on Castaneda.
Thanks for the links. It does appear that the Anthropology faculty quietly awarded him a Ph.D. in 1970.
I guess I was overly skeptical because when I first read parts of his books, they were so obviously fiction that I couldn't believe the New Woos who were citing his doctorate from a prestigious university as proof that they were factual.

[Dr Adequate]

There ought to be a SkepticWiki article on this guy ... more useful links / facts, please.

[Mojo]

I was given a set of Castaneda books several years ago by a woo-ish friend. I found the first one so boring that I didn't get very far with it at all, and when I was trying to make a bit more space in my bookshelves a couple of months ago the whole lot ended up in the Oxfam shop. So I can't go look and see for myself now. Unless they're still in the Oxfam shop, of course...

[Nucular]

The problem was that I've seen claims that he was awarded a Ph.D. in Anthropology from the faculty at UCLA for a dissertation that was later published as "A Journey to Ixtlan".
I've tried to search to validate or falsify that, but no luck at any UCLA site.
If true, you have to wonder what the faculty was smoking.
I haven't got any refs, but I remember validating that to my own satisfaction when I was big into Castaneda. But then maybe, given that I was half-buying some of his stuff (because I so wanted it to be true) maybe I'm not a particularly trustworthy source on that.

An extra slightly worrying thing apart from the fact that they awarded him a PhD in Anthropology instead of Creative Writing was that I've seen him cited in at least two 1960s/70s books on ethnobotany - written by established authorities - as an authority, and in one case, friend and colleague. He really had everyone going.

That said, I have to say, I love the books, at least the first six or seven (I thought they started to tail off a bit after that, and didn't get much further). I'm usually bored and irritated reading new age pseudophilosophy, but somehow these bizarre tales actually still do seem imaginative, poignant and meaningful to me, even now. It's just a shame he had to pretend they were real, commit academic fraud, and found a money making new age quasi-cult on the back of their success.

At the height of my fandom, I trawled through some old magazines and got hold of obscure interviews and things, hoping for some indication as to whether he really claimed they were real, or just an elaborate allegory or communication device for his ideas. I might still have them somewhere, but I seem to remember he tended to be quite cleverly ambiguous when questioned directly, along the lines of "Oh yes, don Juan absolutely existed, and taught me many things about the nature of the reality I'm trying to communicate in the books".

[Nucular]

I was given a set of Castaneda books several years ago by a woo-ish friend. I found the first one so boring that I didn't get very far with it at all, and when I was trying to make a bit more space in my bookshelves a couple of months ago the whole lot ended up in the Oxfam shop. So I can't go look and see for myself now. But it really was boring tosh.

Rolfe.
I seem to remember the first book starts with a long, dry, boring chapter based on 60s anthropological social constructionist theory, that really is a chore to get through (or does it end with it? I can't remember now) - but at any rate, if that's what you were confronted with I'm not surprised you put it down. If not, however, I am surprised you put it down, because as I said, I found the books very readable and compelling. Maybe it's just because I suspended my disbelief a bit too far.