Aldous Huxley

Is it better than Brave new world? cause this one was a shitty one

Poorly-written relic that's only worth reading nowadays for historical context

>>7237716
i found that some of the ideas were fairly interesting. i agree that from a writing perspective this book is a piece of shit. its hard to follow because of his way or wording things and punctuation (also in context with the time and his background) but the material he tried to get out is still sound in my opinion. why didnt you like it if you could explain more?

>>7237699
op here as well as the other reply, i havent read it but i know it is an actual novel and this book is two essays, the first re hashing his experience while on mescaline, the second, heaven and hell, he philosophises through many historical contexts how the human processes the visionary experience. and how the mystic/visionary experience can be looked at with two polarities much resembling heaven and hell as described through time. if i picked it up right at least.

>>7237733
I'm not saying I didn't "like" it. It's just very dated. Discussion on the subject has moved forward. I think Robert Anton Wilson's non-fiction covers a lot of the same ground in a more entertaining (and more contemporary) way.

>>7237761
il have to look into them. any recommendations?

It's pretty good so far; the physiology part resonated but he's a little too simplistic to think this is 'expanding' his mind

Meanwhile I think Robert Anton Wilson's Angel Tech is fucking terrible

>>7237860
which is pretty good so far? the doors of perception? i wouldnt say it expanded his mind at all. but it put him in a headspace where one would be more likely to learn and gain higher understanding of things menial or not.

You made a DOP thread when there was already one in the catalog

>>7237881
oops

>>7237881
you sure that wasnt just a drug book thread with dop as the image related?

www.gnosticmedia.com