In counterpoint, the wisdom and knowledge that Watts delivers has massively helped me out of chronic mental health problems (being the middle class white target audience).
The thing I really enjoy about Watts, and what seems this article seem moot, is that lazy mysticism is half the point. He is offering a counterweight to social pressure and an 'age of anxiety' by suggesting new points of view in which desperate clawing and ladder climbing are absurd. He says very clearly not to take him too seriously, because he's not offering a new totalizing point where you should be anxious about nothing - just showing that there is an alternative, and you are poorer for not having considered it.
And if that doesn't work for you, no worries, he's a lazy mystic not a preacher.
The article isn't as aggressive as the headline, but it also doesn't really give a clear picture of Watts. He had a lot of issues in his personal life, but as the article parenthetically mentions, he helped a lot of people too. If you want to know more about Watts and what he means to people, I would suggest finding some of his lectures on YouTube (avoid the ones with new agey music).
Watts was a connoisseur of fascinating ideas. It's easy to criticize his syncretism as "watered down Buddhism", and you can't take everything he (or anyone) says as gospel, but there's plenty of insight in his lectures. And he will point you towards a hundred other thinkers with amazing ideas to share.
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
A lot of criticism is leveled at Alan Watts, by people who point out how he conveyed many oversimplifications of religious teachings, or ideas that seem to be misunderstandings of teachings from an academic point of view.
I think what those people are either missing or ignoring is that his main motivation was to be a spiritual entertainer, as he described it, and I believe he's best interpreted and understood that way as well.
If people want to learn a rigorous deep understanding of certain philosophies and spiritual beliefs, there are innumerable other ways to dive into this, and better people to listen to. To me, his conveyance of ideas is better suited to impart interesting and different ways of looking at the world in a general manner and to pique one's imagination, not to learn spiritual concepts in a rigorous way.
I always felt he succeeded in that way, simply by attracting more people towards an interest in a spirituality and philosophy, and giving a starting point from which they can pursue serious ideas if their interest is sustained.
Went on a spree of listening to Alan Watts videos on YouTube some years back during a major bout of depression. It was after accidentally stumbling across a programme about him on the CBC. The premise of his talks would intrigue me but honestly I didn't find much to remember in those talks, and the main benefit is they were vaguely comforting.
I find his books a bit wordy and boring but his "Out of Your Mind" lectures are amazing.
Though "Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind" by Shunryu Suzuki is a much better introduction to the topic – Watts had a scholarly approach to it and lacked the actual practice.
Sounds like you approach this debate as an exercise in argumentation, not as a discussion of Watts' life or his publications.
When I asked OP to name someone, I did mean someone well-known. That makes sense in the context of a discussion of a famous philosopher. Maybe a childhood friend gave you a good advice 40 years ago - we won't be able to discuss the character of that person here.
What kind of a person one must be for you to value their life advice?
> Was he an abusive alcoholic or not?
He drank heavily at the end of his life. Was he an alcoholic? Maybe. Was he abusive? I haven't heard anyone call him abusive before this comment.
What are people's thoughts on Allen Watts. Ive listened to a few of his talks on YouTube and read one of his books but I feel there are better any suggestions
Maybe because I've been an ardent atheist since my mid-teens and an agnostic before that, I enjoyed listening to Alan Watts as a good explainer of how it all works. How the eastern and western ideas of spirituality differ and where they came from. He seemed very knowledgeable about that. I was never tempted in to Christianity, Buddhism or any other form of spirituality or enlightenment after listening to many of his lectures. The author of the link seems a bit resentful that other philosophers, especially those of the 60's and 70's had a lot more fun than him after reading this piece and a couple of others on his site...
i think Watts considered himself more of a "spiritual entertainer", he would have laughed at the idea of being a "spiritual leader", being a rather cheeky rascal in the best meaning of the term. his audiobook lectures are great, id recommend buying them as a way to support his legacy.
I used to own a CD collection of his lectures and have very fond memories of listening to him on road trips. Agree that he shares many wonderful ideas in his talks, no need to diminish that by calling ideas “watered down” or “lazy”. He synthesized many religions and philosophies into a cohesive system (even if sometimes pretty esoteric).
For those subscribed to the Waking Up app: they recently (well, around a year ago) added a large Alan Watts lecture collection to the Theory section.
Watts said he enjoyed Speaking because he enjoyed hearing himself Talk
And if anybody should start getting Giddy over any great Pearls of Wisdom he delivered, he said that it would be like a Thief returning a Pocket Watch they had just taken from you - Humans are already equipped to exist in Nature, and whatever Watts says doesn't change that
He's not delivering Weather Forecasts or Road Conditions (Facts upon which to Deliberate) - He's populating Silence with the Word of Alan Watts, and if tomorrow you don't remember all of the words then so what? There will be more words.
That might be true in the abstract, as a theory. But when it comes to point-of-life I think it’s better to judge a philosophy based on how a person has lived it. And it doesn’t seem like Watts lived as good of a life as he could.
I used to criticize Watts for what I thought was not practicing what he preached: he died of alcoholism. That was until I suffered late-stage alcoholism myself. Fortunately, in the modern era I had available all kinds of help not available to Watts at the time. Very people in those days escaped the ravages of late-stage alcoholism, enlightened or not.
The thing I really enjoy about Watts, and what seems this article seem moot, is that lazy mysticism is half the point. He is offering a counterweight to social pressure and an 'age of anxiety' by suggesting new points of view in which desperate clawing and ladder climbing are absurd. He says very clearly not to take him too seriously, because he's not offering a new totalizing point where you should be anxious about nothing - just showing that there is an alternative, and you are poorer for not having considered it.
And if that doesn't work for you, no worries, he's a lazy mystic not a preacher.
reply