Talk:Eight-circuit model of consciousness/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Eight-circuit model of consciousness. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Sources
Right now, this article suffers severely from WP:PRIMARY. Here I will attempt to find some secondary sources which can provide context:
- [1] article in media studies
- [2] (note: conference proceeding)
- [3] book on Leary
- [4] article on ketamine
- [5] Psychedelics Encyclopedia (less than pleased that Andrew Weil wrote the Foreward, but... highly cited reference anyway).
- [6] book on psychedelics
Not impressive, but giving a sense of the context, at least.
jps (talk) 11:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- Please note that Robert Anton Wilson's book and work concerning and expanding on this model (as well as Ali's) are not primary sources to Leary's original model (they would, I'd think, be considered secondary and commentary). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- I'm a bit uncomfortable with using it as a reliable source for anything but the musings of Anton Wilson, but it does speak to the notability of the idea at least that the football was passed to another who is certainly famous in his own right. jps (talk) 18:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- I like McCray, W. Patrick. "Timothy Leary's Transhumanist SMI2LE". Groovy Science: Knowledge, Innovation, and American Counterculture. wplibrary for context. One brief mention in a flood of Leary concepts. All taken, saying 4 terrestrial and 4 post-terrestrial are about the extent of description in most good sources. fiveby(zero) 19:10, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- Based on (probably book jacket) summations of this book here, perhaps this should be covered from a social science perspective. Reviews appear to be authored by university professors (Angela N. H. Creager and Fred Turner); two notable scientific journals (Science and Nature); as well as MIT News. Steve Quinn (talk) 20:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- In fact, I am guessing there would be enough notable coverage of the book, "Groovy Science," for a Wikipedia article. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 21:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- Here is an obit for Robert Anton Wilson in The Telegraph [7] to help determine his credibility as a consciousness researcher and theorist. Steve Quinn (talk) 21:12, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
The notability of a fringe theory must be judged by statements from verifiable and reliable sources, not the proclamations of its adherents.
I think Wilson, Alli, et al fall squarely in the realm of "adherents". JoelleJay (talk) 18:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)- This is absolutely the correct viewpoint. GrandMote (talk) 21:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)