What do you think?
Rate this book
The Illuminati Papers
Is All of History a Vast Conspiracy? Cosmic Joke?
Robert Anton Wilson developed the story of the Illuminati, a conspiracy as old as time itself, as a vehicle to amuse and enlighten. His best-selling books, The Illuminati Trilogy and Cosmic Trigger, have delighted readers the world over and made the Illuminati conspiracy the perfect metaphor for our time. In the Illuminati Papers, Robert Anton Wilson speaks through characters from his novels and other realities and presents his views on our future way of life.
Robert Anton Wilson developed the story of the Illuminati, a conspiracy as old as time itself, as a vehicle to amuse and enlighten. His best-selling books, The Illuminati Trilogy and Cosmic Trigger, have delighted readers the world over and made the Illuminati conspiracy the perfect metaphor for our time. In the Illuminati Papers, Robert Anton Wilson speaks through characters from his novels and other realities and presents his views on our future way of life.
168 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1980
28 people are currently reading
704 people want to read
About the author
Robert Anton Wilson
118 books1,695 followersRobert Anton Wilson was an American author, futurist, psychologist, and self-described agnostic mystic. Recognized within Discordianism as an Episkopos, pope and saint, Wilson helped publicize Discordianism through his writings and interviews. In 1999 he described his work as an "attempt to break down conditioned associations, to look at the world in a new way, with many models recognized as models or maps, and no one model elevated to the truth". Wilson's goal was "to try to get people into a state of generalized agnosticism, not agnosticism about God alone but agnosticism about everything."
In addition to writing several science-fiction novels, Wilson also wrote non-fiction books on extrasensory perception, mental telepathy, metaphysics, paranormal experiences, conspiracy theory, sex, drugs, and what Wilson called "quantum psychology".
Following a career in journalism and as an editor, notably for Playboy, Wilson emerged as a major countercultural figure in the mid-1970s, comparable to one of his coauthors, Timothy Leary, as well as Terence McKenna.
In addition to writing several science-fiction novels, Wilson also wrote non-fiction books on extrasensory perception, mental telepathy, metaphysics, paranormal experiences, conspiracy theory, sex, drugs, and what Wilson called "quantum psychology".
Following a career in journalism and as an editor, notably for Playboy, Wilson emerged as a major countercultural figure in the mid-1970s, comparable to one of his coauthors, Timothy Leary, as well as Terence McKenna.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
May 24, 2014
****An Apology ***
(a la Socrates; a Defence; and a preliminary apology to Bob for having the pretense to write such a thing).
**Integral Theory & Ken Wilber is where I'm coming from, since I find that body of work most comphrehensive. seemingly absurd terms might very well be technical terms from that work.
R.A.W's 8 circuit model of consciousness, transmitted to him by none other then Timothy Leary, needs defending for a few reasons. 1) technical philosophers & scientists will at once see its limitations, assuming they can even accept the basic premise of epistemological pluralism. 2) there are some reasons for the limitations, aesthetic & historical, which means we can forgive these gentlemen for their shortsightedness (god knows WE aren't shortsighted, so let us hand down forgiveness like the saints we are). overall I think the model offers something that the more comprehensive, detailed cartographies of Integral Theory usually can't.
what limitations? the model is phenomenological. Leary observed the primates around him; the behavioural-social patterns that were most prevalent, robotic, and problematic (prepersonal to early-personal development). he looked at the raw data of psychedelic experiences and what they illuminated. he did, however, use important findings from Freud and the transactional analysts to make sense out of early stages of development.
what's missing? the crucial distinction between stages/states/lines/quadrants. are the "circuits" states of consciousness or stages? how do they develop? the lack of clarification serves to confuse sooner or later. multiple intelligences i.e. relatively independent lines of development are not made distinct, they're jumbled all together into a simple progression up stages (or states). that's why I say it was phenomenological, it looked at immediate data rather then long term trends shown by developmental psychology. it's all too simplistic. are states of illumination always temporary? is that what higher intelligence is, a temporary disorienting glimpse at our cells enjoying sensation? can't we aspire to anything more?
one meta-problem with the model is that it lacks a "holonic logic" for guidance. "what the shit is that", you sensibly ask? holonic refers to how wholes exist in our world: always as parts of other wholes, integrating the parts yet transcending them. without this holonic logic, bob can't make sense out of how the so called circuits transcend the robotic tendencies of what came before them. we can't make sense out of development, what stunts it, what makes states into stable stages. without these tedious nerdy technicalities we find ourselves in a mire of pre-trans fallacies and/or simple hierarchy schemes (which is what the 8 circuit model amounts to, ultimately, without such integral qualifications).
coming from this [circuit 3 anal retentiveness] integral viewpoint, I'd have to say the quadrants would do the model much good. you get these seemingly materialistic neologisms from Leary/R.A.W all the time: neurologic, mind as biocomputer, circuits, imprints, left-right brain metaphors, physics analogies... it's all so uncomfortably close to a reductive flatland systems theory. left quadrant collapse to right quadrant does not serve to clarify things. I know Leary wanted to teach the world the mutual implication of internal & external. he was a panpsychist on the mind-body issue. but exterior holism is still reductionism, as Wilber pointed out to me ad nauseum. is all the subjective and intersubjective development really an epiphenomenon or result of physiological and/or technological development? Leary and Roberto were visionaries in my mind: these ideas weren't "beyond" them. they must of decided to leave things ambiguous? or perhaps they didn't see the distinctions so clearly, leaving it for others to define. the only way I could see them butting heads with the integral model is that the relativistic pluralism got them a little too excited, i.e. mean green meme. perhaps integral theory is just too stuffy and square in presentation? this brings me to 2)...a real defence of the model
2) the first point to be made is that Leary and Robert were pioneers in this still emerging field(s) of altered states, transpersonal development, prepersonal and intellectual pathology... ya know, the good stuff. that means a) they suffer the limitations put on all pioneers of new territory and b) they left the details for future researchers to outline. as pioneers they were coining goofy neologisms all the time because there was so much new territory to classify. the first phase of philosophy-science is often classificatory, a la Aristotle. after such poking in the dark can come the developmental reconstructions, the applications & predictions, etc... all that we expect of very scientific, technical theory.
these theories were made in the 60s and 70s, right at the beginning of the green meme explosion, the pluralist expansion of consciousness that so shook the culture of the west. the 8 circuit model uses the major insights of its time (new physics, cybernetics, sociobiology, psychedelic therapy) and integrates them in a way that sheds light on so much. we must keep in mind Wilber wasn't even near his fourth iteration of the integral model when Leary & Wilson were playing with these ideas; it took Wilber several decades to have the model SES and Integral Spirituality outline. The 8 circuit model is a playful recapitulation of the chakra system: it received the wisdom of the past, attempted to integrate it with newer contemporary insights, and transmitted a novel set of signals worth absorbing. this is progress; and they did it without boring everybody to death.
that's the historical point to be made, what's the aesthetic point you ask? (stop asking questions, it's dangerous on the Planet of Apes). the aesthetic point is that Leary and Wilson weren't pure theoreticians. they sacrificed a degree of precision and comprehensiveness for the sake of art: they wanted to make you think, share the newest ideas, yet do it all in the context of an artistic expression. it was a stylistic idea, and keeping in mind that McLuhan was among Leary's great influences, perhaps they knew this presentation would appeal to the widest audience possible. that's why I said it offers something the integral model just can't usually: an entertaining, aesthetically diverse experience. integral is for integral awareness seeking an integral framework. this model is more democratic I would say, although it mainly suggests a green meme perspective on development towards the higher stages. the green meme looking up, if you will, and trying to describe the view (while pleasurably disorienting the inflexible symbol mechanisms of the more primitive logical mind). these guys *performed* philosophy, they tried to inspire novelty in the mind through an adventure up & down the spiral of development. I was inspired and continue to be.
but why blather about all this on a review of The Illuminati Papers? this has been the first Robert Anton Wilson book I've read in a long time...I know he wants me to challenge him as well as think with him... I apologize for the apology, lastly; I hope it has disinformed you as planned.
(a la Socrates; a Defence; and a preliminary apology to Bob for having the pretense to write such a thing).
**Integral Theory & Ken Wilber is where I'm coming from, since I find that body of work most comphrehensive. seemingly absurd terms might very well be technical terms from that work.
R.A.W's 8 circuit model of consciousness, transmitted to him by none other then Timothy Leary, needs defending for a few reasons. 1) technical philosophers & scientists will at once see its limitations, assuming they can even accept the basic premise of epistemological pluralism. 2) there are some reasons for the limitations, aesthetic & historical, which means we can forgive these gentlemen for their shortsightedness (god knows WE aren't shortsighted, so let us hand down forgiveness like the saints we are). overall I think the model offers something that the more comprehensive, detailed cartographies of Integral Theory usually can't.
what limitations? the model is phenomenological. Leary observed the primates around him; the behavioural-social patterns that were most prevalent, robotic, and problematic (prepersonal to early-personal development). he looked at the raw data of psychedelic experiences and what they illuminated. he did, however, use important findings from Freud and the transactional analysts to make sense out of early stages of development.
what's missing? the crucial distinction between stages/states/lines/quadrants. are the "circuits" states of consciousness or stages? how do they develop? the lack of clarification serves to confuse sooner or later. multiple intelligences i.e. relatively independent lines of development are not made distinct, they're jumbled all together into a simple progression up stages (or states). that's why I say it was phenomenological, it looked at immediate data rather then long term trends shown by developmental psychology. it's all too simplistic. are states of illumination always temporary? is that what higher intelligence is, a temporary disorienting glimpse at our cells enjoying sensation? can't we aspire to anything more?
one meta-problem with the model is that it lacks a "holonic logic" for guidance. "what the shit is that", you sensibly ask? holonic refers to how wholes exist in our world: always as parts of other wholes, integrating the parts yet transcending them. without this holonic logic, bob can't make sense out of how the so called circuits transcend the robotic tendencies of what came before them. we can't make sense out of development, what stunts it, what makes states into stable stages. without these tedious nerdy technicalities we find ourselves in a mire of pre-trans fallacies and/or simple hierarchy schemes (which is what the 8 circuit model amounts to, ultimately, without such integral qualifications).
coming from this [circuit 3 anal retentiveness] integral viewpoint, I'd have to say the quadrants would do the model much good. you get these seemingly materialistic neologisms from Leary/R.A.W all the time: neurologic, mind as biocomputer, circuits, imprints, left-right brain metaphors, physics analogies... it's all so uncomfortably close to a reductive flatland systems theory. left quadrant collapse to right quadrant does not serve to clarify things. I know Leary wanted to teach the world the mutual implication of internal & external. he was a panpsychist on the mind-body issue. but exterior holism is still reductionism, as Wilber pointed out to me ad nauseum. is all the subjective and intersubjective development really an epiphenomenon or result of physiological and/or technological development? Leary and Roberto were visionaries in my mind: these ideas weren't "beyond" them. they must of decided to leave things ambiguous? or perhaps they didn't see the distinctions so clearly, leaving it for others to define. the only way I could see them butting heads with the integral model is that the relativistic pluralism got them a little too excited, i.e. mean green meme. perhaps integral theory is just too stuffy and square in presentation? this brings me to 2)...a real defence of the model
2) the first point to be made is that Leary and Robert were pioneers in this still emerging field(s) of altered states, transpersonal development, prepersonal and intellectual pathology... ya know, the good stuff. that means a) they suffer the limitations put on all pioneers of new territory and b) they left the details for future researchers to outline. as pioneers they were coining goofy neologisms all the time because there was so much new territory to classify. the first phase of philosophy-science is often classificatory, a la Aristotle. after such poking in the dark can come the developmental reconstructions, the applications & predictions, etc... all that we expect of very scientific, technical theory.
these theories were made in the 60s and 70s, right at the beginning of the green meme explosion, the pluralist expansion of consciousness that so shook the culture of the west. the 8 circuit model uses the major insights of its time (new physics, cybernetics, sociobiology, psychedelic therapy) and integrates them in a way that sheds light on so much. we must keep in mind Wilber wasn't even near his fourth iteration of the integral model when Leary & Wilson were playing with these ideas; it took Wilber several decades to have the model SES and Integral Spirituality outline. The 8 circuit model is a playful recapitulation of the chakra system: it received the wisdom of the past, attempted to integrate it with newer contemporary insights, and transmitted a novel set of signals worth absorbing. this is progress; and they did it without boring everybody to death.
that's the historical point to be made, what's the aesthetic point you ask? (stop asking questions, it's dangerous on the Planet of Apes). the aesthetic point is that Leary and Wilson weren't pure theoreticians. they sacrificed a degree of precision and comprehensiveness for the sake of art: they wanted to make you think, share the newest ideas, yet do it all in the context of an artistic expression. it was a stylistic idea, and keeping in mind that McLuhan was among Leary's great influences, perhaps they knew this presentation would appeal to the widest audience possible. that's why I said it offers something the integral model just can't usually: an entertaining, aesthetically diverse experience. integral is for integral awareness seeking an integral framework. this model is more democratic I would say, although it mainly suggests a green meme perspective on development towards the higher stages. the green meme looking up, if you will, and trying to describe the view (while pleasurably disorienting the inflexible symbol mechanisms of the more primitive logical mind). these guys *performed* philosophy, they tried to inspire novelty in the mind through an adventure up & down the spiral of development. I was inspired and continue to be.
but why blather about all this on a review of The Illuminati Papers? this has been the first Robert Anton Wilson book I've read in a long time...I know he wants me to challenge him as well as think with him... I apologize for the apology, lastly; I hope it has disinformed you as planned.
September 5, 2015
Mostly wild conspiracy based speculation. The author did shine in the some of the books reviews included--in those there was a surprising amount of insight which made me look at the author being reviewed in a different light. Otherwise most of the book reads like bad stream of consciousness writings of a psychotic person.
October 3, 2021
Spoiler: it's a joke. The part you think is real is the joke. The part you think is normal is the con. Basically, this is a funny-book, meant for laughing, while occasionally having a thought.
May 19, 2015
Say what you may about his "discipleship" of Aleister Crowley and Timothy Leary, Wilson was actually quite prescient about the role the NSA and other surveillance agencies might play in the future (now the present day) America. While laughably taken to be "paranoid rants" in the early 80's, it appears in hindsight that Mr. Wilson could somehow see the totalitarian future. This book does give you a few ideas as to how to reset your "mammalian programming" so that in most things social, you're more of an Alpha than "They" are. Even if he's "full of crap" on a couple others.
September 5, 2023
Robert Anton Wilson enjoys provoking people through his books. In 'The Illuminati Papers,' he explains how to abolish stupidity and how the government ensures that we remain docile and not too clever, just to keep our declining society functioning. People are often trapped in their mythic bubbles. Robert Anton Wilson tries to break these bubbles so that each of us becomes enlightened
May 19, 2021
Smart funny and controversial even today. A ton of good "articles" or however you would refer to the sections in this book, a few great ones, and just a few I flat out didn't get and just found the language over complicated. Inspires you laying out many other great authors, books, schools of thought, and more.
June 9, 2023
Robert Anton Wilson might be the last philosopher, or at any rate, his writing is philosophy for the axial age, when most people have stopped looking for hidden truths or anything obscure. I bought this one new in consequence of trying to set up a book fair for this fall in Denver (October of '23 or so). Wilson has so many books with Illuminati in the title I thought this might have been a new one on me. In fact I own a previous version of this one, but I'll take this opportunity to tell a story. In this book, Wilson's voice is more "poppy" or deliberately snide-esque, perhaps to draw in readers potentially too snide by demeanor or too conditioned to brook his revelations. My mom recently passed. I once recommended Wilson's Cosmic Trigger trilogy to her. She looked up his name and came upon something online written in the aforementioned snidely tone and said she didn't like his voice. I persisted, saying he does that sometimes, and his Cosmic Trigger trilogy was/were three of the most "important" (or something like that) books I'd read. After she died, I found all three copies of the Cosmic Trigger trilogy in one of her bookcases, annotated and with colored tabs highlighting passages deemed significant. I haven't opened any of them yet.
January 10, 2023
Hard to explain this one. I really liked it, and I thought he brought up alot of great points - I enjoyed the format and his writing style and found it funny and interesting. Pretty ahead of his time about social justice issues and reminds me of what right wing/libertarian used to be before the new wave took it over (as of 2022). People who like conspiracy and essays will like this book, but it's not as conspiratorial as I thought it would be and he uses the Illuminati just as a medium to explain his thoughts. More of a author and thinker than an actual nutcase.
August 31, 2025
I haven’t read the associated illuminatus trilogy but this book was very interesting by itself. It’s interesting to see the hope for life extension and things like that, and it explains life and humans very well in certain spots and is vaguely comedic/sarcastic and informative - learned a lot about historical events through conducting my own research on things briefly mentioned in the book and I learned a lot of zen/buddhism related things from this book. I’ll have to reread Prometheus rising for sure after this
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 5, 2020
Always fascinating
Libertarian, futurist, psychologist, optimist, enthusiast, all round thinker, harsh social and political critic. Literary, occult, commentator. Space migration, intelligence increase and life extension. Psychological and intellectual liberation. What’s not too like? Don’t agree with everything. But always fascinating.
Libertarian, futurist, psychologist, optimist, enthusiast, all round thinker, harsh social and political critic. Literary, occult, commentator. Space migration, intelligence increase and life extension. Psychological and intellectual liberation. What’s not too like? Don’t agree with everything. But always fascinating.
September 10, 2018
Good relaxing reading
July 21, 2019
Nice primer for what this guy's all about.
October 27, 2019
Another reality-bending RAW book. If you read the Cosmic Trigger series or Prometheus Rising and looking to read more non-fiction by him in the same style, this is definitely a great choice.
May 25, 2025
not that good really
July 12, 2025
He hides it well but Robert Anton Wilson may secretly be almost rational
December 15, 2025
3.5 stars.
Dry in some areas but a smart read.
Dry in some areas but a smart read.
June 23, 2008
A quick, blazing head-banger of an introduction to various aspects of RAW's thought, comprised of quick & discrete essays written pseudonymously, expanding on some of the themes from the Cosmic Trigger series and his other works like Prometheus Rising and Coincidance. I especially recommend "Ten Good Reasons to Get Out of Bed in the Morning" and "Coex! Coex! Coex!" (which further reinforces my belief that RAW was just as good a reader of James Joyce as many of the more canonical experts on Joyce, such as Harry Levin, Harry Blamires and the Joyce biographer Richard Ellman). Also great were the RAW interviews by 'Conspiracy Digest'. Robert Anton Wilson joked about playing tricks on his readers (He learned this either from Joyce or Aleister Crowley) I have no way of being sure whether 'Conspiracy Digest' even interviewed RAW, or even whether any of the short pieces in this volume were printed elsewhere, or even how much of what is presented as fact IS actual fact. Which is not really the point. Nevertheless, an indispensable volume in the RAW oeuvre. As Phillip K Dick said upon reading Wilson, "I was astonished and delighted".
All Hail Discordia.
All Hail Discordia.
August 30, 2007
I have been reading this book off and on since I got it at the beginning of 2006. I kept it in my car and when I went to have coffee or lunch somewhere and I didn't have homework, I'd pull it out and read one or two of the "articles".
In short, I loved it. All of it. I love this man and his thoughts. Its perfect blend of intellectual stimulii and dry, sardonic humor makes me want to SMI2LE. =)
In short, I loved it. All of it. I love this man and his thoughts. Its perfect blend of intellectual stimulii and dry, sardonic humor makes me want to SMI2LE. =)
December 12, 2008
A cute, lighthearted book for those who loved the Illuminatus Trilogy and want it to go on. Borrow it from a library or a friend, unless you're a die-hard RAW fan.
Currently reading
March 9, 2009im really enjoying his clear statements that promote the importance of gaining intelligence. I also like that he changes ideas around each 30 pages or something. its nice to be fucked with and prodded at while being educated in a distant but such personal form.
January 6, 2008
Illuminatus theory...
March 10, 2009
I read this years ago and can't remember much about it, other than it was the first I'd ever heard of Finnegan's Wake.
December 10, 2009
More great essays by RAW. coex!coex!coex! is worth the price of the whole book.
March 13, 2010
trying WAY too hard. not very funny and not very though provoking....bleh.
March 21, 2013
Learn to program yourself to realize your potential. A mindblowing book designed to make your think.
January 16, 2014
True RAW material.
June 5, 2014
This book was too short! As usual, Robert Anton Wilson fluctuates between a highly intelligent, very serious tone, and comical nonsense. But he always keeps you wondering, is it true?
September 7, 2015
Poor RAW hasn't got far enough out of his own reality tunnel to quite grasp the nuance of feminism, but other then that it's a great pseudo philosophical exercise.
February 10, 2016
Awesome, as always. Another view on all those ideas of RAW
August 5, 2016
Fun, occasionally illuminating supplement to RAW's loopier fiction. Particular good complement to SCT. His section on the RICH economy makes the whole book worthwhile.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews