Search
Search results
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated The Satanic Bible in Books
Jun 29, 2018
LaVey echoes a view of man's value and of non-materialist religion which can be easily found in the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche (especially Antichrist) and Ayn Rand. He is incredibly inconsistent on the subject of morality and shows only a cursory understanding of Christian history, doctrines, and the Bible.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.
LaVey does not view Satan as a person (nor does he view God that way), but as a representation of what man really is in his primal nature-- a violent and lustful nature which LaVey calls good, though he simultaneously argues that certain parts of it (that which would harm children or rape, for instance) are not good-- a dichotomy that he calls hypocritical in righthand path religions such as Christianity. Beyond this tension, he elsewhere seems to argue for moral relativism, creating a vicious circle of nonsense. Because good and evil are falsehoods and God and Satan are non-persons, the spells and rituals he creates are only symbols meant to harness our primal energies, sending them out to accomplish our goals (much like in the Hicks' Law of Attraction books or in The Secret).
A mix of equal parts tongue-in-cheek symbolism and outright charlatanism.
I suspect that this book's teachings would appeal primarily to two types of people: narcissists who want to seem edgy and angry people who have been harmed by institutional religion. In regard to the former, there are more thoughtful ways to be counter-cultural. In regard to the latter, an assessment of the intellectual weaknesses of this philosophy won't remove the hurt or pain they've been through, but hopefully an understanding that the kind of Christianity spoken of by LaVey is not genuine Christianity can remove some of the hatred they feel toward it due to the immoral actions performed by its claimed representatives.
Totally off-topic, but Lavey looks like a bald version of Evil Spock.
Goddess in the Stacks (553 KP) rated My Life with Bob in Books
Sep 13, 2018
I need to read more books about books, because the few that I've read, I've really enjoyed! Earlier this year I read Tolstoy and the Purple Chair, and loved it. I have holds on Voracious: A Hungry Reader Cooks Her Way Through Great Books and The World Between Two Covers: Reading the Globe. (I also have a hold on The Man Who Loved Books Too Much, but I'm not sure that quite counts.) And, in looking up the links for those books, I just put holds on three more books about reading, since this is a genre I apparently enjoy!
My Life with Bob is about the author's reading life. Bob is a notebook she uses to keep track of what she's read. Just title and author, and whether or not she's finished it. Very simple. But in looking back through what she's read, she recalls where she was, and what she was doing or going through at the time. So the real story is how her reading choices fit into her life, and how being a bookworm affected her life.
I enjoyed the book, with the slight irritation (in the latter part of the book) of her insistence on calling Young Adult literature, Children's Lit. Children's books are picture books and books for young readers, not The Fault in Our Stars and The Hunger Games. Those are Young Adult, and there's a pretty big difference in my opinion. Maybe not in the professional world; she is the editor of The New York Times Book Review. But it's frustrating to hear her talk about Kid Lit and lump Harry Potter in with a 36-page autobiography of a teddy bear written for kids under 10.
I was also a little shocked to learn (in the book!) she wrote a book about how porn is destroying the American family, and testified before Congress about it, sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch and Sam Brownback. I normally don't have a problem reading Republican authors - I often don't know the exact political leanings of authors - but I'm reading about her reading choices, and suddenly they are all suspect. (She disliked Ayn Rand, at least, so that's something.) The book was published in May of last year, so after the last presidential election. Anyone who acknowledges working with the GOP at this point, and isn't embarrassed by it, immediately gets a black mark in my book.
So ultimately I'm torn on this book. I liked reading it. I dislike the author. (I will never even try to be non-political on this blog. Sorry-not-sorry.)
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com
My Life with Bob is about the author's reading life. Bob is a notebook she uses to keep track of what she's read. Just title and author, and whether or not she's finished it. Very simple. But in looking back through what she's read, she recalls where she was, and what she was doing or going through at the time. So the real story is how her reading choices fit into her life, and how being a bookworm affected her life.
I enjoyed the book, with the slight irritation (in the latter part of the book) of her insistence on calling Young Adult literature, Children's Lit. Children's books are picture books and books for young readers, not The Fault in Our Stars and The Hunger Games. Those are Young Adult, and there's a pretty big difference in my opinion. Maybe not in the professional world; she is the editor of The New York Times Book Review. But it's frustrating to hear her talk about Kid Lit and lump Harry Potter in with a 36-page autobiography of a teddy bear written for kids under 10.
I was also a little shocked to learn (in the book!) she wrote a book about how porn is destroying the American family, and testified before Congress about it, sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch and Sam Brownback. I normally don't have a problem reading Republican authors - I often don't know the exact political leanings of authors - but I'm reading about her reading choices, and suddenly they are all suspect. (She disliked Ayn Rand, at least, so that's something.) The book was published in May of last year, so after the last presidential election. Anyone who acknowledges working with the GOP at this point, and isn't embarrassed by it, immediately gets a black mark in my book.
So ultimately I'm torn on this book. I liked reading it. I dislike the author. (I will never even try to be non-political on this blog. Sorry-not-sorry.)
You can find all my reviews at http://goddessinthestacks.com