The God of Atheists

Deep Purple · Number of posts: 127 Registration date: 2008-05-10

Those who have read it, what did you think of TGOA? I thought it was a well-written book. It was clearly autobiographical, as Stef has mentioned (except for the plot line of starting a rock band, I suspect; I've heard his song-based podcasts; he's an adequate amateur singer, but no pro). It's obvious that he is the philosophy student and the computer programmer in the book. I wonder how autobiographical the sex scenes were (the point of the sex scenes seemed to be that sex with the philosophically impure is not satisfying, and Stef dated a lot of philosophically impure women).

I found the children the most interesting characters. I think it's how Stef sees himself (and all children) outside the corrupting influence of parents. It's a compelling fantasy, and I want to believe it, but it just doesn't seem likely. I really wish Stef and Christina would have kids and run the experiment themselves, but they seem unwilling to do so (Stef has mentioned an unwillingness, but not an inability, although they are both on in years).

All in all, TGOA seems to be a well-written vanity project. His phrasings, analogies, and structure is aesthetically pleasing. However, Stef seems to think it Atlas Shrugged with human protagonists, but it lacks the philosophical explicitness of Rand's tome. Moreover, where Rand had impossible adult paragons, Stef has impossible child paragons.

(Incidentally, we usually refer to philosophers and intellectuals by their last name -- Rand, Hume, Kant -- but it feels very awkward to me to refer to Stef as "Molyneux." It almost seems insulting to me. Maybe that has to do with the uniqueness of his first and last names; alternatively, it could be because I'm holding on to that personal flavor he injects in the podcasts: I want to be on a first-name basis with the man. Any thoughts?)

Nielsio · Subject: Re: The God of Atheists Sat May 31, 2008 5:44 am

A review by someone I respect:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKS0Qz1eeOs

I haven't read his books myself.

_________________
http://thefreedomchannel.blogspot.com/ | http://www.youtube.com/Nielsio

Conrad · Subject: Re: The God of Atheists Sat May 31, 2008 7:29 am

at some point Stef posted a scene that may have been from the God of Atheists on the board and I was quite impressed by that (and wrote about it on the FDR board)

I've had no inclination at any point to read the actual book though

Conrad · Subject: Re: The God of Atheists Sat May 31, 2008 7:32 am

Deep Purple wrote:

I found the children the most interesting characters. I think it's how Stef sees himself (and all children) outside the corrupting influence of parents. It's a compelling fantasy, and I want to believe it, but it just doesn't seem likely. I really wish Stef and Christina would have kids and run the experiment themselves, but they seem unwilling to do so (Stef has mentioned an unwillingness, but not an inability, although they are both on in years).

For the sake of potential children everywhere I disagree... ;-)

I don't know, think of the psychological pressure he puts on the FDR'ers and then think about being a child going through that 24/7 for 18 years. just imagine the child disagreeing with Stef about something relatively important

Conrad · Subject: Re: The God of Atheists Sat May 31, 2008 7:48 am

Deep Purple wrote:

Those who have read it, what did you think of TGOA? I thought it was a well-written book. It was clearly autobiographical, as Stef has mentioned (except for the plot line of starting a rock band, I suspect; I've heard his song-based podcasts; he's an adequate amateur singer, but no pro). It's obvious that he is the philosophy student and the computer programmer in the book. I wonder how autobiographical the sex scenes were (the point of the sex scenes seemed to be that sex with the philosophically impure is not satisfying, and Stef dated a lot of philosophically impure women).

I found the children the most interesting characters. I think it's how Stef sees himself (and all children) outside the corrupting influence of parents.

this is interesting. the general idea of innocent, pure children (true selves) getting corrupted by parents and other environmental factors is very appealing (I still remember the Teenage Depression podcasts about this theme and was very impressed. I had never looked at it the way he describes things there) and there seems ot be significant truth in it as well.

at the same time it can be used as a self-serving fantasy, a myth the child creates and builds to protect himself during years of abuse to survive(the alternative myth is 'I am bad, my parents are good') but that in later life, when it does no longer serve its useful function as survival mechanism in a powerless situation, becomes a general and unquestioned myth of 'the pure innocent me (and my friends) vs. the corrupt world'

i didnt know TGOA was about children btw. thanks for pointing that out

Quote:

All in all, TGOA seems to be a well-written vanity project. His phrasings, analogies, and structure is aesthetically pleasing. However, Stef seems to think it Atlas Shrugged with human protagonists, but it lacks the philosophical explicitness of Rand's tome. Moreover, where Rand had impossible adult paragons, Stef has impossible child paragons.

I think Stef has a tendency to confabulate, to mythologize his experiences and writing fiction, or relating events from his past life (or even board conflicts) to FDR'ers provides excellent opportunities to do so.

when I hear Stef talk about events that I was part of too, his version is almost always at least significantly distorted, misrepresented to his benefit. (that's also why i don't trust what he says about his past) what he talks about in the mythology series basically is what he himself does

Quote:

(Incidentally, we usually refer to philosophers and intellectuals by their last name -- Rand, Hume, Kant -- but it feels very awkward to me to refer to Stef as "Molyneux." It almost seems insulting to me. Maybe that has to do with the uniqueness of his first and last names; alternatively, it could be because I'm holding on to that personal flavor he injects in the podcasts: I want to be on a first-name basis with the man. Any thoughts?)

perhaps using 'Molyneux' sort of signifies a psychological/intellectual distancing oneself from the FDR experience? yeah, using 'Stef' seems way more natural

Toolbox · Number of posts: 16 Registration date: 2008-06-05

Actually I'd bet you Stef did start a rock-band. he's just narcissistic enough to do that. and I bet he was the lead singer, and everyone else in the band thought he was a douche because he couldn't play an instrument.

So what makes it a "vanity project"? is it just that it hasn't sold and he published it on a vanity publishing site? so that's not really a judgment of quality. Dan Brown could write a semi-autobiographical book and self-publish and it'd be a "poorly-written vanity project"?

NonEntity · Number of posts: 2598 Registration date: 2007-11-08

Speaking of children and innocence and stuff of value, take a look at the promotional page for this book, A Nation of Wimps. It looks really interesting to me...

- NonE

Dylboz · Number of posts: 2014 Registration date: 2007-09-20

Well, Dan Brown sucks balls. Tom Hanks with a Mullet? This is what you right books for?

_________________
Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia

Toolbox · Number of posts: 16 Registration date: 2008-06-05

uh... haha thankfully I missed that movie, but not the book. which even if you skipped every other chapter, like I did, you didn't miss much.

Dan Brown's a real bloody hack. I mean he can't write his way out of a wet paper bag. There was an analysis of his books a while back that pointed out the opening sentence followed the same format in each one.

Dylboz · Number of posts: 2014 Registration date: 2007-09-20

My ex-wife was just in love with that book, and kept pushing me to read it and others by him. After reading Dostoyevsky and Rothbard and Steinbeck and Rand, I thought it would be a nice break. Well, I never got past the second chapter, and I thought "this reads just like a made for Lifetime movie."

That woman and I should have never married, we don't even orbit the same star.

_________________
Please check out my blog!
Dylboznia

mole · Number of posts: 80 Registration date: 2008-05-03

Deep Purple wrote:

I really wish Stef and Christina would have kids and run the experiment themselves, but they seem unwilling to do so (Stef has mentioned an unwillingness, but not an inability, although they are both on in years).

Nah, Stef's shooting blanks.

_________________
"The opposite of a correct statement is an incorrect statement, but the opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth." — Niels Bohr

Anne la Jordanie · Number of posts: 90 Age: 20 Registration date: 2008-02-26

Deep Purple wrote:

I wonder how autobiographical the sex scenes were (the point of the sex scenes seemed to be that sex with the philosophically impure is not satisfying, and Stef dated a lot of philosophically impure women).

I would argue that most written sex scenes are nominally autobiographical, if not of reality than of a personal sexual fantasy. If you read a number of works including sexual or even romantic scenes by the same author, you will begin to notice distinct similarities. Personally, I think this is a good thing, as it adds to the personal nature of an already personal act.

Deep Purple wrote:

Moreover, where Rand had impossible adult paragons, Stef has impossible child paragons.

This hit the nail on the head for me. I've never been able to think of WHY Stef felt subtly different from Rand (besides that whole minarchisim thing), but I think this is it. Incidentally, the thing that drove me nuts about Atlas Shrugged when I read it was that there wasn't a single non-adult (except for D.'s flashacks). It's hard to feel a kinship with the characters at 15.

Deep Purple wrote:

(Incidentally, we usually refer to philosophers and intellectuals by their last name -- Rand, Hume, Kant -- but it feels very awkward to me to refer to Stef as "Molyneux." It almost seems insulting to me. Maybe that has to do with the uniqueness of his first and last names; alternatively, it could be because I'm holding on to that personal flavor he injects in the podcasts: I want to be on a first-name basis with the man. Any thoughts?)

Perhaps it is just because most of the people who closely follow his work ARE on a first name basis with him? Also, Molyneux just doesn't flow the way Socrates or Descartes does and doesn't have the stacato of Rand or Kant.

On another note, I'm fond of Dan Brown and the movie of The DaVinci Code (I admit it wasn't great, but I thought the languages in particular were well done). It was probably intentional that all the opening sentences followed the same format; the first few chapters are what gets a book published, so authors are really picky about them, particularly the opening line. It's probably supposed to be thematic or reminicent or some such. J

_________________
My cake of justice gives me +5 to Dispute Resolution.

NonEntity · Number of posts: 2598 Registration date: 2007-11-08

Anne la Jordanie wrote:

Incidentally, the thing that drove me nuts about Atlas Shrugged when I read it was that there wasn't a single non-adult (except for D.'s flashacks). It's hard to feel a kinship with the characters at 15.

(emphasis mine)

Wow. I'd never noticed nor thought of that before.

- NonE

Stewart · Subject: Re: The God of Atheists Wed Jun 18, 2008 9:01 am

Is it really that uncommon for an adult book to have adults as the characters? I think most of the novels that I've read have been absent young characters.

NonEntity · Number of posts: 2598 Registration date: 2007-11-08

Stewart wrote:

Is it really that uncommon for an adult book to have adults as the characters? I think most of the novels that I've read have been absent young characters.

Go ahead, make me look like an idiot. It's okay. I don't mind! lol!

- NonE