God's Debris

[miriam_e]

[Later edit: I'm amazed that I didn't give the link to the book: http://www.andrewsmcmeel.com/godsdebris/ hits head. But if you hate pdf as much as I do, ask me for the html version I made instead.]

Scott (Dilbert) Adams has re-released his book God's Debris for free. Yay! I originally bought it when it was first published. I prefer ebooks, but unfortunately it was encumbered with all kinds of locks that made it pretty much impossible to use on a different computer... and of course all computers die.

The new, free release is as a .pdf file. I welcome this with mixed feelings. I'm delighted that I can re-read the book, but I despise .pdf. I spent a while last night converting the pdf to flat text and then into html. Now I have it in a form that I can happily read on any of my computers (desktop, laptop, Palm). Yay! And now I can show people this totally cool book.

I implore everybody to read this book. It is not what you think it is. It defies categorisation really. It is fictional in style, but is about reality. It is constructed as a series of short sequences that could be easily read on tram or train commutes, or in waiting rooms or short breaks.

From the introduction:

This is not a Dilbert book. It contains no humor. I call it a 132-page thought experiment wrapped in a fictional story. I'll explain the thought experiment part later.

God's Debris doesn't fit into normal publishing cubbyholes. There is even disagreement about whether the material is fiction or nonfiction. I contend that it is fiction because the characters don't exist. Some people contend that it is nonfiction because the opinions and philosophies of the characters might have lasting impact on the reader.

The story contains no violence, no sexual content, and no offensive language. But the ideas expressed by the characters are inappropriate for young minds. People under the age of fourteen should not read it.

The target audience for God's Debris is people who enjoy having their brains spun around inside their skulls.

After a certain age most people are uncomfortable with new ideas. That certain age varies by person, but if you're over fifty-five (mentally) you probably won't enjoy this thought experiment. If you're eighty going on thirty-five, you might like it. If you're twenty-three, your odds of liking it are very good.

By the way, if you have already read God's Debris and liked it then you might be interested in his sequel out now, The Religion War. And you can still buy God's Debris.

Comments

Re: Promises to be fascinating

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

I think he truly doesn't believe in any part of religion, but he thinks that a lot of skeptics are just as wrong as the religious nuts. He feels that being right for the wrong reasons is the same as being wrong. He does have a lot of fun with both sides in God's Debris. At times he plays a little fast and loose with the facts, though he covers himself by saying that not all of what is said he actually believes himself.

His purpose is more to make people think and question themselves than to push them toward any particular belief structure. It is pretty clear that he doesn't believe in any god even though it talks a lot in the story as if some kind of god does exist. He is simply using ideas to set fire to people's nice comfortable delusions. I know for a fact that he thinks that to believe in any kind of god is "stupid" (his word, but not said in this book).

I found it a delightful book, and I am quite dismissive of the idea of a god. (Bear in mind that I also wrote a story recently that assumed that a god was a possibility. http://werple.net.au/~miriam/#stories scroll down to Grace or Grace3.)

I read a lot of people's comments who raged at this book, but most of them completely missed the point. Unlike a standard theological or philosophical text this book has no real intention of getting at the "truth". It is more aimed at unravelling the lies... often using other lies as decoys and letting you ask yourself why you can't see any difference between them. (Like the part about Einstein's description of gravity and his own one.) It is more of a 'poke the sleeping dog and see if it moves' kind of book. I loved it.