H.L. Mencken on Religion

Book Description

No one ever argued more forcefully or with such acerbic wit against the foolish aspects of religion as H.L. Mencken. As a journalist, he gained national prominence through his newspaper columns describing the famous 1925 Scopes trial, which pitted religious fundamentalists against a public school teacher who dared to teach evolution. But both before and after the Scopes trial, Mencken spent much of his career as a columnist and book reviewer lampooning the ignorant piety of gullible Americans.

S.T. Joshi has brought together and organized many of Mencken's writings on religion in this provocative and entertaining collection. The articles presented here include satirical accounts of a range of the religious phenomena of his time. On a more serious note are his discussions of the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche and the scientific worldview as a rival to religious belief. Also included are poignant autobiographical accounts of Mencken's own upbringing and his core beliefs on religion, ethics, and politics.

H.L. Mencken knew that satire, wit, and clever jesting were the most effective ways to battle religious folly, and he used these weapons to their fullest extent in writings spanning almost three decades.

Customer Reviews:

Not quite what you may have thought.......2006-12-12

Even a cursory reading of this collection reveals interesting nuances to Mencken's views on religion that both fans and foes may have missed. It is soon evident that Mencken was more of a religious skeptic or agnostic than the atheist he was frequently taken to be. He certainly did not believe in a personal god, and believed that positive evidence for the existance of a god is unlikely to appear. Nontheless, he was willing to grant the bare possibility of a god. It would seem that like Sartre's grandmother, Mencken's scepticism kept him from being a thoroughgoing atheist.

What really stirred Mencken's bile was the behavior of much of God's fan club here on Earth, many of whom he experenced as being at least intellectually dishonest (if not worse) and dishonorable. Mixed with this was a kind of bemused wonderment at the gullibility of the bulk of his fellow Americans, who seemed ever eager "to believe that Jonah swallowed the whale, or vice-versa." His early career as a Baltimore newspaper reporter observing the Christian nuisances pestering the skid-row bums (see his "Christmas Story"), 'working girls', saloon habitues, and all-around plain folk seems to have ground his rapier to a permanent sharp edge. Was he fair? I don't think he ever pretended he was. His mission, as he saw it, was to apply the lash of verifiable truth to the backs of pious frauds and their dupes. They were perfectly free to reply (and they did) using whatever sort of arguments or language they pleased.

Still, he was not an "anthopophagous atheist of the sort who goes around scaring old ladies", as he once put it. In tones that curiously echo Santayana, he expresses fulsome admiration for the Catholic Church, finding the 'poetry' of the Mass to be enchantingly beautiful; and Church insistance that doctrine was for Rome to decide to be shrewd policy. More interestingly, for a man reputed to be a sour misanthrope, he formed real and lasting friendships with clergy such as Bishop James Cannon of the United Methodist Church--an ardent Prohibitionist! (Normally Mencken consigned Prohibitionists to the lowest circle of his Inferno.)

If Mencken was neither terribly original nor especially profound on the subject of religion; still he--like Mark Twain--put the case for doubt in a frequently hilarious and unforgettable fashion that still serves to kick open otherwise seemingly-closed arguments and minds. This is probably a greater service to civilization than any number of tomes written by philosophers that fell dead-born from the press.

Prejudice in a neat little container.......2006-05-04

If we spoke of blacks and Jews like the other commentators speak of Christians, they would no doubt be blacklisted and widely renounced. As it is, Mencken offers nothing to the intellectual study of religion and philosophy except for an eloquent way to say he "doesn't like it." None the less, it would appear from the reviews of others that if you agree with Mencken's athiest world-view, you will indeed enjoy having him fuel you fire. For me, I like a little more philosophy and a little less rhetoric.

For thinking people only. .......2006-04-14

Considering most of the articles were written in the 1920s, one is shocked by how timely, fitting and appropriate many of his comments are. The rise of fundie thinking at the turn of last century lasted until the Scopes trial - which is brilliantly covered in this book. (Mencken attended the trial, and covered it with scathing wit) Then, it collapsed. it took the fundies until the late '80s, the 1980s that is, to return to their destructive power that they again hold in our society.

This collection is entertaining, amusing and to some extent, it makes one angry. Why? because we are having to battle with half-wits, nit-wits, baptists, and other witless religions as they try to force their ideas onto others, just as they tried and failed before. Mencken provides an interesting slice of history, as well as a wonderful view of faith healing, the inability of the fundies to hold a rational thought and the dangers of religious leaders impacting political and social policy.

I would strongly recommend this book for anyone thinking about home schooling or considering sending their poor offspring to a religious school. This book will help make up your mind.

A Sane Perspective on Religion.......2005-09-11

An excellent read if you are looking for confirmation of the fact that all religious extremists are insane. This would, of course, include Muslim as well as Bible Belt loonies. Mr. Mencken was a long ways ahead of his time in recognising this and savages ALL religious dingbats, home grown or imported.

A Jolt of Electricity.......2005-05-21

I've read numerous Mencken anthologies, and I think this one is the best. His commentaries on fundamentalist attacks on both evolution and the wall between church and state are as relevant now as they were when he wrote them in the 1920s and 1930s. Moreover, as anyone who's ever read Mencken can attest, the man was a brilliant stylist and frequently hysterically funny. Oh, how the man could write! In contrast to the intellectually lazy media hacks of today, Mencken is sound and fury signifying something.

Average customer rating:

Interesting Read
A Ruin
An important piece
Fascinating read - even for a Christian
Not the Culmination I Was Hoping For

The Anti-Christ
Friedrich Nietzsche
Manufacturer: See Sharp Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Religious | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books

All 4-for-3 Deals | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 1884365205

Book Description

This is Nietzsche's last book and a fitting capstone to his career. It's succinct, biting, and encapsulates the criticisms of Christianity found in his other works. This edition contains an 8,000-word introduction by its translator, the famous iconoclastic writer H. L. Mencken.

Download Description

Nietzsche's final assault on institutional Christianity, written during the last sane year of his life.

Customer Reviews:

Interesting Read.......2007-07-26

this is the last book that Nietzsche had written before he went mad. which necessarily makes it an important book. the tone he writes the book in, i would say, is a harsh and unforgiving one.

this book is a very enjoyable book to read, unlike any other. you might feel that he is slightly being unfair towards christians, but he makes it clear why he does so in his small introduction at the beginning of the book.

there is something that is extremely important to note, wich is that this book is NOT a critique of God in any way. it is merely a critique of the christian concept of God. he states this twice in the book, but very briefly and without really making it absolutely clear.

A Ruin.......2007-01-10

Nietzsche's chief weaknesses--weaknesses for which he is famous--are immodesty; bad manners; a proneness to exaggeration (often absurd exaggeration); bad scholarship (often abominably bad scholarship); and disregard for evidence. At times he was able to check these faults. The works he produced at his best, like Beyond Good And Evil, which gives perhaps the best explanation of his opinions, are much less affected by these habitual faults than the work he produced at his worst.

To my mind N.'s weaknesses make The Antichrist a wreck of what it might have been. It might have been a trenchant argument in favour of atheism, or at least a trenchant argument in favour of N.'s most important ideas. And it is neither. His characteristic weaknesses lie everywhere. First, in the book, he is often absurdly conceited.

'We have discovered happiness, we know the way, we have found the exit out of the labyrinth of thousands of years.' [TA, 1]

This evidently refers to N.'s own philosophy. He might have applied some of his criticisms of the arrogance of other philosophers to himself, and written with a stitch more modesty.

Second, in the book he is often unnecessarily rude.

'The good god and the devil--both abortions of decadence.' [TA, 17]

Broadly speaking, there are two explanations of the universe that are made possible by the evidence we have--that something produced the universe; and that someone produced the universe. Either conclusion is a generalisation. So neither can be proven in such a way that the other is shown to be categorically false. Moreover, the universe is evidently in many ways a highly organised universe; it evidently appears, in many ways, as you would expect it to appear, if it had been made by someone not something. N. might have written more respectfully of a hypothesis he could only ever disprove (if it can be disproved) using probable arguments.

Three, at times in the book N.'s scholarship is unspeakably bad.

'The imperium Romanum which we know, which the history of the Roman provinces teaches us to know better and better, this most admirable work of art in the grand style was a beginning: its construction was designed to prove itself through thousands of years: until today nobody has built again like this, nobody has even dreamed of building in such proportions sub specie aeterni. This organisation was firm enough to withstand bad emporors: the accident of persons may not have anything to do with such matters--first principle of grand architecture. But it was not firm enough against the most corrupt kind of corruption, against the Christians.' [TA, 58]

The idea that the Roman Empire fell chiefly because of Christianity is ridiculous. What about the weakness of the Senate? the ambition of those who were near the Emperor, and strong enough to challenge him? the power of the army? the disillusion with civic religion? the barbaric purges? the difficulties of adminstering an empire so large? the rebellions within and attacks from without?

Perhaps the fault that is most damaging to The Antichrist, though, is N.'s disregard for evidence. You cannot criticise his argument, because he provides no argument, other than, perhaps, the nonsensical one that if you find a plausible explanation for a phenomena, then it is the correct explanation of that phenomena. N. offers the view that Christianity is adequately explained if it is taken as the product of selfish barbarism. Needless to say, this assertion he takes as sufficient reason to conclude that Christianity is only the product of selfish barbarism.

'The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its corruption; it has turned every value into an un-value, every truth into a lie, every integrity into a vileness of the soul. Let anyone dare to speak to me of its `humanitarian' blessings! To abolish any distress ran counter to its deepest advantages: it lived on distress, it created distress to eternalize itself.' [TA, 62]

The Christianity N. attacks is, depending on the need of the moment, a Christianity that he has made up himself; or monastic Christianity; or the worst form of Christianity that exists. He does not do justice either to orthodox Christian doctrine, or to any good the Church has done.

When you have to use this kind of reasoning, you show fairly clearly how little talent you have for marshalling evidence well, and weighing it impartially. It is worth contemplating N.'s open acknowledgement that his atheism was not adopted because of reasoning.

'I have absolutely no knowledge of atheism as an outcome of reasoning, still less as an event: with me it is obvious by instinct.' [EH, `Why I Am So Clever', 1]

Evidently, not even N. himself fancied that his religious opinions had anything to do with reasoning carefully about worthwhile evidence.

An important piece.......2006-12-27

It's great to see Mencken's translation back in print. All considerations about "The Anti-Christ" aside, this translation is a relic of sorts seeing as how it was the first american translation. Though perhaps not the best (i.e., most scholarly) translation, the only great flaw I see in it, taking the book for what it is - a translation by an aficionado-, is the publisher's handling of it.

Mr. Bufe encumbered himself with dumbing down Mencken's introduction and parts of the translation. As he himslef admits in the publisher's note, he translates all french words to english. And for what reason? Apparently they made the text incomprehensible. Poor Mr. Bufe seems to underestimate the readers: it's quite obvious that anyone that has the brains to read this book can easily overcome the language barrier posed by a few words (not to mention the fact that they might know how to speak another language).
"I translated them because they were impediments to comprehension, and because there is no real point to having untranslated French terms in an English text; its only purpose is to make those who can read French feel like members of an elite club." This seems like a rather biased statement. If Mencken and Nietzsche used French words (or any other non-English words), it wasn't to be snobish; it was their style, just like so many other authors. For someone who says he admires Mencken's work (inspite of his "clear signs of anti-semitism"), it's a rather blatant sign of disrespect of the translators work to edit his style in such a way. Were he around, I'm sure that H.L. Mencken would not stand for such a thing.

So again, it's not that he makes the text any less inteligible with the edits, but rather that he takes away from the richness of it, diminishing somewhat the experience of reading such a work.

Fascinating read - even for a Christian.......2006-11-11

Although untrained in philosophy (as you will undoubtedly infer), I have read quite a bit on my own. Of course, while reading philosophy I often (usually) encounter writings which denigrate Christianity, often times with very solid argument. However, I have never been as captivated by a book which stands in such complete opposition to my own beliefs as I was by "The Antichrist."

Nietzsche's passion, rage, scorn and conviction are utterly compelling. Compared to such bland offerings like "Why I Am Not A Christian" by Bertrand Russell, this book really sparks (two different animals, I know). I sensed that, while writing this book, Nietzsche was simultaneously sinking into the depths of his madness AND thinking as clearly as he'd ever dared. He comes across as both complete loon and literary genius. Truly captivating reading!

I will say that I disagree with almost all that Nietzsche writes in this book. As a Christian, I have the luxury of being able to call some things right and some things wrong without being tripped up by relativism. Nonetheless, it is a singularly powerful and captivating read, regardless of stance. I would recommend this book to anyone searching for passionate, vigorous and captivating philosophy.

Not the Culmination I Was Hoping For.......2006-10-31

In Nietzsche's earlier works, he made several allusions to "The Anti-Christ," a man Nietzsche hoped would eventually be born. Unlike the traditional religious connotation, however, Nietzsche's anti-christ is a man who has such a deep insight into the universe, so pure a skepticism, that he is able to see truth like none before him. Spun throughout Nietzsche's works are allusions to the characteristics which this individual would possess to deliver this great insight into the world.

As one of his later works, I hoped this book would be that story. I had hoped that Nietzsche would bring together the threads of this new world view into a single poignant moment. Unfortunately, Nietzsche is never so forward and organized and an expectation otherwise was perhaps doomed to disappointment.

Instead of this culmination of work, I found this book a trifle repetitive. Over the course of 90 pages, Nietzsche repeats many of the anti-religious themes embedded in his earlier works. For those interested in this aspect of his scholarship (or unfamiliar with his previous works), I imagine this would be an excellent collection of his thoughts. He uses numerous examples to clearly indicate his attitude towards the rise of Christ, in life, as an ideal to equal his favorite Hinduism. For most of the book, however, he tells the story of the fall of Christ, in death, to the selfish motives of his flock. He weaves a story of an ideal which was so beyond his followers to understand that it became a twisted message used to grasp power.

Perhaps more important then the collection of thoughts is the success Nietzsche has in expressing his respect for Christ the man. Never before in Nietzsche's readings had I understood where he casts blame for the fall of Christianity. This makes the book especially accessible and well worth the read for people interested in his anti-organized religion attitudes.

Treatise on the Gods (Maryland Paperback Bookshelf)

Average customer rating:

A different Mencken
Not For the Theologically Sensitive
Cujus regio, ejus religio
Hard Headed Skeptic of the Theological Arts
Words of wisdom from an old pro.

Treatise on the Gods (Maryland Paperback Bookshelf)
H. L. Mencken
Manufacturer: The Johns Hopkins University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Essays | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Classics | General | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

History of Science | History & Philosophy | Science | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0801885361

Book Description

With a style that combined biting sarcasm with the "language of the free lunch counter," Henry Louis Mencken shook politics and politicians for nearly half a century. Now, fifty years after Mencken's death, the Johns Hopkins University Press announces The Buncombe Collection, newly packaged editions of nine Mencken classics: Happy Days, Heathen Days, Newspaper Days, Prejudices, Treatise on the Gods, On Politics, Thirty-Five Years of Newspaper Work, Minority Report, and A Second Mencken Chrestomathy.

Controversial even before it was published in 1930, Treatise on the Gods collects Mencken's scathing commentary on religion.

Customer Reviews:

A different Mencken.......2005-03-01

If you're used to the snappy quotables we've (all?) come to expect from Mencken and love, you may be somewhat disappointed. "Treatise..." contains more carefully fleshed out analysis and argument than his sociocultural criticism.

In this mode, without so much of the caustic wit, his writing style actually doesn't impress quite as much. But, to make up for it, his quality of argument and inventiveness is surprisingly rich. I'd always considered Mencken to be quite a philosopher, as well as a snappy come-backer. Here, he proves it: coming up with some quite brilliant hypotheticals about the origin of religion in early man, especially. And his re-telling of the concise history of Religion shows that he has a knowledge of considerable breadth. There are a few very dramatic turns of phrase here (the fun stuff), some awkward delivery, but a lot of interesting subject matter.

Not For the Theologically Sensitive.......2005-01-13

Pleasant, easy to read, and thorough overview of religion from the beginning of humanity, with an emphasis on Christianity, from the position of an atheist.

From the preface: "My book is mainly factual. Its purpose is simply to get together, in handy and I hope readable form, the material data about the embryology, anatomy, and physiology of theology, with an occasional glance at its pathology....Religion was invented by man just as agriculture and the wheel were invented by man, and there is absolutely nothing in it to justify the belief that its inventors had the aid of higher powers, whether on this earth or elsewhere....There is no purpose here to shake the faithful, for I am completely free of the messianic itch..."

Chapter I "Its Nature and Origin" - Mencken describes his view of how early priests came into being in prehistoric society: "One Spring there came great rains in the valley and on their heels a flood of melting snow...One night the flood rolled into the lowermost cave, cut off the occupants, and drowned a mother and her child...The rising water to them seemed like a living thing...One fellow steps boldly forth...He goes close to the edge and bombards his enemy with stones...Growing bolder, he stalks into the water and belabors it with his club...the next morning the flood begins to recede...This first priest could accomplish something that other men were incapable of...What more natural than to give thanks?...True religion was born at that moment...He took on the aloof, philosophical air of a dermatologist contemplating a rash: he learned how to avoid making promises and yet hold the confidence of his customers... He gave some thought to the form and content of his first incantations, and thereby invented the first ritual...The gift of blarney went with the sacerdotal office, in the early days as now...the new trade of priesthood had attractions that were plainly visible to any bright and ambitious young man...When he let it be known that there were certain things, done by the people, that would gratify the gods and insure their aid, these things began to be regarded as virtuous, upright, moral. When he announced that other things were frowned upon, they straightaway became sins...The priest found himself a law-giver...Did the fires rage and the sky remain dry? Then it was because the faithful had forgotten their plain duties...It was not the priest's fault...calamities were plentiful in those days, as they are now. They remain the most potent weapons in the armamentarium of the priest...Theologians, as a class, are practical men. Immortality, as they preach it in the modern world, is but little more than a handy device for giving force and effect to their system of transcendental jurisprudence: what it amounts to is simply a threat that the contumacious will not be able to escape them by dying...I am myself a theologian of considerable gifts, and yet I can no more imagine immortality than I can imagine the Void which existed before matter took form. Neither, I suspect, can the Pope."

Chapter II "Its Evolution," continues as an academic treatise, but sprinkled liberally with condescending and clever phraseology: About creation myths: "In no department of theology is there a vaster accumulation of amusing rubbish." About afterlife: "Even in India, the very gonad of theology..." About contradictions in the Bible: "The collection of tracts called the New Testament is so full of inconsistencies and other absurdities that even children in Sunday School notice them."

Chapter III "Its Varieties" is a study of comparative religions. This is a well-done academic piece with fewer "Mencke-isms."

Chapter IV "Its Christian Form" is a beautifully written history of Christianity, highly complimentary of the Old Testament as poetry and Literature, and is the best chapter in the book. He reviews the well-accepted J, E, D, & P authorship of the Torah, with brief mention of how it was compiled. (for more info on this, read "Who Wrote the Bible," by Friedman). This chapter alone is worth the price of the book. According to the bibliography, he gets much of his factual material from James Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics.

Chapter V "Its State Today," resumes "Menckeisms," such as, "The church as an organization has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions."

I thoroughly enjoyed this entertaining and informative book and highly recommend it. For a different approach to the same subject, I recommend Atran's book, "In Gods We Trust."

Cujus regio, ejus religio.......2004-05-21

In this sardonic, blasphemous and sometimes ferociously cynical pamphlet, H.L. Mencken castigates the irrationality and incredibility of all religions, e.g. there are 175.000 discrepancies in the manuscripts of the Christian New Testament.
But he considers religion rightly as one of ( for him) the greatest inventions of all times, giving the clergy enormous economical (all the temples became extremely rich) and political power. For Mencken, their power comes from the fear of Hell. The God of love that they preach invariably turns out to be a God of harsh and arbitrary penalties and brutalities. Religion is not only cruel (human sacrifices), but also a source of enormous human misery: 'Is a Catholic bishop a good citizen, when he commands, on penalty of Hell, that poor and miserable women convert themselves into mere brood sows?'(p. 270)
'The priest is the most immoral of men.' (p. 271)
His major targets are Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.
'Calvin was the true father of Puritanism, which is to say, of the worst obscenity of Western Civilization.' (p. 245) His God is an 'appalling monster'. (p. 272)
The Churches are well aware that science is their natural enemy. Therefore, they try to control education. They are always on the defensive (Galileo, Darwin) and they are opposed to all attempts of rational thinking. For Mencken, religious education is the same as organized ignorance.
He lambasts those who defend religion for 'practical' reasons: 'the fact that threats of Hell have their social uses is ... simply an argument against the human race!' (p. 268)
However, H.L. Mencken has a dark side: 'the democratic pestilence'. Like Plato, he was disgusted with the masses which were a source of a cancerous proliferation of demagogy. More, 'the reigning theologians heated up the mob against the enlightened minority.' (p. 255)
It shows his deep pessimism: the masses could not be educated and the mighty priests kept them in an irrational darkness.
This is an important flaw in his reasoning and it turned out to be a false prophesy. In many democratic countries, the religious right is on the defensive and is losing (lost) important battles.
This treatise is one of the most violent pamphlets I ever read: a Homerian battle of the enlightened one against the powerful caste of the priests.
A must read.

Hard Headed Skeptic of the Theological Arts.......2004-03-15

H. L. Mencken was a rare man indeed. He was a hard headed skeptic of the theological arts, but took an intense, scholarly interest in it, and it was a boon to the universe of thoughtful men when he decided to report back to them on what he found there. The book he wrote will stand for a long while as the best of its kind--at once dispassionate and informative, with more than a little of his trademark wit thrown about with an undisguised glee. His enthusiasm for his subject bubbles out all over the place.

The book begins with an imaginary story of how religion must have gotten started among the first primitive men. It is a story well told, and reveals what Mencken imagines is at the root of men's heart much of the time--a fear of the unknown, and an understandable aspiration to master that fear by some means. Then, very early on, the con men step in to utilize the fear for their own ends--power and cash. To successfully create a job for himself, he proceeds to invent embellishments unintelligible to the poor saps, and rituals that only the initiated, such as himself, can perform.

The book continues with some comparative religion, basing most of it on what the Romans sneered at, that the Greeks made dramas about, what the Jews borrowed from the Babylonians, and what the Asiatics actually first dreamed up. He finds in all of this the roots of Christianity, and especially the stuff that Christ had never thought of, which the theologians later added for the most practical of reasons.

His account of the early church and the evolution of the bibles is gratifying in its scholarship and clarity of description. He makes the ancient theological quarrels come to life, imparting an understanding that is a valuable addition to any freethinker's equipment. Occasionally, the real Mencken peeks through, enlivening and enlightening as he goes.

The best part of the book, though, is when he shows how religion is inadequate for the job, and is in a full retreat before the onslaught of science and rational methods, leaving the truly civilized man with " a way of facing the impenetrable dark that must engulf him in the end, as it engulfs the birds of the air and the protozoa in the sea ooze....not perhaps with complete serenity, but at least with dignity, calm, a gallant spirit."

Words of wisdom from an old pro........2003-03-05

I had no idea H. L. Mencken wrote a book until I stumbled upon this treatise (shows you how much I know). Needless to say, I snatched it up in a heartbeat. The book is, unsurprisingly, a literary delight. I was, however, struck at how calm the tone was compared to the acid sarcasm in his dispatches from the Scopes trial. I have to confess, I enjoyed the peacable Mencken more, not that the old trouble-maker doesn't peek through once in a while to give us a good laugh. There is, for instance, a little passage about a "rough Christian country." But I won't give it away - read it for yourself!

The Skeptic: a Life Of H. L. Mencken.(Book Review): An article from: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life

Average customer rating:

The Skeptic: a Life Of H. L. Mencken.(Book Review): An article from: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life

Manufacturer: Institute on Religion and Public Life
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Book Description

This digital document is an article from First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life, published by Institute on Religion and Public Life on December 1, 2002. The length of the article is 445 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Citation Details
Title: The Skeptic: a Life Of H. L. Mencken.(Book Review)
Publication: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life (Refereed)
Date: December 1, 2002
Publisher: Institute on Religion and Public Life
Page: 60(2)

Article Type: Book Review

Distributed by Thomson Gale

Average customer rating:

Anthony Ludovici
i don't think nietzsche was an idiot
A superb book (not for the spiritually squeamish)
one of the greatest works of western philosohpy? I think not
Powerful

The Antichrist
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
Manufacturer: Legion for the Survival of Freedom
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Religion & Spirituality | Large Print | Formats | Books

Philosophy | Large Print | Formats | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0939482509

Book Description

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) wrote THE ANTICHRIST (1888) after THUS SPAKE ZARATHUSTRA and shortly before the mental collapse that incapacitated him for the rest of his life. This work is both an unrestrained attack on Christianity and a further exposition of Nietzsche's will-to-power philosophy so dramatically presented in ZARATHUSTRA.

Christianity, says Nietzsche, represents "everything weak, low, and botched; it has made an ideal out of antagonism towards all the self-preservative instincts of strong life." By contrast, Nietzsche defines good as: "All that enhances the feeling of power, the Will to Power, and power itself in man. What is bad?--All that proceeds from weakness. What is happiness?--The feeling that power is increasing,--that resistance has been overcome."

In attempting to redefine the basis of Western values by demolishing what Nietzsche saw as the crippling influence of the Judeo-Christian tradition, THE ANTICHRIST has proved to be highly controversial and continuously stimulating to later generations of philosophers.

Customer Reviews:

Anthony Ludovici.......2006-05-08

I have only read Thus Spoke Zarathustra so I am only beginning my exploration of Nietzsche, however, having read the Thomas Commons translation of that work in the Dover Thrift edition which contains commentary by Anthony Ludovici, I can at least warn you all that Mr. Ludovici was, apparently, an anti-semitic jerk and a moron. He wrote several anti-semitic works in 1938 under the psuedonym Cobbett, Jews and Jews in England. Yeah...not a very nice guy.

So, when I get around to it, I think I would much prefer to read Walter A. Kaufmann's translation.

i don't think nietzsche was an idiot.......2004-08-28

Unlike many other people who have reviewed this book, I do not believe that Nietzsche was an idiot. It is extremely obvious in The Antichrist, that Nietzsche was strongly right-wing, and therefore had a strongly right-wing outlook on life. This is NOT a book for someone who is NOT right-wing themself, and also CLOSED-MINDED TOWARD OTHER WAYS OF THINKING.
Its true, Nietzsche's beliefs are not democratic. He did not believe that all men were created equal. He believed that strength was good, that weakness was bad, and that the strong should rule over the weak. He saw Christianity as something that was embracing all the weaknesses in man, and therefore something that was universally wrong.
I am not saying that I am a supporter of Nietzsche's philosophy. In reality I am a very Left-Wing thinker. I am not racist in any way, and I am not against any religion in its entirety, but I do not think that it is harmful for me to once in a while take a glimpse into the world on the other side of the spectrum.

A superb book (not for the spiritually squeamish).......2004-05-04

As Nietzche himself said, he is not a philosopher, he is dynamite. And there is certainly an explosive force to this book. Nietzche unmasks Christianity for the nihilistic life-denying system of belief that it is. Unfortunately his disrepectful style is likely to make believers sick with disgust and so prevent them from appreciating his message.

one of the greatest works of western philosohpy? I think not.......2004-01-31

OK, firstly, my rating refers to the ideas presented in this book, not the book itself, which is by all means an interesting read. However, this does not change the fact that this is simply a rant about christianity from a selfish, arrogant, petty man, who reckoned himself to be one of the greatest thinkers, when in fact he is not. Not only does he say that compassion towards our fellow humans is immoral, but he says that all humans are unequal (he sees himself as one of the more superior humans, unsurprisingly) and he also claims that the pursuit of power is the moral action. Right from the start he claims that feeling for another's misfortune is weak and weakness is immoral. Then he goes on to rip apart christianity, granted, he makes a couple of valid points, but most of what he says is complete trash, bases on lies. I'm not exactly the biggest fan of christianity, but some of the arguments presented here are absurd to say the least. Nietzsche is not a genious, he is an idiot. This book contains a few contradictions and not just little ones, there is certianly a very big one. I wonder if anyone else noticed it? Anyway, I suggest you get this book yourself and you can be the judge, who knows, you may agree with him, but if you have an IQ which is over 5, then you wont.

Powerful.......2003-01-12

Whether you agree with him or not, you gotta admit that Nietzsche had some very strong arguments about the validity of Christianity, and how he views it as a form of weakness posing as a strong institution. There is a section where he takes verses from the Bible itself and explains in a way on how it is evangelical and dictatorial. Nietzsche was a deep thinker, perhaps too deep because he got really sick shortly after this book, and he didn't seem like the type of guy to just ramble about a topic without knowing about it. Him quoting the Bible and many other religious texts porves that he well-researched Christianity and made enough valid points to defend his position on Christianity. I am not an antichrist myself, thoguh I more or less shun organized religion, but Nietzsche has some very thought-provoking concepts. Sure it is offensive to one devout to Christianity, and I'd probably be offended if I was a practicing Christian, but this is recommended for those who study religions and philosophy, or just a powerful book in general.

Average customer rating:

Mencken and Einstein look at religion
Joseph A Daly
Manufacturer: Paulist Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Unknown Binding
ASIN: B00087QXBK

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books