Rating: 
Summary: Good, to a point
Review: Well, I basically agree with nightferret's review and criticisms. However, I am not an atheist and I do believe in the need for spirituality, and I certainly don't think that all religions are bad. But I do, however agree with LaVeys' scathing social criticism. If nothing else, "The Satanic Bible" offers insight into our culture's hypocrisy. LaVeys' use of Freudianism, however,is questionable. Reading a lot of books on a subject doesn't make you a psychologist. LaVey was, perhaps, a very intelligent, articulate man, but he cannot honestly make to grandiose claim of knowing what "human nature" is. This book is a good observational view of society, often darkly humorous, but shouldn't really be taken as the cornerstone of a relgious movement.
Rating:
Summary: Too Easy To Misunderstand
Review: After reading this book, I was rather in a mixed state of feelings with regards to LaVey. The book at once is unscholarly, almost crude in many places, but the author's integrity comes through quite clearly. I was surprised at how moderate most of LaVey's views were, considering what one most likely expects to get based upon the title. LaVey values honesty and sincerity a great deal, and his innate sense of value in being human is all-too apparent. He disregards all traditional religious activity as mainly sanctimonious and intentional fraud, while allowing that a considerable portion is hypocritical self-deceit rather than an intentional attempt to generate revenue at the expense of the grief of others. While it is readily apparent that laVey knows little or nothing about the natures of the religions which he criticises -- he seems to regard all religion as moronic and as shallow as your typical Sunday morning TV evangelists seem to reduce all religious belief to -- while being completely ignorant of any of the higher aspects of most religions (which, admittedly, rarely infiltrate the popular mind). he never delves very deeply into anything he addresses in this volume, but tends only to look at the surface, and even then, he looks only at those things which seem to be obvious to him, but ignores anything he does not understand. If he had spent more time reading of Gandhi or Merton, the mystics or anyone of a very large variety of religious experience and belief, he may have not come to such shallow conclusions -- it is one thing to reject what is boviously false or detrimental, quite another to dismiss in toto what he does not have enough interest about to delve too deeply and to get at the possible reality behind religious ideas. This gives LaVey a sort of "elitist" point of view which mars the work as a whole, because he obviously is out of his league when attempting to do any sort of genuine philosophy (and such "elitism", I might add, does nothing but bring hom closer to the attitudes of the narrow-minded religionists whom he dismisses so readily). Also, his elitist point of view is all the more absurd when the majority of his book is nothing more than a sort of "dumbed down" version of Nietzsche's philosophy. One wonders whether LaVey is critical enough to be aware of the cultural influences which he seems to have accepted (Nietzsche, Hume, Locke, Hobbes -- everything that he says has been said better by those before him; he stills seems to think he is the originator of these ideas rather than one who merely picked up on the sceptical currents in western philosophy that have been popular for the last three hundred years). If the book was really intended for such "elitists", one wonders why LaVey didn't refer them to the original philosophers rather than giving the public a bastardised and vastly inferior version. Still, despite the plagiarism and endless philosophicl problems that the text presents, LaVey does believe strongly in what he says. Namely, that as their seems to be no real god that exists, that human beings have the awesome task of becoming the closest thing to a god that can be acheived in a solely materialistic world. Heaven and Hell are reagrded as fictions from a more dishonest, simpler age and are now taken as merely states of mind. The one commandment is common sense and the ideal philosophy is one of rational self-interest -- in other words, humanism. LaVey's assessment of humanity is not very noble, but at least he does his utmost to see us as he thinks we really are and not to believe in pleasing lies just because they are pleasing -- in other words, the truth may hurt, but even then it is better than self-deception, and only then can people begin to develop into all they are capable of. Responsibility to the responsible is the order of the day -- but this still places those who have ethics (and make no mistake about, the Satanic Bible DOES include a very noble set of ehtical principles) at the mercy of thos who don't. LaVey gets rid of all of the foolish demonisation of sexuality and self-interest which has done nothing but hurt society as a whole, and rep;aces it with a very practical code of ethics: be good to those who are good to you, if someone hurts you, hurt them worse. Noble sentimensts are muddied with base ones, and on the whole, the crude way LaVey tends to express himself will probably cause this book to be mainly attractive to the people that LaVey would least want to consider his compatriots. When he says that "man is a god", I don't think for a second that this means mean are already gods and have no reason to advance themselves or to behave as decent human beings (the previous reviews I think demonstrate the degree to which he was misunderstood, with typcical evangelistic hatred and small-mindedness predominating). All in all, it is a good try, but will almost certainly be misunderstood by most people as giving a free excuse to those who are too lazy or too stupid to try to better themselves or their world, and will be ignored by those who LaVey most wants to reach. In short, stick to Nietzsche or Hobbes if you want real philosophy and are interested in learning how to make the most of life; stick to Ragnar Redbeard or Crowley if you want to irritate everyone around you with your mindless arrogance and stupidity.
Rating: 
Summary: Logic, Common Sense, and a Touch of Blasphemy
Review: Logic, common sense, and a touch of blasphemy are combined by Dr. Anton Szandor LaVey in his amazing book, The Satanic Bible. LaVey uses this book to tell his side of the story, and uses the book to dispell nearly all myths of Satanism propogated by the church. It is an inspiring book, and details how mankind should live life on Earth. The book explains all suggestions fully, and does not leave a trace of doubt in the reader's mind as to the validity of what Dr. LaVey is saying. LaVey even goes so far as to give detailed descriptions of one of the Satanic Rituals that are practised by followers of LaVeyian Satanism. A great, inspiring, conversation starting book that will make you think, even if you do not necessarily agree with what is said. This book would impress people of every religion and faith (or lack thereof) with its logic and common sense, and the overall intelligence with which LaVey preaches. A good book for all to read.
Rating: 
Summary: Cute, but not great
Review: Fun to read, I would give it 4 stars, but...I took 1 star away for being derivative (the whole Book of Satan is copied from Redbeard's Might Is Right). I also had to take another star away for hypocrisy. The truly open-minded ones will see thru LaVeyan Satanism. It's no different from Christianity in a fundamental sense. The COS is a club for sheep in dog's (sorry, you don't even rate high enough for wolves') clothing. They may have no problem with breaking God's laws, but oh how they squeal with devotion to the laws of man. [Unbelievable!] Keep this book away from 14 year olds --let them read Stirner instead, if they're smart enough to handle it.
Rating:
Summary: Intead of giving away my "soul", I decided to keep it....
Review: The book isolates the power of the 3 main forces behind all human action, the force of self-preservation is cultivated by the destruction ritual, self-prophegation the lust ritual, and self-optimization in the compassion ritual. La Vey in the course of freudian psychology and pshychodramatic principal in correlation to social archtypes is indeed a genius. When applied effectively enhances a delightful ego and sophistication, excellent for those too busy for the unlogical ideologies presented by modern religion, very nietzchean.
Rating:
Summary: Good Philosphy, but hardly a masterpiece
Review: Before getting on with my criticisms, I would like to say that I actually like most of the philosophy (not the religion) in this book -- which really is too say little more than that I had come to similar conclusions myself. (A statement I've also made of Stephen Mitchell's "Tao Te Ching" -- a book LeVay would probably not have cared for.) LeVay sometimes takes things litte too far, but only a little. Having said that, I might note that, when it comes to logic, LeVay is not as faultless as he is often creditted with. He is only slightly more logical than good Christian, Pagan, and Eastern theologian. Often, there are (il)logical jumps, inconsistancies, rhetorical word-games, and babbling circumlocution. Also, he makes some techinical errors is the trivial he uses to eximplify his view: e.g., the English "Devil" is derived from the French "Diable," which comes from the Latin "Diablus," and ultimately the Greek "Diabolos," and is not related to the Hindi "devi" as LeVay states. On factual maters, I would guess LeVay to be 60-70% correct. All this is still at least as good (probably better) than most religious works, however. LeVay's biggest short comings are in (1) justifying a Satanic religion, and (2) characterize human nature to narrowly and inflexibly. On the first mater, LeVay does try to answer the question of why he proposses a Satanic religion rather than just practical materialism, but his justification is basically a lot of babblement and he talks around himself. (As an atheist, I see no reason for having religion, and LeVay's answer was hardly satifying, let alone convincing.) On the second mater, LeVay barrows a lot of (now held doubtful) Freudian doctrine, and further assumes that there is a very large, encompassing human nature, which is virtually invariant. This second problem, the failiure to fully realize human bio-cognitive diversity leads to a fair amount of judgementallity. LeVay assumes any who don't fit his mold are "repressed" and dishonest, and holds open contempt for such as "liars." I have found that most Satanists I've talked to are terribly self-righteous and judgemental (in there own way), and this may be the root of it all. (This is not to say all Satanists are so narrow -- but this seems common, and makes sence if LeVay himself encoded it.) Finally, I want to note, since its is frequently claimed, that Satanism is not a from a Christianity! (Nor is it Pagan.) It is obviously a religious movement unto itself, and not part of Christianity anymore than Christianity and Islam are part of Judaism (or Judaism part of ancient Paganism). This "Satanism=Christianity" rhetoric may be a fun way for Pagans to slam both opponents at once by comparing each to there own worst enemy -- but an objective reading of The Satanic Bible shows that Satanism (for better or worse) is something unto itself.
Rating:
Summary: A must for anyone into rational/pragmatic religious thought!
Review: This book was great, I read it all in one night. It implies Jungian archetypal psychology with a freethinking rational structure, concocting a nicce premium blend of a modern religion. It also clears up any negative grounds with Satanism, and shows LaVey's extroadinary abilities with writing. RIP Anton Szandor LaVey 1933-1997
Rating:
Summary: Satanic (?) Bible
Review: Any serious student of the occult will find this book as a source ofcomic relief. He even changed the ending of the Enochian Calls to suitthe book! When I found out the remedial intellect and lack oforiginal thought that is rampant in the CoS, it proved that this book is indeed a guide for the Lost. If you decide to get this book and join the CoS, memorize it. Because to the CoS members, Anton LaVey's thoughts and opinions ARE what they think is "free thinking". LaVey derides the Xians as being "sheep", but yet he demanded the same sort of blind following that the Catholic Church and Xians in general subscribe to. This book hurt me deeply: My ribs hurt from laughing so hard! END
Rating:
Summary: Satanism=Christianity
Review: I have read this book. LA Vey attempts to show satanism as a philosophy, which is completely inaccurate. PAGANISM is the true philosophical religion. Infact, Christians modeled their 'Satan' after the Pagan religion. By practicing satanism, you are also practicing christianity--because satanism is a part of christians' beliefs, they accept the fact that an immmortal sadist exists. Do not confuse satanism and paganism; Paganism is a nature-worship religion and is ultimately non-sadistic. Satanism is a religion which is completely sadistic and sacraficial. If you are non-sadistic, worship nature and call yourself a 'satanist,' you are *NOT* a Satanist...you are a PAGAN. -D.G. Wells, Ph.D, Theologist
Rating:
Summary: Better and Better everytime
Review: This book is the best ever. Maybe it's a bit old(10 years) But books like this will never outdate. Everytime I read it again it becomes better and better. It's my personal bibel. I interpret it on my way and I live on my way. This books really helps. But read the others to. You will like it to!
|
