Scott Adams (he of dilbert fame) wrote a novella a few years ago called “God’s Debris.” It’s supposed to be a quasi-humorous look at the nature of the universe, with the tease of an eye-opening revelation about reality that would blow away all of your preconceived notions. I’m curious to readthe book, if only to see if the claim is true, but I’m enough of a skeptic that I think this is a lot of hooey. I’d flip through a copy at my local bookstore, except I’ve never seen it in one.
So, in a fit of curious boredom, I’m asking Dopers to give me the Straight Dope on “God’s Debris” – mind-altering revelations, or crazed cartoonist natterings? What is the big secret, anyway? And will I regret even wasting my time asking this question?
I bought it a couple of years ago as an ebook I no longer have access to. (Just say no to copy protection)
This is how I remember it. A guy’s delivering a package to an old man. They have a discussion about God. The old guy has a theory. Apparently God got bored with being all powerful and did the only thing that was a challenge to him. He blew himself up into a billion pieces. The pieces became all of us, so we’re “God’s Debris”, get it? At the end the delivery man replaces the old guy to spread the word.
The old man suggested that idea’s were more important than beliefs. So…guessing here…the idea that we are all god’s debris should be passed down by an ‘Avatar.’ The ‘Avatar’ is the 5th level of existence, accepting that existance is nothing more than a delusion we accept as reality. There can only be one ‘Avatar’ at a time, and the book covers the training of the next ‘Avatar.’
I think the introduction of the book says it all, “if you like reading this book, give it to your friends and discuss it.”
IMHO, this is Mr. Adams way of putting another meme out there.
FYI, I checked the copy I read out of the library. Y’know, that place you went to find stuff out before the internet? Yeah, check this out (pun intended), they are still around…
The book is kind of hard to describe without you actually reading it. Also, there’s a sequel to it called the Religion War. Both are definitely worth a read.
Worth keeping in mind, however, is that the point of the book isn’t to explain anything, but to make you think, and question your view of reality.
I’m reading this because this very attractive new date sent it to me (because we have in common being non-religious) and he wanted to discuss it.
I’m finding the logical and scientific fallacies to be mildly infuriating. I do not want to shame this really cute and attractive man. How do I suggest to him the way it is making me snarl and growl, and have him still like me? Open to suggestions.
This device, where a hapless I-didn’t-know-what-to-say protagonist meets some arrogant loner with all the answers, just annoys me beyond reasoning for some reason.
Probably because the arrogant loner with all the answers is the writer, right?
Argh!!!
Anyway, to the guys, how can a woman like myself nicely say this is stupid in many places… and still get the next date with the cutie. Lie?
I admire Scott Adams’s aplomb and I think he’s just as funny as hell, but in God’s Debris he jumps way past his level of intelligence and skill. It’s not just that I disagree with it, but that, as iLoveFlowers notes, it’s full of logical holes and stupidities and straw men. It’s just a college bull session and not a very good one.
If you’re still interested, the book is freely available online (linked to in its wiki article) and is not too long of a read. I recommend spending the time to look at it.
I think the criticism here is largely baseless since, as has been mentioned, the only goal of the novella is to make you think, not to persuade you to some metaphysical theory. Just read this section from the foreword.
Yes, let’s put this zombie out of its misery.
**
iLoveFlowers**, welcome to the SDMB.
If you want dating advice, there are all kinds of folks in IMHO and MPSIMS who will be more than delighted to provide it. And of course, if anyone wants to discuss this particular book, you can start a new thread about it.