Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
Pantheon (2010), Edition: 1, Hardcover, 416 pages
Description
Elevated to celebrity by his best-selling book, psychology professor Cass Seltzer finds his relationship with a fellow theorist challenged by a former girlfriend's invitation to join her biochemistry experiment in immortality, an effort that is further complicated by his ongoing quest to understand religion.
Media reviews
Goldstein’s lofty psycho-religio-philosophical subtext, or rather metatext, doesn’t gray her roman à clef about love, Jewish cultural identity and academic infighting. She sews her philosophical inquiry to the material of everyday life.
The pleasures to be found in “36 Arguments for the Existence of God” are scattershot. But there are a great many of them, and this novel’s bracing intellectual energy never flags. Though it is finally more a work of showmanship than scholarship, it affirms Ms. Goldstein’s position as a
Show More
satirist and a seeker of real moral questions at a time when silly ones prevail. Show Less
Awards
Massachusetts Book Award (Must-Read (Longlist) — Fiction — 2011)
Christian Science Monitor Best Book (Fiction — 2010)
Language
User reviews
LibraryThing member crazy4novels
The opening chapter of Rebecca Goldstein's 36 Arguments For the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction finds Professor Cass Seltzer giddily contemplating his uncanny luck. His recent publication, The Varieties of Religious Illusion, couldn't have been timed more perfectly. His book wouldn't have made
As Cass lingers with his thoughts and gazes at the Charles River (he's recently been offered a professorship at Harvard), he reviews the 180 degree turn his religious views have taken during the course of his academic journey. Years ago, during the final semester of his pre-med undergraduate work at Frankfurter U, he impulsively signed up for a life-altering class entitled "The Manic, the Mantic, and the Mimetic," taught by the legendary Jonas Elijah Klapper. Rumors of Klapper's ability to transfix students with incantatory lectures about spirituality, delivered with unequaled emotional profundo, were not exaggerated, and Cass threw over his medical plans and joined Klapper's select group of starry-eyed acolytes.
Roz, Cass's girlfriend at the time, bought none of it. What kind of a pompous pedant would abandon Columbia University for Frankfurter U based on the offer of a one-man department ("The Department of Faith, Literature, and Values") and the absurd title of "Extreme Distinguished Professor?" How could Cass expect to succeed if none of Klapper's graduate students ever managed to actually wrestle a PhD out of him? She nicknamed Klapper "The Klap," howled at his secretive name change from Klepfish to Klapper, and refused to kowtow when it was called for.
Cass was thoroughly mesmerized, however, and Klapper latched on to him with zeal ("I sense the aura of election upon you") after discovering that Cass was a distant relative of the reknowned Rebbe (rabbi and spiritual leader) of the Valdeners, a sect of Hasids living in a self-proclaimed shtetl near New York City. Klapper, a rapt student of arcane Hasidic and Kabbalist hermeneutics, used Cass to wrangle an audience with the Rebbe. Roz drove the two to Valden (to Klapper's irritation), and the ensuing visit altered the lives of all three visitors, the Rebbe's young son (a mathematical genius), and the possible future of the Valdeners themselves.
Gold's book is basically a classic academic send-up with a religious twist that is simultaneously biting and circumspect. Her exposition of Cass's gradual disillusionment with Klapper will have you rolling on the floor (suffice it to say that some pivotal points rest upon an oversized ethnic fur hat and the hidden numerical mysteries of potato kugel), but her razor wit is always aimed at Klapper, never the Rebbe or the Valdeners. It is clear that Gold is mind-bogglingly intelligent (I kept reviewing her photograph on the book flap, wondering who IS this woman?). It is also fairly clear that she rejects religious dogma. Her addition of a 52-page appendix presenting Cass's devastatingly cogent refutation of all 36 traditional arguments for the existence of God probably makes this a safe assumption (ultimately, the reader cannot know whether this is Cass or Gold speaking). And yet, she softens the edges by making it clear that Cass, although confident in his book's anti-religious assertions, is nonetheless the gullible victim of a few secular illusions of his own (there's an entire romantic subplot that I've not mentioned). Similarly, her subplot of a profound choice that the Rebbe's son must ultimately make illustrates that the best path to meaning in life may not always be grounded upon a rational and public rejection of falsehoods.
I heartily recommend this book, even though the goyim among us may be a bit nervous about laughing too loud as we turn the pages. Although I would have chuckled at the foibles of my own Protestant faith tradition guilt-free, I kept wondering whether it was politically correct to enjoy Gold in the measured lampooning of her own faith background. In retrospect, I don't think she'd mind.
Show More
the slightest blip on the bestselling list ten years ago, but a current firestorm between crusaders of the religious right and their nemeses, the "new atheists," has catapulted his book and his career to unforeseen heights. Recent muscle-flexing by fundamentalists has awakened intellectuals from their slumbering complacency ("it's a tiresome proposition, having to take up the work of the Enlightenment all over again," but someone's got to do it.), and Cass's book is a prime weapon in their academic arsenal against "mass weapons of illogic."As Cass lingers with his thoughts and gazes at the Charles River (he's recently been offered a professorship at Harvard), he reviews the 180 degree turn his religious views have taken during the course of his academic journey. Years ago, during the final semester of his pre-med undergraduate work at Frankfurter U, he impulsively signed up for a life-altering class entitled "The Manic, the Mantic, and the Mimetic," taught by the legendary Jonas Elijah Klapper. Rumors of Klapper's ability to transfix students with incantatory lectures about spirituality, delivered with unequaled emotional profundo, were not exaggerated, and Cass threw over his medical plans and joined Klapper's select group of starry-eyed acolytes.
Roz, Cass's girlfriend at the time, bought none of it. What kind of a pompous pedant would abandon Columbia University for Frankfurter U based on the offer of a one-man department ("The Department of Faith, Literature, and Values") and the absurd title of "Extreme Distinguished Professor?" How could Cass expect to succeed if none of Klapper's graduate students ever managed to actually wrestle a PhD out of him? She nicknamed Klapper "The Klap," howled at his secretive name change from Klepfish to Klapper, and refused to kowtow when it was called for.
Cass was thoroughly mesmerized, however, and Klapper latched on to him with zeal ("I sense the aura of election upon you") after discovering that Cass was a distant relative of the reknowned Rebbe (rabbi and spiritual leader) of the Valdeners, a sect of Hasids living in a self-proclaimed shtetl near New York City. Klapper, a rapt student of arcane Hasidic and Kabbalist hermeneutics, used Cass to wrangle an audience with the Rebbe. Roz drove the two to Valden (to Klapper's irritation), and the ensuing visit altered the lives of all three visitors, the Rebbe's young son (a mathematical genius), and the possible future of the Valdeners themselves.
Gold's book is basically a classic academic send-up with a religious twist that is simultaneously biting and circumspect. Her exposition of Cass's gradual disillusionment with Klapper will have you rolling on the floor (suffice it to say that some pivotal points rest upon an oversized ethnic fur hat and the hidden numerical mysteries of potato kugel), but her razor wit is always aimed at Klapper, never the Rebbe or the Valdeners. It is clear that Gold is mind-bogglingly intelligent (I kept reviewing her photograph on the book flap, wondering who IS this woman?). It is also fairly clear that she rejects religious dogma. Her addition of a 52-page appendix presenting Cass's devastatingly cogent refutation of all 36 traditional arguments for the existence of God probably makes this a safe assumption (ultimately, the reader cannot know whether this is Cass or Gold speaking). And yet, she softens the edges by making it clear that Cass, although confident in his book's anti-religious assertions, is nonetheless the gullible victim of a few secular illusions of his own (there's an entire romantic subplot that I've not mentioned). Similarly, her subplot of a profound choice that the Rebbe's son must ultimately make illustrates that the best path to meaning in life may not always be grounded upon a rational and public rejection of falsehoods.
I heartily recommend this book, even though the goyim among us may be a bit nervous about laughing too loud as we turn the pages. Although I would have chuckled at the foibles of my own Protestant faith tradition guilt-free, I kept wondering whether it was politically correct to enjoy Gold in the measured lampooning of her own faith background. In retrospect, I don't think she'd mind.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jwhenderson
I first encountered the writing of Rebecca Goldstein when I read her novel, The Mind-Body Problem. It is an informed, witty and very humorous look into the relationship of two academics and their grappling with that famous philosophical issue among other things. Having enjoyed that book enough to
Her latest, however, is a big, ambitious novel that is nominally about God, although it unfolds on an extremely earthly plane. Overcomplicated yet dazzling, sparked by frequent flashes of nonchalant brilliance, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God affirms Ms. Goldstein’s rare ability to explore the quotidian and the cosmological with equal ease. The main character, Cass Seltzer, has written a book called "The Varieties of Religious Illusion" (see William James and Sigmund Freud) which has, surprisingly to the author, become a best-seller. Nobody in Ms. Goldstein’s novel thinks much of Cass’s book, Cass included. But it has become enormously popular thanks to the book’s appendix, which is called “36 Arguments for the Existence of God.” That appendix is also included as an appendix to Ms. Goldstein’s novel. And it offers a coherent refutation of each one of the 36 arguments that are listed. Cass became a celebrity because he made the case for atheism so well.
The rest of Ms. Goldstein’s book, the fictitious part, is divided into 36 chapters. Each chapter is titled with a fictitious argument mirroring the 36 in Cass's own book; titles like "The Argument from Lucinda" (his enamored beauty and current girl friend) or "The Argument from Strange Laughter". The chapter titles remind me of epigraphs in that they both suggest and connect to plot moments covered by the chapter. The main thread of the book is the argument for and against belief in the existence of God, The climax of which occurs almost by accident. Cass almost forgets that he will be debating the existence of God with a Nobel Laureate at Harvard, but remembers this commitment only the night before the debate. It is held in "the beautiful nave of the church" at Harvard and sponsored by the "Agnostic Chaplaincy"! I was impressed with the dream-like setting of the debate and the moment when the argument that "lack of a higher authority" would mean that "it all dissolves into moral chaos and ethical relativism. . ."(p 315). This reminded me of Ivan's argument in The Brothers Karamazov.
Since the debate constitutes one of this book’s big dramatic moments and is so hastily introduced, it’s not surprising to find smaller plot points being treated in equally haphazard ways. On the other hand, give Ms. Goldstein a philosophical case to make about potato kugel, Jewish cuisine and Kabbalistic numerology, and she really does soar. Some of the humor in the book comes at the expense of academia with Cass considering an offer from Harvard as a result of his book after long being stuck in the backwater of Frankfurter University. Overall, despite a bit of excess complexity, this was an entertaining novel of ideas leavened by sophisticated humor.
Show More
recommend it to others I looked forward to reading her latest novel, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God. I was not disappointed. It reminds me that I have missed most of her writing in the interim, which includes other fiction, as well as biographical works about Gödel and Spinoza. Her latest, however, is a big, ambitious novel that is nominally about God, although it unfolds on an extremely earthly plane. Overcomplicated yet dazzling, sparked by frequent flashes of nonchalant brilliance, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God affirms Ms. Goldstein’s rare ability to explore the quotidian and the cosmological with equal ease. The main character, Cass Seltzer, has written a book called "The Varieties of Religious Illusion" (see William James and Sigmund Freud) which has, surprisingly to the author, become a best-seller. Nobody in Ms. Goldstein’s novel thinks much of Cass’s book, Cass included. But it has become enormously popular thanks to the book’s appendix, which is called “36 Arguments for the Existence of God.” That appendix is also included as an appendix to Ms. Goldstein’s novel. And it offers a coherent refutation of each one of the 36 arguments that are listed. Cass became a celebrity because he made the case for atheism so well.
The rest of Ms. Goldstein’s book, the fictitious part, is divided into 36 chapters. Each chapter is titled with a fictitious argument mirroring the 36 in Cass's own book; titles like "The Argument from Lucinda" (his enamored beauty and current girl friend) or "The Argument from Strange Laughter". The chapter titles remind me of epigraphs in that they both suggest and connect to plot moments covered by the chapter. The main thread of the book is the argument for and against belief in the existence of God, The climax of which occurs almost by accident. Cass almost forgets that he will be debating the existence of God with a Nobel Laureate at Harvard, but remembers this commitment only the night before the debate. It is held in "the beautiful nave of the church" at Harvard and sponsored by the "Agnostic Chaplaincy"! I was impressed with the dream-like setting of the debate and the moment when the argument that "lack of a higher authority" would mean that "it all dissolves into moral chaos and ethical relativism. . ."(p 315). This reminded me of Ivan's argument in The Brothers Karamazov.
Since the debate constitutes one of this book’s big dramatic moments and is so hastily introduced, it’s not surprising to find smaller plot points being treated in equally haphazard ways. On the other hand, give Ms. Goldstein a philosophical case to make about potato kugel, Jewish cuisine and Kabbalistic numerology, and she really does soar. Some of the humor in the book comes at the expense of academia with Cass considering an offer from Harvard as a result of his book after long being stuck in the backwater of Frankfurter University. Overall, despite a bit of excess complexity, this was an entertaining novel of ideas leavened by sophisticated humor.
Show Less
LibraryThing member littlegeek
Meh. The problem with "arguing" about the existence of god is that it's asking the wrong questions. Yes, there are things we don't understand. Let's experience them and accept them and talk about them without thinking we know what they are (god or aliens, et al) or trying to convince ourselves they
Show More
aren't happening (aka "being rational"). Show Less
LibraryThing member MeditationesMartini
I read not the novel but the appendix, which is not a work of fiction but an actual catalogue of 36 arguments for the existence of God with extensive rebuttals. Improbably but not perhaps so incongruously, my review takes the form of an extended block quote from Terry Eagleton's review of Richard
"We hold many beliefs that have no unimpeachably rational justification, but are nonetheless reasonable to entertain. Only positivists think that ‘rational’ means ‘scientific’. Dawkins rejects the surely reasonable case that science and religion are not in competition on the grounds that this insulates religion from rational inquiry. But this is a mistake: to claim that science and religion pose different questions to the world is not to suggest that if the bones of Jesus were discovered in Palestine, the pope should get himself down to the dole queue as fast as possible. It is rather to claim that while faith, rather like love, must involve factual knowledge, it is not reducible to it. For my claim to love you to be coherent, I must be able to explain what it is about you that justifies it; but my bank manager might agree with my dewy-eyed description of you without being in love with you himself.
"Dawkins holds that the existence or non-existence of God is a scientific hypothesis which is open to rational demonstration. Christianity teaches that to claim that there is a God must be reasonable, but that this is not at all the same thing as faith. Believing in God, whatever Dawkins might think, is not like concluding that aliens or the tooth fairy exist. God is not a celestial super-object or divine UFO, about whose existence we must remain agnostic until all the evidence is in. Theologians do not believe that he is either inside or outside the universe, as Dawkins thinks they do. His transcendence and invisibility are part of what he is, which is not the case with the Loch Ness monster. This is not to say that religious people believe in a black hole, because they also consider that God has revealed himself: not, as Dawkins thinks, in the guise of a cosmic manufacturer even smarter than Dawkins himself (the New Testament has next to nothing to say about God as Creator), but for Christians at least, in the form of a reviled and murdered political criminal. The Jews of the so-called Old Testament had faith in God, but this does not mean that after debating the matter at a number of international conferences they decided to endorse the scientific hypothesis that there existed a supreme architect of the universe – even though, as Genesis reveals, they were of this opinion. They had faith in God in the sense that I have faith in you. They may well have been mistaken in their view; but they were not mistaken because their scientific hypothesis was unsound."
Show More
Dawkins's The God Delusion:"We hold many beliefs that have no unimpeachably rational justification, but are nonetheless reasonable to entertain. Only positivists think that ‘rational’ means ‘scientific’. Dawkins rejects the surely reasonable case that science and religion are not in competition on the grounds that this insulates religion from rational inquiry. But this is a mistake: to claim that science and religion pose different questions to the world is not to suggest that if the bones of Jesus were discovered in Palestine, the pope should get himself down to the dole queue as fast as possible. It is rather to claim that while faith, rather like love, must involve factual knowledge, it is not reducible to it. For my claim to love you to be coherent, I must be able to explain what it is about you that justifies it; but my bank manager might agree with my dewy-eyed description of you without being in love with you himself.
"Dawkins holds that the existence or non-existence of God is a scientific hypothesis which is open to rational demonstration. Christianity teaches that to claim that there is a God must be reasonable, but that this is not at all the same thing as faith. Believing in God, whatever Dawkins might think, is not like concluding that aliens or the tooth fairy exist. God is not a celestial super-object or divine UFO, about whose existence we must remain agnostic until all the evidence is in. Theologians do not believe that he is either inside or outside the universe, as Dawkins thinks they do. His transcendence and invisibility are part of what he is, which is not the case with the Loch Ness monster. This is not to say that religious people believe in a black hole, because they also consider that God has revealed himself: not, as Dawkins thinks, in the guise of a cosmic manufacturer even smarter than Dawkins himself (the New Testament has next to nothing to say about God as Creator), but for Christians at least, in the form of a reviled and murdered political criminal. The Jews of the so-called Old Testament had faith in God, but this does not mean that after debating the matter at a number of international conferences they decided to endorse the scientific hypothesis that there existed a supreme architect of the universe – even though, as Genesis reveals, they were of this opinion. They had faith in God in the sense that I have faith in you. They may well have been mistaken in their view; but they were not mistaken because their scientific hypothesis was unsound."
Show Less
LibraryThing member gbill
The debate over God’s existence as worked into this story was of interest, Goldstein is obviously very intelligent, and there are some interesting supporting characters here, but the book was a bit too philosophical for me. What the book needed more of was Roz Margolis, the main character’s
Quotes:
On Existentialism:
“I can’t look at other creatures who are committed to their existence and flourishing in the same way as I’m committed to my existence and flourishing without feeling a certain degree of identification, empathy, sympathy, compassion. The intuition that we ought to do unto others as we would have them do unto us flows naturally from this outward move.”
On genius:
“Genius was a matter of incantatory intuitions and phosphorescent blasts into the dark. Genius was a matter of thunderclap reasons, of which reason knew nothing. Genius was oracular, overweening, and severe. It is left to others to grub around in dusty doubts and cavil in insect voices. … Genius itself is diseased and self-destructive, antisocial and ill-mannered. It’s also the only thing that redeems us.”
On God, and suffering:
“Suffering provides us wonderful opportunities for character-building. Yes, I’m familiar with this line of reasoning. The only people who push it are the God-apologists, who are trying to make excuses for what an insufferable world this is, even though there’s supposed to be an omnipotent, omniscient, and well-intentioned Big Boy running the show. Any suffering the apologists can’t rationalize away as a product of our having the ennobling capacity for free will, including the free will to inflict unspeakable atrocities on one another, they try to explain with this character-building song and dance. I find the song pornographic and the dance macabre.”
On love, this a reference to Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach”:
“…what’s left to believe in? and to grasp the same answer that the poet had seized on: love and love alone. Love is the only solace. Not just any love, of course, not an easy, superficial love, but the love of the like-minded, the like-souled, the one who hears the eternal note of sadness in the same key and register as you.”
On loyalty:
“As wild and unpredictable as she was, she was always on his side. That was and would always be predictable. And he was on hers. Even without always getting what her side was, he knew with certainty that he’d be on it, and she’d be on his.”
On morality:
“When we’re trying to teach a child why it’s wrong to pick on another child, do we say, ‘It’s wrong because if I catch you doing it again you’ll be spanked,’ or do we, rather, say, ‘How would you feel if someone did that to you?’ And when we’re wrestling with our own conscience, trying to resist a temptation we know is wrong, do we think to ourselves, ‘If I do it, then I’ll be flambéed in hell’s fires’, or do we think, ‘Would I want everyone in the world to behave this way? Wouldn’t I feel moral outrage if I learned of someone else doing this?’”
On mortality:
“’…nobody would want to go back to the days when forty was considered a ripe old age…’
‘Forty! For the first few hundred thousand years of human history, half of the population died in infancy and childhood! A third of young men died in warfare before they were twenty. A woman’s marriage ceremony was rape, and she had a good chance of dying if a pregnancy came of it. Talk about nasty, brutish, and short! But did our species give in to this barbarism? Of course not! And we’re the lucky results of the Glorious Refusal, which means we have the obligation to keep on refusing the barbarities that nature is constantly trying to force on us!’”
On religion; I admire this one for its balance, since Jewish culture and Hasidism pervade much of the book:
“The Maccabees, in opposing Hellenism, were opposing cosmopolitanism. They were religious fundamentalists who might well have sympathized with the Taliban’s dynamiting of the Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan, classics of Indo-Greek art that the religious purists decreed must go, since they had once been used as idols.”
Show More
love from the past with a BIG personality, and passages such as the game theory analysis of two people in a romantic relationship, neither of whom has said “I love you” yet, which was brilliant. If you do read it, don’t bother with the appendix, the actual arguments for the existence of God. While an interesting collection, they are tedious in both argument and rebuttal.Quotes:
On Existentialism:
“I can’t look at other creatures who are committed to their existence and flourishing in the same way as I’m committed to my existence and flourishing without feeling a certain degree of identification, empathy, sympathy, compassion. The intuition that we ought to do unto others as we would have them do unto us flows naturally from this outward move.”
On genius:
“Genius was a matter of incantatory intuitions and phosphorescent blasts into the dark. Genius was a matter of thunderclap reasons, of which reason knew nothing. Genius was oracular, overweening, and severe. It is left to others to grub around in dusty doubts and cavil in insect voices. … Genius itself is diseased and self-destructive, antisocial and ill-mannered. It’s also the only thing that redeems us.”
On God, and suffering:
“Suffering provides us wonderful opportunities for character-building. Yes, I’m familiar with this line of reasoning. The only people who push it are the God-apologists, who are trying to make excuses for what an insufferable world this is, even though there’s supposed to be an omnipotent, omniscient, and well-intentioned Big Boy running the show. Any suffering the apologists can’t rationalize away as a product of our having the ennobling capacity for free will, including the free will to inflict unspeakable atrocities on one another, they try to explain with this character-building song and dance. I find the song pornographic and the dance macabre.”
On love, this a reference to Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach”:
“…what’s left to believe in? and to grasp the same answer that the poet had seized on: love and love alone. Love is the only solace. Not just any love, of course, not an easy, superficial love, but the love of the like-minded, the like-souled, the one who hears the eternal note of sadness in the same key and register as you.”
On loyalty:
“As wild and unpredictable as she was, she was always on his side. That was and would always be predictable. And he was on hers. Even without always getting what her side was, he knew with certainty that he’d be on it, and she’d be on his.”
On morality:
“When we’re trying to teach a child why it’s wrong to pick on another child, do we say, ‘It’s wrong because if I catch you doing it again you’ll be spanked,’ or do we, rather, say, ‘How would you feel if someone did that to you?’ And when we’re wrestling with our own conscience, trying to resist a temptation we know is wrong, do we think to ourselves, ‘If I do it, then I’ll be flambéed in hell’s fires’, or do we think, ‘Would I want everyone in the world to behave this way? Wouldn’t I feel moral outrage if I learned of someone else doing this?’”
On mortality:
“’…nobody would want to go back to the days when forty was considered a ripe old age…’
‘Forty! For the first few hundred thousand years of human history, half of the population died in infancy and childhood! A third of young men died in warfare before they were twenty. A woman’s marriage ceremony was rape, and she had a good chance of dying if a pregnancy came of it. Talk about nasty, brutish, and short! But did our species give in to this barbarism? Of course not! And we’re the lucky results of the Glorious Refusal, which means we have the obligation to keep on refusing the barbarities that nature is constantly trying to force on us!’”
On religion; I admire this one for its balance, since Jewish culture and Hasidism pervade much of the book:
“The Maccabees, in opposing Hellenism, were opposing cosmopolitanism. They were religious fundamentalists who might well have sympathized with the Taliban’s dynamiting of the Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan, classics of Indo-Greek art that the religious purists decreed must go, since they had once been used as idols.”
Show Less
LibraryThing member cbobbitt
The stream of consciousness third-person narration makes the story interesting if a bit rambling in its commentary about graduate school, messianic behavior by egotistical scholars, and arguments about the existence and relevance of God. The subplot of the rabbinical succession at the New Walden
Show More
community of hassidic Jews clutters the primary struggle of the main character (Cass Seltzer) with conflicts in his personal and professional life. The 36 titled chapters and the 36 sections of the appendix add to the cleverness of the "work of fiction" conceit. Goldstein's erudite vocabulary also adds to the pleasure of reading this novel. Show Less
LibraryThing member michaelbartley
There were some wonderful parts of this book, at time Rebecca Goldstein is excellent writer, however she seems more interested in writing about the big ideas that she misses the detail of life which results in the characters being flat. still it is a excellent book
LibraryThing member akblanchard
Even though I’m a person of faith, and even though I didn’t like every aspect of this book, I am really glad I read it. It has some great writing in it, especially the lyrical first chapter. What I didn’t like about it was that the characters were not well-developed, especially the women.
Show More
They were either caricatures (Pascale, Lucinda) or mouthpieces for philosophical points (Roz). It was disappointing that the main character, Cass, the “atheist with a soul” didn’t turn out to be all that interesting. A reviewer for Amazon called Cass a “milquetoast” and I concur. I also didn’t find Azarya, the Hasidic genius, torn between his duty as the Rebbe’s son and his quest for knowledge, quite as endearing as the author did. The characters of this novel of academia live in a bubble where everyone is Jewish but there truly is no God (one issue the book did not touch upon,but I wish it had: if there truly is no God, what is the point of identifying with Judaism in any way at all?). The professorial characters are every bit as cut off from the modern world as the book's Hasidim in their isolated, transplanted shetl. I also think that the main character’s mostly-absent love interest, Lucinda Mandelbaum, is a a stand-in for (what some would see as)the cruel, jealous, arbitrary God of the Old Testament (so God does actually exist, and Her name is Lucinda Mandelbaum!). Despite its flaws, it is a book that makes you think, but perhaps not as the author intended. Show Less
LibraryThing member lynnytisc
This book is not a treatise on religion as a send up of the demi-gods of academia. Our hero Cass Seltzer is a straight man for his messianic professor to whom he is drawn into a complex web of study.
It brought to mind Tom Wolfe's "A Man in Full" in it's skewering of the intelligentia.
The book has
I would recommend this book to all Wolfe fans and Jasper Fjorde fans as well!
It brought to mind Tom Wolfe's "A Man in Full" in it's skewering of the intelligentia.
The book has
Show More
an undercurrent of very droll humor as he is invited to meet someone at the "View from Nowhere" and he finds it's a philosophy book in the university library, and then is amazed that it's the name of a campus watering hole. I would recommend this book to all Wolfe fans and Jasper Fjorde fans as well!
Show Less
LibraryThing member 3bythesea
The story focuses on Cass Seltzer and switches back and forth between his tme and a grad student and the present in which he is a professor and best selling author. I found some sections compelling. such as those which provided a send up of some of the absurdity that one can encounter in the
Show More
university system as a graduate student. Others seemed to drag on or were anti climactic. Show Less
LibraryThing member artlibrarian1
One of the funniest and yet serious books in a long time. Great characters set in the Boston area. Goldstein knows her geography and academia!
LibraryThing member julie10reads
I stuck with this treatise pretending to be a novel simply because I had NOTHING else to read at the time. The character of Azarya drew me deeper into the book and it is his story that I find myself thinking about. If I am not mistaken, Azarya is a modern type of Jesus and his community not unlike
Show More
the Pharisees of Jesus' time. What Azarya, unmistakably a genius, chooses to do with his life invites the reader to make comparisons with Jesus' life, particularly how he evolved into Messiah. Worth reading for that part. Show Less
LibraryThing member kris_onken
I was hoping for this book to be great but it let me down. Lots of rich ingredients but the presentation failed.
LibraryThing member Paulagraph
One star. Oh that's harsh, but I couldn't even force myself to adhere to my read-100-pages-before-abandoning-a-book rule. So poorly written, IMHO, and with such unappealing yet overblown characters that I just couldn't go on. After 70 pages of fiction-induced torture, I skipped straight to the
Show More
Appendix, which IS interesting in that it lists the novel's 36 Arguments for the Existence of God, along with the protagonist cum author's deconstruction of or rebuttal to each. Better than Dawkins' non-fictional The God Delusion in that this summary is succinct, amusing, user-friendly and lacking in pomposity. Show Less
LibraryThing member heike6
I flipped through and found what I saw too boring to actually sit down and read. Sorry!
LibraryThing member Darrol
Evoked memories of a particular prof in college that tried to create a cult of personality and bemoaned the lack of something in the freshman. This book also evoked memories of Chaim Potok's The Chosen. I remember being at least a little attracted to the Hasidim in The Chosen, but in this book they
Show More
just seemed like any other restrictive sect. I suppose that I have become more thoroughly secular in the subsequent 30 years. Cass Seltzer seems to be very unlucky with women; to bad he could not have stayed with Roz. She was my favorite character. Show Less
LibraryThing member Gregorio_Roth
36 Arguments was good enough to finish. It was an interesting approach to the debate between those of faith and those of no faith in God. Goldstein balanced the argument fairly and shed light on the issues generously. Goldstein will help you get you to look up from your ostrich like mind stuck in
She also motivated me to read Spinoza's Philosophy. I am always looking for gurus(alive or dead) to motivate me to think beyond my boxed in existence. Spinoza will help shape my box made of Logos.
36 Arguments became cumbersome in the narrative, it just did not flow, and seemed to be just another piece of writing about the college experience. (E.G. Brett Easton Ellis: Rules of Attraction.)
I was convinced, after our book discussion, to re-read the narrative alone and see if my thoughts are the same. The kind ladies at the E Book Discussion are so good in motivating me to take another look, and for this I am thankful.
Show More
your philosophical sandbox; the book is sure to light your theological ire up and encourage you to join the conversation between atheists and believers. She also motivated me to read Spinoza's Philosophy. I am always looking for gurus(alive or dead) to motivate me to think beyond my boxed in existence. Spinoza will help shape my box made of Logos.
36 Arguments became cumbersome in the narrative, it just did not flow, and seemed to be just another piece of writing about the college experience. (E.G. Brett Easton Ellis: Rules of Attraction.)
I was convinced, after our book discussion, to re-read the narrative alone and see if my thoughts are the same. The kind ladies at the E Book Discussion are so good in motivating me to take another look, and for this I am thankful.
Show Less
LibraryThing member MartinBodek
What an astonishing, wonderful, spectacular, deep and wonderful book this! Enriching to the maximum. What a splendid way to relay philosophy, and religion. The writing is absolutely beautiful and I felt my brains expand mightily as I was reading everything. What a remarkable understanding of angst
Show More
the writer has. How marvelous the tension! How superbly, beatifically soulful and human this book is. I'm stopping now because I've run out of adjectives, but as you can see, I love this book. Absolutely an incredible, moving experience. Wow! Note: the title is slightly misleading. Carefully be mindful of the subtitle. Don't come crying to me if you read the book based on my recommendation and end up with something you didn't expect. Show Less
LibraryThing member lucybrown
I began reading 36 Arguments without much hope of enjoying it. Of course, the same dread filled me as I purchased it since I am often lured by the marriage of fiction with philosophy, though the marriage almost always end up a Sophie's World sort of debacle. Yet, pulled to such book I always am.
The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show More
Another reason I began this book without much hope of enjoying it is that I read some reviews on this site & others like it. The reviews made it sound as the book was filled with "heavy" stuff that required more than the usual amount of concentration allotted novel reading to wend ones way through. I have failed to find anything that has taxed my brain, in fact, I find myself smiling, even grinning an awful lot. The term “pretentious” was lobbed about quite freely in some reviewa. As for that charge, the book is far too slyly good-natured to be anything like pretentious. Yes, the characters engage in philosophic, religious, and mathematic debate, but given the fact the most of the characters are part of academia, it would be odd for them not to discuss these things. I am happy to report that I am more the pleasantly surprised with the book as a whole. The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show Less
LibraryThing member lucybrown
I began reading 36 Arguments without much hope of enjoying it. Of course, the same dread filled me as I purchased it since I am often lured by the marriage of fiction with philosophy, though the marriage almost always end up a Sophie's World sort of debacle. Yet, pulled to such book I always am.
The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show More
Another reason I began this book without much hope of enjoying it is that I read some reviews on this site & others like it. The reviews made it sound as the book was filled with "heavy" stuff that required more than the usual amount of concentration allotted novel reading to wend ones way through. I have failed to find anything that has taxed my brain, in fact, I find myself smiling, even grinning an awful lot. The term “pretentious” was lobbed about quite freely in some reviewa. As for that charge, the book is far too slyly good-natured to be anything like pretentious. Yes, the characters engage in philosophic, religious, and mathematic debate, but given the fact the most of the characters are part of academia, it would be odd for them not to discuss these things. I am happy to report that I am more the pleasantly surprised with the book as a whole. The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show Less
LibraryThing member lucybrown
I began reading 36 Arguments without much hope of enjoying it. Of course, the same dread filled me as I purchased it since I am often lured by the marriage of fiction with philosophy, though the marriage almost always end up a Sophie's World sort of debacle. Yet, pulled to such book I always am.
The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show More
Another reason I began this book without much hope of enjoying it is that I read some reviews on this site & others like it. The reviews made it sound as the book was filled with "heavy" stuff that required more than the usual amount of concentration allotted novel reading to wend ones way through. I have failed to find anything that has taxed my brain, in fact, I find myself smiling, even grinning an awful lot. The term “pretentious” was lobbed about quite freely in some reviewa. As for that charge, the book is far too slyly good-natured to be anything like pretentious. Yes, the characters engage in philosophic, religious, and mathematic debate, but given the fact the most of the characters are part of academia, it would be odd for them not to discuss these things. I am happy to report that I am more the pleasantly surprised with the book as a whole. The book’s plot follows the intellectual odyssey of Cass Seltzer, an atheist psychologist who has recently published a book in entitled The Illusions of Religious Experiences. The book has made him the newest celebrity of the intelligentsia, a role with which he is not entirely comfortable. Nor is he so sure of the tag with which the media has stuck him, “the atheist with a soul,” but then again when one is an non-believer who counts a Gerard Manley Hopkins poem as ones second favorite poem, one is liable to get stuck with an ironic nickname or two. For all his success, Cass has stayed
humble; considering he is romantically involved with the self-promoting, fanging “Goddess of Game Theory” who routinely lets him know he is intellectually small potatoes compared to her, he has had some help in this regard.
As Cass comes to terms with his new role as a star of the academic firmament, he reviews his past; his upbringing as the child of a woman who has fled her Hassidic upbringing, his friendship with an angelic Hassidic child with a gift for math, his short career as the protégé of a academic guru (one who bears more than a slight resemblance to Harold Bloom), his marriage to a French poet, and his love affair with an earthy anthropologist. One thing becomes remarkably clear as the story progresses; Cass has a near perfect track record for worshipping the perfectly loathsome. Sweet Cass is naïve and then some. It is his good fortune that his affability has drawn some good sorts to him as well.
The characters are all wonderfully drawn, it is hard not to adore Cass and his friend Roz. The philosophic and religious themes intriguing and well leavened with humor and gentle irony. It is also the sort of book that makes one want to find out more about other things; Hasidim, game theory…..
For the most part this book reads like a bottle of vinho verde, crisp with just enough effervescence to give it a bit of sparkle, but not seem clever, that is, clever in the worst sense of the word.
The book just got better and better as I read. Before I was even done, I had recommended it to at least five people.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jefware
A novel of the search for certitude in an improbable world.
LibraryThing member gayla.bassham
Redeemed by the ending. Poorly organized and could have used some editing. Lots of loose ends.
LibraryThing member flydodofly
I loved Goldstein's humour and obvious intelligence, and I really appreciated the arguments at the end of the book - my family had great fun discussions based on that. The passages which go a little too into detail on judaism were lost to me, however. Goldstein's insight on academia and their
Show More
behaviour, fears and the way they live and play amused me greatly. On the overall, a very enjoyable book. Show Less
LibraryThing member steve02476
Just got about 30 pages into it, it’s not the right kind of book for me, esp in the midst of a corona virus epidemic. I suppose I might try it again some day.
ISBN
0307378187 / 9780307378187