I'm currently reading "The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into The Forces of History" by Howard Bloom.

The book is fascinating, but it may be a little unsettling for some. I'm totally absorbed in it though...

Here is a link to check it out...



http://www.howardbloom.net/lucifer/

Catchy title, what's the premise of the book? The reviews at Amazon looked encouraging, but I don't place much stock in reviews.

Originally posted by jwreck
Catchy title, what's the premise of the book? The reviews at Amazon looked encouraging, but I don't place much stock in reviews.


It's ambitious. Bloom attempts to explain the forces of history and how human biology/nature has affected it – specifically societies.

In the first chapter, Bloom explains the Lucifer Principle as this…

“The nature scientists uncover has crafted our viler impulses into us: in fact, these impulses are a part of the process she uses to create. Lucifer is the dark side of cosmic fecundity, the cutting blade of the sculptor’s knife. Nature does not abhor evil; she embraces it. She uses it to build. With it, she moves the human world to greater heights or organization, intricacy, and power.”

“In the process, The Lucifer Principle contends that evil is woven into our most basic biological fabric.”

I recommend it. It’s been a fun read so far. There are some excerpts on Amazon…


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0871136643/slide-show/103-7590720-1090233#reader-link

Remove the sponge cell from the sponge, prevent it from finding its way back to its brethren, and it dies. Scrape a liver cell from the liver and in its isolation it too will shrivel and give up life. But what happens if you remove a human from his social bonds, wrenching him from the superorganism of which he or she is a part?

The quote is from Howard Bloom's website and unfortunately an example of a fallacy in which a conclusion is wrong because the premise is false. He defines humans as part of a superorganism similar to mold or an organ such as a liver. The reader is unconvinced that humans are one living organism, but that doesn't stop him from ascerting that it will react like one organism to different stimuli.

He says that if a liver cell is removed from the liver organ, the cell will die. Therefore, if a human is removed from this "superorganism" it will also die. He gives an example of Lawrance of Arabia having an accident and conforms his conclusion as to why he had the accident to agree with his theory that it was because he was not a part of the "superorganism" anymore.

His view seems like an amatuer Darwin meets an amatuer Freud meets the writer who really wrote It Takes A Village. I might check it out if I see it in Barnes and Noble.

Sounds interesting, as long as it doesnt get preachy.

And maybe a human wont die if disconnected from other humans, but they would most likely go nutz.

Originally posted by eanax

In the first chapter, Bloom explains the Lucifer Principle as this…

“The nature scientists uncover has crafted our viler impulses into us: in fact, these impulses are a part of the process she uses to create. Lucifer is the dark side of cosmic fecundity, the cutting blade of the sculptor’s knife. Nature does not abhor evil; she embraces it. She uses it to build. With it, she moves the human world to greater heights or organization, intricacy, and power.”



Well, the premise looks to be completely derivative of Anton Levay's Church of Satan. The Satanic Bible delves a lot into this concept. It's Wicca meets Randian objectivism, in an oversimplified nutshell. I recommend Levay's stuff, it's entertaining and more than a little thought-provoking every now and then. Since just about everyone confuses it with simple devil worship, it's a fun book to read out in public at parks, libraries & such. You'll get some amusing looks.

Isn't that kind of the premise behind Conrad's Heat of darkness? Kurtz is removed from society (the superorganism) his evil whims prevail and he ultimately wastes away. Could be wrong.

Originally posted by eanax
I'm currently reading "The Lucifer Principle: A Scientific Expedition Into The Forces of History" by Howard Bloom.

The book is fascinating, but it may be a little unsettling for some. I'm totally absorbed in it though...

Here is a link to check it out...



http://www.howardbloom.net/lucifer/
Interesting. To immagine that evil is part of human geneology. What I do find fascinating is how people around the world define evil. To the people of the old testiment evil was simply put a departure from God and his laws. Among Greeks, it was being opposed to the public order. Romans were obscessed with order and saw chaios as a form of supream evil. This sentiment was echoed among Chineese scholars of Confusiousism. Now the Christian theologians, beginning with St. Paul saw mankind as being inheretly corrupt and believe that only through acceptance of the devine could perfection be attained, and therefor salvation. In more modern eras the existentialists, such as Sartre did not see any form of higher order whatsoever and believed that only through individual will accepting the knowledge that there was no devine intrevention can "being-in-itself" be acheived.