The poor man is delusionally convinced that nobody can read his book without it changing their worldview. Even most real philosophers aren’t that arrogant. (And philosophers can be a pretty arrogant bunch, but I love them anyway.)

This is a sequel to my book God’s Debris, a story about a deliveryman who chances upon the smartest person in the world and learns the secrets of reality. I subtitled that book A Thought Experiment and used a variety of hypnosis techniques in an attempt to produce a feeling of euphoric enlightenment in the reader similar to what the main character would feel while discovering the (fictionally) true nature of reality.

Hypnosis techniques!? Did anyone notice that they were being hypnotized while reading God’s Debris? If it were possible to hypnotize someone with a book, don’t you think that would be a little unethical?

“Consider this worldview. Got it? Good. By the way, when I said ‘consider it’, I really meant ‘focus on it while I hypnotize you into thinking it’s true’ (fictionally).”

Reactions to the book were all over the map. About half of the people who e-mailed me said they felt various flavors of euphoria, expanded awareness, connectedness, and other weird sensations that defied description. A surprising number of people reported reading the entire book twice in one day. So I know something was happening. But no two people had the same reaction.

“Muhahaha! My spell worked! Well, the Probability that my spell works is apparently 50%.” (Probability – spooky!)

So… was it a “thought experiment”, or a new holy book?

Other people wrote angry letters and scathing reviews, pointing out the logical and factual flaws in the book. It is full of flaws, and much of the science is made up, as it states in the introduction. I explained that the reader is supposed to be looking for flaws. That’s what makes the experiment work. You might think this group of readers skipped the introduction and missed the stated point of the book, but I suspect that something else is going on. People get a kind of cognitive dissonance (brain cramp) when their worldview is disturbed. It’s fun to watch.

So it was an experiment, but those of us that noticed he was skimming over factual errors and flaws in his thinking weren’t really critically evaluating his holy- I mean, thought experiment. Our puny brains were just experiencing so much cognitive dissonance that we failed to understand his disclaimers. At least he derives pleasure from our confusion.

The most interesting readers are the ones who have instant amnesia after reading the book, angrily insisting that there were no new ideas in it. False memories are a common side effect of having your worldview suddenly bent. You might love the book, you might hate it, but if you can remember it, you’ll be interested to hear that some readers thought it had no new ideas.

Wait a minute… I said, “He tied a lot of different arguments together in an interesting way, though I didn’t notice any that were original to Adams. I have a feeling that a lot of atheists have heard most of them before”. In other words, I didn’t notice any new ideas. It couldn’t be that I’ve actually read these arguments and ideas before in the works of Teilhard, Dennett, Aristotle, Spinoza, Hume, Asimov, Simmons, etc. Those must be false memories manufactured by my apparently still-reeling mind. Maybe we wouldn’t contract this weird form of amnesia if he cut back on his secret hypnotizing.

…
My target readers for The Religion War are bright people with short attention spans, especially lazy students and busy book clubs. I try to avoid tedious descriptions of scenery and clothing. I hope you don’t miss them. You can read the whole thing in three hours, and it’s packed with ideas to mull.

While the story is fiction, most booksellers will list the book under nonfiction because its purpose is to highlight the most important—yet most ignored—questions in the world. I list some of those questions in the back of the book, but they won’t make complete sense until you’ve finished the story. I call them “Questions to Ponder.”

So this isn’t really a fiction book based on Teilhard’s omega point. It’s more of his “most important-yet most ignored” pseudo-philosophical omega point theology made into a short story for the lazy people with short attention spans.

After reading that, I think my earlier comparison to Dianetics was on the mark. I don’t buy his disclaimers: I think this is what he wants people to believe. I can easily imagine Adams spinning this thing into a new Scientology.

I agree, it activates the BS meter. He skims over and selectively misrepresents too much in order to support his idea, while masking the superficiality of any single argument by constantly changing the subject. It almost felt like I was reading Dianetics again. :/

He wiggles out of culpability in the introduction by saying that the opinions and philosophies contained are not his own, and by giving this disclaimer:

The central character states a number of scientific “facts.” Some of his weirdest statements are consistent with what scientists generally believe. Some of what he says is creative baloney designed to sound true. See if you can tell the difference.

I guess that gives him an out when it comes to his descriptions of evolution, light, the observer effect, etc.

Despite the disclaimers, I got the same impression as I Like Tea: that these are probably versions of his views woven into story form. I’ve even read some of these opinions in his work before. The section on affirmations was mentioned at the end of Dilbert Future, though I was happy to read that he attributed it to something like cognitive psychology rather than a mysterious force this time.

These things wouldn’t normally bother me, except that this story is presented as some kind of philosophical/theological allegory, and not as flat-out fiction.

On the other hand:

I thought it was a decent novella, from a “this is pure fiction” perspective. He tied a lot of different arguments together in an interesting way, though I didn’t notice any that were original to Adams. I have a feeling that a lot of atheists have heard most of them before, but I can see how it could be interesting to the average Joe.

The main idea behind the story was developed in the early 1900s by a Jesuit, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, in an attempt to resolve conflicts between his faith and the Theory of Evolution. Since then a few philosophers have latched onto it, the latest being the dude who thinks physics proves Christianity.

I’ve read some good scifi stories written around this concept, including the Hyperion series by Dan Simmons, The Last Question by Issac Asimov, and a few others. I just, ah, procured The Religion War. We’ll see if Adams can make his version work.

But I could see how someone who’s never bothered to consider doubts about God might find their beliefs challenged by it.

So, yeah….^^