What does /lit/ think of this book and this philosophy? I finished

It's well intentioned but stupid.
>Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
Nigga I didn't ask.
>If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
It's not his fault you find him annoying.
>Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
The "mating signal" is a sexual advance. Don't make sexual advances unless someone makes a sexual advance? How the fuck is that supposed to work?
>Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
What if it doesn't belong to anyone
>Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
Magic isn't real.
>Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
What is need
>Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
What about all the human animals
>When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
So... never have a conversation when you're out of the house?

>>8736313
Yeah, the book is full of logical inconsistencies and vague statements.
But I also don't like the philosophy itself.

It just fills in the holes of Christianity.

*shrugs*

It's like lower-brow Ayn Rand. It has all the problems of Rand's work (the biggest problem is that shallow self-interest is not psychologically rewarding) without Rand's few insights.

Anton (((LaVey)))

>>8736303

Garbage. Satanism in general is stupid. The worst is theistic Satanism which is just the antithesis of Christianity. LaVeyan Satanism is Satanism without the belief in a theistic deity and is full of misifts and edgy spergs.

>Religion is the opium of the people

File: 1291811094511.jpg (31KB, 350x418px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 350x418px

Well, its really a book of two halves.

>First Half

Yeah made sense, he more or less said what countless others had said before him (modern society is descended from primitive beliefs that may have been beneficial at the time but religion has constrained human beings and forced them to act against their nature thus leading to misery).

I had no problem with the first half.

>Second Half

Spells in a made up language.

>mfw

File: existentialism.jpg (513KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 2048x1366px

>>8736303
babby's first deconstruction of Christianity.
Reconstructs slightly more egoistic dogma in it's place like >>8736361 said. Pick another path, anon.

>>8736372
What about deep self-interest?

>>8736412
>Pick another path, anon.
Oh, I don't plan on choosing satanism as my path; rather, I stated earlier that I disagree with many things in this book.

I read this book out of interest in learning about this philosophy. Needless to say, I broadened my horizon by learning about the LaVeyan satanists' views, but this is not my path.

>>8736361
>It just fills in the holes of Christianity.
How?
I am currently agnostic, but I use to be a Christian and I know quite a lot about Christianity, but I can't see how it fills in the holes of Christianity.
Do you mean that it fills the role of opposing Christianity?

Yeah, Satanism is full of logic holes.

Even /x/ tier cosmic bullshit wizard religions say it's retarded.

>>8736447
How is filling the holes of something and opposing it any way similar? Explain.

File: original.gif (164KB, 189x163px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 189x163px

>>8736313
>magic isnt real

>>8736644
no meme pls

>>8736634
I wasn't sure what they meant when they said "fill the holes of Christianity", so I made an assumption even if it didn't make much sense.
I thought that maybe they meant that satanism fills the other side of Christianity, as in two side of the same coin, where one opposes the other, yet they're still part of the same object.
In any case, that is not true; satanism is not meant to oppose specifically Christianity; rather, it is meant to oppose most right-hand path faiths including, but not limited to, Christianity.

>>8736313
>Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself
This is actually a good piece of advice and 4chan in general should take heed of.

>>8736814
I don't think it's a good advice; complaining a bit can relieve stress, even if it's something that you like doing.
Like for example, I am currently taking a digital systems course and I am really enjoying it, but sometimes I complain when I get a really hard assignment, but I still like it.
Complaining or talking about something, especially when you're with others, can really help relieve stress.

That's what I have personally found, at least; I am sure it's different for everyone.

>>8736303
From what I understand, it's a compendium of objectivist theroy, which I find flawed, with a twist of mysticism.
I like Lavey. He was rather intelligent and a provacitve figure. Really, he was a performer.
His philosophy doesn't represent anything new, a lot of it's just borrowed and flawed.
5/10.

>>8736875
Yeah, it's got a lot of similarities to objectivism.
I also don't like objectivism very much.