What do you think?
Rate this book
Spiritual Envy: An Agnostic's Quest
As the host of one of National Public Radio’s most popular interview programs, Michael Krasny has spent decades leading conversations on every imaginable topic and discussing life’s most important questions with the foremost thinkers of our time. Now he brings his wide-ranging knowledge and perceptive intelligence to a thoughtful and thought-provoking exploration of belief — and lack of belief.
Many books and pundits advocate for a specific God, while others adamantly declare there is no God. Yet these strident viewpoints often speak right past each other, rarely convincing anyone but the already convinced. In Spiritual Envy , Krasny helps believers and nonbelievers alike understand their own questions about faith and religion, about God and human responsibility.
Krasny challenges each of us to look closely at faith and its power, and to examine the positive and negative aspects of religion as expressed in culture, literature, and human relationships. Personal and universal, timely and timeless, this is a deeply wise yet warmly welcoming conversation, an invitation to ask one’s own questions — no matter how inconclusive the answers.
Many books and pundits advocate for a specific God, while others adamantly declare there is no God. Yet these strident viewpoints often speak right past each other, rarely convincing anyone but the already convinced. In Spiritual Envy , Krasny helps believers and nonbelievers alike understand their own questions about faith and religion, about God and human responsibility.
Krasny challenges each of us to look closely at faith and its power, and to examine the positive and negative aspects of religion as expressed in culture, literature, and human relationships. Personal and universal, timely and timeless, this is a deeply wise yet warmly welcoming conversation, an invitation to ask one’s own questions — no matter how inconclusive the answers.
264 pages, Paperback
First published August 26, 2010
31 people are currently reading
321 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
February 16, 2017
Meh. Sometimes I give a 3-star rating because a book is solidly good but there are things which I find disturbing, concerning or just not-quite-stellar, and sometimes because I feel guilty giving it a lower rating. This is the latter scenario. Nothing Krasny says in the book is particularly intriguing or innovative and The Bonobo and the Athiest by Frans de Waal https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4... offers a much more fascinating and compellingly argued exploration of questions of ethical behavior outside of religious codes. I wanted to enjoy this book and Krasny's conversational tone, but I experienced the book as rambling, focus-less and a bit tired. There is a funny gr review of the book in which the reviewer likens the experience of reading it to being trapped in a car on a long trip with a seven-year-old who won't stop talking about the problem of whether or not Santa Claus is real. Maybe getting to read that review added an extra star to my "Spiritual Envy" experience. (That reviewer also gave the book 3 stars. :)
December 20, 2010
Michael Krasny is a self-proclaimed agnostic and this is a glimpse into his world of certainty in uncertainty. It is also a view of the materialist's experience of the world. To Krasny only that which can be proven by empiricism is given any credence. His heroes are existentialists and absurdists. He does a very good job of presenting and defending their view. He is obviously extremely well read and has put a lot of thought into why it is impossible to know if anything beyond the material world exists. Occasionally he asserts that he is envious of those of us who experience the world of faith as real, but it is clear that he will never be able to see a world which he absolutely rejects because it cannot be proven on his terms. One or two times he speaks of loving his family. I wish I could ask him to prove it, which he would have to admit he could not, then I would ask him if he was lying. Some things may not be verifiable with the limited tools of reason, but that may not prove they are not real or important. I doubt Krasny would agree still I don't think he was lying about loving his family. I was glad I read Krasny's book. It is fair and honest and he is respectful of those with whom he disagrees, which in the United States has become almost a lost virtue. He would be an interesting person to converse with. Reading his book will have to be serve, and I recommend you do.
January 26, 2015
This is an extremely personal memoir. I came to realize while reading it that perhaps there is little more personal and particular (and by this I mean unrelatable to others) than logic, or more accurately, “reasoned sense.” Krasny argues that agnosticism makes more “reasoned sense” than either religious/spiritual belief or atheism, neither of which can be proved. I’ll concede this point (as, I think, most believers in a faith- or experiential-based religious system would), though the way he got to it—described in detail in this book—is so personal that I found it tedious.
For example, while his loss of belief in God seems to have come fairly easily, by the same means that other agnostics site (why would a personal, anthropomorphic, omnipotent God allow suffering? where is the proof?), he devotes many, many pages to whether one who doesn’t believe in God can or should adhere to the Ten Commandments (long before the chapter on doing good without belief in God appears). To someone who was raised Jewish and who was very religious in his youth, this is a serious question. To me, who was not, this is irrelevant. I think I was frustrated by the book because I wanted it to start in a difference place, much farther along in the argument, not assuming or accepting or arguing against the Ten Commandments or any other particular faith. He assumes that the Ten Commandments imply a God who intervenes and punishes. Why? Perhaps in context this is true—I don’t know what else Moses says God said—but the Ten Commandments themselves do not. He refers to an old joke which I had never heard about Unitarians calling them the Ten Suggestions, which is so close to my own beliefs that I was disappointed he laughed it off, instead of exploring the idea of a God who offers guidelines for a peaceful life, but who doesn’t punish or condemn those who don’t follow them. Likewise, while pages and pages are devoted to various Western religious ideas, the concept of reincarnation is lumped in with belief in alien abductions. He claims to respect all others’ beliefs (barring that they cause harm), but obviously that respect does not warrant serious discussion of reincarnation in the book. He writes, “I believe this one life is all there is,” though there is no more proof of that than that there is no God (the basic premise of his argument is that he, as an agnostic, is against certainty of any unproven claims).
Insofar as this is a personal memoir of his coming away from God, it makes sense that he focuses on his previous beliefs and how he changed his mind about them (he does recognize his loyalty to the God of his boyhood, despite his disbelief), while not opening his heart to other beliefs (which he says he would do if he could). And, of course, if he had seriously considered the possibility of reincarnation he would have come to the same conclusion as he does about all other religious/spiritual beliefs and atheism—that you can’t know what you can’t know. But, for me, I may have been more interested in reading about the journey of a seeker (as he calls himself) who sincerely considers other concepts of God which are not presented in the major religions. Toward the end of the book, he discusses the hybridization of religions (in particular, Judaism with Buddhism) and the idea doesn’t seem to make sense to him at all—in fact, it seems to repel him. Maybe his strong adherence to religious doctrine is caused by his scholarly nature and approach; maybe it’s because he lived through the sixties and seventies and cannot separate undoctrined spiritual beliefs from the unsatisfactory New Age ideas of the time.
While arguing in my head with most of his arguments (as I suspect most readers will find themselves doing), I did find that the book helped me better evaluate and categorize my own beliefs. For instance, I think my concept of God, including my belief in karma and reincarnation, falls more under “natural law” or “force” than for most Judeo-Christian monotheists (although I also subscribe to the belief in an incarnate God)—an issue touched on in the book (particularly on page 206 in which he compares it to a plot element found in Star Wars, which highlights the discrepancy between how he characterizes Western and Eastern religious ideas) but not explored nearly as fully as the idea of his favored anthropomorphic God. I also came up with new questions of my own, inspired by the type of questions he asks himself. Obviously the existence of God will never be proven as long as the God one is trying to prove is a God who requires faith (unconfirmed belief). But why would a God require faith? What is the benefit (to him or to us)? To revert us to the trust, naivete, and innocence of youth?
Also, ironically, while reading the book I came to a greater understanding and respect for atheism. I had always dismissed atheism because I thought it meant rejecting God or the spiritual realm just because you don’t feel it—a certainty derived from a negative. But now, if I look at it another way, I can imagine an atheist looking out across the world and feeling strongly, certainly, “This is it. This is all.” This certainty, at least, would be derived from a positive feeling instead of a lack of a positive feeling.
Finally, as other reviewers have noted, the highlight of the book is that Krasny is respectful of those with whom he disagrees, something of a lost virtue.
p.s. I haven’t finished Rebecca Newberger Goldstein’s 36 Arguments for the Existence of God yet, but I’m pretty sure Spiritual Envy is the book written by the novel's fictional “atheist with a soul”!
For example, while his loss of belief in God seems to have come fairly easily, by the same means that other agnostics site (why would a personal, anthropomorphic, omnipotent God allow suffering? where is the proof?), he devotes many, many pages to whether one who doesn’t believe in God can or should adhere to the Ten Commandments (long before the chapter on doing good without belief in God appears). To someone who was raised Jewish and who was very religious in his youth, this is a serious question. To me, who was not, this is irrelevant. I think I was frustrated by the book because I wanted it to start in a difference place, much farther along in the argument, not assuming or accepting or arguing against the Ten Commandments or any other particular faith. He assumes that the Ten Commandments imply a God who intervenes and punishes. Why? Perhaps in context this is true—I don’t know what else Moses says God said—but the Ten Commandments themselves do not. He refers to an old joke which I had never heard about Unitarians calling them the Ten Suggestions, which is so close to my own beliefs that I was disappointed he laughed it off, instead of exploring the idea of a God who offers guidelines for a peaceful life, but who doesn’t punish or condemn those who don’t follow them. Likewise, while pages and pages are devoted to various Western religious ideas, the concept of reincarnation is lumped in with belief in alien abductions. He claims to respect all others’ beliefs (barring that they cause harm), but obviously that respect does not warrant serious discussion of reincarnation in the book. He writes, “I believe this one life is all there is,” though there is no more proof of that than that there is no God (the basic premise of his argument is that he, as an agnostic, is against certainty of any unproven claims).
Insofar as this is a personal memoir of his coming away from God, it makes sense that he focuses on his previous beliefs and how he changed his mind about them (he does recognize his loyalty to the God of his boyhood, despite his disbelief), while not opening his heart to other beliefs (which he says he would do if he could). And, of course, if he had seriously considered the possibility of reincarnation he would have come to the same conclusion as he does about all other religious/spiritual beliefs and atheism—that you can’t know what you can’t know. But, for me, I may have been more interested in reading about the journey of a seeker (as he calls himself) who sincerely considers other concepts of God which are not presented in the major religions. Toward the end of the book, he discusses the hybridization of religions (in particular, Judaism with Buddhism) and the idea doesn’t seem to make sense to him at all—in fact, it seems to repel him. Maybe his strong adherence to religious doctrine is caused by his scholarly nature and approach; maybe it’s because he lived through the sixties and seventies and cannot separate undoctrined spiritual beliefs from the unsatisfactory New Age ideas of the time.
While arguing in my head with most of his arguments (as I suspect most readers will find themselves doing), I did find that the book helped me better evaluate and categorize my own beliefs. For instance, I think my concept of God, including my belief in karma and reincarnation, falls more under “natural law” or “force” than for most Judeo-Christian monotheists (although I also subscribe to the belief in an incarnate God)—an issue touched on in the book (particularly on page 206 in which he compares it to a plot element found in Star Wars, which highlights the discrepancy between how he characterizes Western and Eastern religious ideas) but not explored nearly as fully as the idea of his favored anthropomorphic God. I also came up with new questions of my own, inspired by the type of questions he asks himself. Obviously the existence of God will never be proven as long as the God one is trying to prove is a God who requires faith (unconfirmed belief). But why would a God require faith? What is the benefit (to him or to us)? To revert us to the trust, naivete, and innocence of youth?
Also, ironically, while reading the book I came to a greater understanding and respect for atheism. I had always dismissed atheism because I thought it meant rejecting God or the spiritual realm just because you don’t feel it—a certainty derived from a negative. But now, if I look at it another way, I can imagine an atheist looking out across the world and feeling strongly, certainly, “This is it. This is all.” This certainty, at least, would be derived from a positive feeling instead of a lack of a positive feeling.
Finally, as other reviewers have noted, the highlight of the book is that Krasny is respectful of those with whom he disagrees, something of a lost virtue.
p.s. I haven’t finished Rebecca Newberger Goldstein’s 36 Arguments for the Existence of God yet, but I’m pretty sure Spiritual Envy is the book written by the novel's fictional “atheist with a soul”!
September 29, 2015
It's been a long time since I read a book that annoyed me to the level this one did. Not necessarily the author's fault; in the end, I chose the book, and I also chose to keep reading after page 3 (and 10, and 14, and 21, and...), when I'd realized the kind of book this was. Call me stubborn; it's one of my rules to never leave a book unfinished. But this one was a long haul, and reaching the last page felt like an accomplishment of the size of climbing Everest... Without, sadly, the high of achievement.
It was to be expected. The use of "Envy" in the book's title should have clued me in; this is a book written by a man caught in a loop between the faith he's lost and the desire to recover it. For me, having grown up as an atheist, this kind of yearning is not just alien but incomprehensible. Imagine you're a surly fifteen-year-old trapped in a long car trip with a seven-year-old who spends the entire five hours of the trip expositing on whether he should or shouldn't believe in Santa Claus. He's heard things, you see, about Santa not being real, and he suspects it's true — a common sense deep within him tells him it's true — and he's caught in between two worlds: the childhood one of magic and irresponsibility, and the adult one of hard truths, reality, and facing the consequences of your choices. Now, you — the fifteen-year-old — stopped believing in Santa Claus a long, long time ago. Maybe you never did, even. And although the mental processes of this seven-year-old might be interesting to follow for, say, fifteen minutes, a full five hours of listening to him argue the same point from ten sides will leave you exhausted. You want to interrupt him and tell him he's right, Santa doesn't exist, and maybe you actually do it. But it does no good. He just looks at you with this "A-ha!" expression and says, "How do you know he doesn't exist? How can you be absolutely, totally sure? Maybe he never brought you gifts because you didn't behave. Maybe he does exist, but nobody's seen him because no one behaves good enough." And then he's off again: because if Santa doesn't exist, how can you — me — anyone — ever have a clear moral compass? How can we know right from wrong if there's no reward under the tree at the end of the year? And how can we know what Santa considers right or wrong? Sure, there's a bunch of storybooks, but they're old... And they're contradictory. "Why, oh why," the seven-year-old cries, "why can't I just SEE him? Just once? I need a sign. I need to feel him close."
Yeah.
I've no doubt many people will find comfort in Mr. Krasny's words. In proof that there are others out there as confused, as uncertain. My main problem with the book is that it gets nowhere. It ends in the same quandary with which it began: is there a god? Are the ten commandments the foundation of faith? All these pages later, Mr. Krasny is no closer to an answer of any kind, nor to inner peace. So... What's the point of the book? What have we, the readers, gained? Commiseration, in the case of other "agnostics"? That hardly seems worth writing a book for. And the pursuit of recovering faith via logical thinking is, to put it kindly, self-defeating. By definition, faith defies logic. Faith is like love; no logical reason can fire it, no logical reason can end it. It comes and goes without explanation. I am as certain that god does not exist as a believer is that god exists; neither of us can give proof — actual scientific evidence — of our position, yet neither of us require scientific evidence to be certain. But a logical approach to faith is like an organic approach to McDonald's. And it has a faintly putrid scent of bet-hedging. I can empathize with seekers, I can even empathize with religiosity, but I cannot bear the hypocrisy of, "But what if it *is* true? Better light a candle, just in case."
As for the moral compass issue, I've never put any stock in religion — even spirituality — being a proper guideline for defining right and wrong. As far as I can see, all religion does is generalize, paint in broad strokes that obliviate the individual and the diverse. And, especially, the different. Defining right and wrong is actually quite easy once religion (and its promises of rewards and gazillion virgins and whatnot) is taken out of the equation. To do good not for the reward of heaven or the threat of hell but for the sake of good — that's a world I want to live in. And Mr. Krasny, with his tragic quandary of how to live a good life without god, is not helping to build that world.
Why three stars, then? Because in the annoyance it provoked in me, this book forced me to analyze my own atheism and its evolution, my own set of core moral beliefs and the process through which I apply them. It also reaffirmed my opinion that religion — any religion — feeds intellectual weakness. And these observations, this insight into myself and the way my brain works, is definitely worth two extra stars.
It was to be expected. The use of "Envy" in the book's title should have clued me in; this is a book written by a man caught in a loop between the faith he's lost and the desire to recover it. For me, having grown up as an atheist, this kind of yearning is not just alien but incomprehensible. Imagine you're a surly fifteen-year-old trapped in a long car trip with a seven-year-old who spends the entire five hours of the trip expositing on whether he should or shouldn't believe in Santa Claus. He's heard things, you see, about Santa not being real, and he suspects it's true — a common sense deep within him tells him it's true — and he's caught in between two worlds: the childhood one of magic and irresponsibility, and the adult one of hard truths, reality, and facing the consequences of your choices. Now, you — the fifteen-year-old — stopped believing in Santa Claus a long, long time ago. Maybe you never did, even. And although the mental processes of this seven-year-old might be interesting to follow for, say, fifteen minutes, a full five hours of listening to him argue the same point from ten sides will leave you exhausted. You want to interrupt him and tell him he's right, Santa doesn't exist, and maybe you actually do it. But it does no good. He just looks at you with this "A-ha!" expression and says, "How do you know he doesn't exist? How can you be absolutely, totally sure? Maybe he never brought you gifts because you didn't behave. Maybe he does exist, but nobody's seen him because no one behaves good enough." And then he's off again: because if Santa doesn't exist, how can you — me — anyone — ever have a clear moral compass? How can we know right from wrong if there's no reward under the tree at the end of the year? And how can we know what Santa considers right or wrong? Sure, there's a bunch of storybooks, but they're old... And they're contradictory. "Why, oh why," the seven-year-old cries, "why can't I just SEE him? Just once? I need a sign. I need to feel him close."
Yeah.
I've no doubt many people will find comfort in Mr. Krasny's words. In proof that there are others out there as confused, as uncertain. My main problem with the book is that it gets nowhere. It ends in the same quandary with which it began: is there a god? Are the ten commandments the foundation of faith? All these pages later, Mr. Krasny is no closer to an answer of any kind, nor to inner peace. So... What's the point of the book? What have we, the readers, gained? Commiseration, in the case of other "agnostics"? That hardly seems worth writing a book for. And the pursuit of recovering faith via logical thinking is, to put it kindly, self-defeating. By definition, faith defies logic. Faith is like love; no logical reason can fire it, no logical reason can end it. It comes and goes without explanation. I am as certain that god does not exist as a believer is that god exists; neither of us can give proof — actual scientific evidence — of our position, yet neither of us require scientific evidence to be certain. But a logical approach to faith is like an organic approach to McDonald's. And it has a faintly putrid scent of bet-hedging. I can empathize with seekers, I can even empathize with religiosity, but I cannot bear the hypocrisy of, "But what if it *is* true? Better light a candle, just in case."
As for the moral compass issue, I've never put any stock in religion — even spirituality — being a proper guideline for defining right and wrong. As far as I can see, all religion does is generalize, paint in broad strokes that obliviate the individual and the diverse. And, especially, the different. Defining right and wrong is actually quite easy once religion (and its promises of rewards and gazillion virgins and whatnot) is taken out of the equation. To do good not for the reward of heaven or the threat of hell but for the sake of good — that's a world I want to live in. And Mr. Krasny, with his tragic quandary of how to live a good life without god, is not helping to build that world.
Why three stars, then? Because in the annoyance it provoked in me, this book forced me to analyze my own atheism and its evolution, my own set of core moral beliefs and the process through which I apply them. It also reaffirmed my opinion that religion — any religion — feeds intellectual weakness. And these observations, this insight into myself and the way my brain works, is definitely worth two extra stars.
April 16, 2014
Krasny asks a book long question (that I shared to some extent), and asks the reader to join the question; he invites the reader to seek along with him. It's probably safe to say that not all agnostics feel the way he feels; but, questioning comes with the territory, I think. Krasny doesn't claim to know the answers. I really appreciate that in this time of such overpowering (sometimes almost nauseating) certainty: in both the believer and atheist camps. Certainty eludes me, as it eludes Krasny, and he isn't afraid to share his uncertainty and what he is doing in spite of it.
Lately, I've had some slight envy, similar to what Krasny writes about, and questions of how to be the best person I can be in this life I have. I don't believe religion is necessary for morality, but I can see how it has shaped morality, mores, and ethics in different societies and for individuals within those societies.
What I miss is the camaraderie that I enjoyed when I was a practicing Christian and that is the envy I have for those who are confident and solid in their faith. Occasionally, I envy the comfort that would come with certainty, but then I remember that if I were certain, I would not have the curiosity to keep my mental hunger fed.
If you are interested in how some agnostics think, this book can help you ask the kinds of questions to find your own way, without telling you how you should think or believe. Read it and see what you think.
Lately, I've had some slight envy, similar to what Krasny writes about, and questions of how to be the best person I can be in this life I have. I don't believe religion is necessary for morality, but I can see how it has shaped morality, mores, and ethics in different societies and for individuals within those societies.
What I miss is the camaraderie that I enjoyed when I was a practicing Christian and that is the envy I have for those who are confident and solid in their faith. Occasionally, I envy the comfort that would come with certainty, but then I remember that if I were certain, I would not have the curiosity to keep my mental hunger fed.
If you are interested in how some agnostics think, this book can help you ask the kinds of questions to find your own way, without telling you how you should think or believe. Read it and see what you think.
September 22, 2011
Michael Krasny's book of searching and questioning resonates with my own path in this life. As a result I come away knowing that there are others like me who need empirical evidence in order to accept ideas without question. I love having a 'knowing' about something but those times are far and few between. I accept that I too am an agnostic and have been for a long time, but did not know or was not courageous enough to express that to myself let alone to others. To the believers out there, it is not that I do not wish to believe as you do and to feel the warmth of knowing that there is a great and kind father looking out for me, loving me. I would welcome that peace of mind but I cannot accept that just because you or someone else says that it is so. That does not work for me. So thank you Michael Krasny's as I too believe that we should all be free to believe as we want to or to not believe, so long as we do no harm or force our beliefs upon others.
January 25, 2011
Boooo!
I can't recall another book taking so long to essentially say nothing. The author wasn't there to sell me on agnosticism. The author wasn't NOT there to sell me on agnosticism either. Or was he? How can I know? Can I know? Is it possible to have too many questions? If someone invented a new punctuation mark to indicate a raise in pitch at the end of a sentence, could it have been employed to make this book more readable to me? How can I know or evn express the relative "readability" of a work of prose? Is it even knowable? Quantifiable? If in its knowableness it is found to only be partially knowable, would I still deign to know it? Say, from henceforth all humanity decides that the comma shall also be used as an interrogative marker, how would we decide which mark to use? I shall think on it.
I can't recall another book taking so long to essentially say nothing. The author wasn't there to sell me on agnosticism. The author wasn't NOT there to sell me on agnosticism either. Or was he? How can I know? Can I know? Is it possible to have too many questions? If someone invented a new punctuation mark to indicate a raise in pitch at the end of a sentence, could it have been employed to make this book more readable to me? How can I know or evn express the relative "readability" of a work of prose? Is it even knowable? Quantifiable? If in its knowableness it is found to only be partially knowable, would I still deign to know it? Say, from henceforth all humanity decides that the comma shall also be used as an interrogative marker, how would we decide which mark to use? I shall think on it.
March 21, 2011
Kransy has some good thoughts, and he has done much research and scholarship on the subject, but his perspective is one I had a little trouble with. He doesn't seem willing to fully embrace Agnosticism, despite calling himself one. I understand his points and his purpose, and I liked much of what he said, but there seemed to be this... underlying whingeingness of the whole thing that I didn't care for. (He also has a few moments of "look how well read I am!" which I found annoying). I also think that while he tries to point out the nuances of different religions and philosophies, he generalized when it was convenient, which didn't help any.
I would not recommend this book to anyone - far better work has been written about Agnosticism, and Kransy points to most of it. Read that instead.
I would not recommend this book to anyone - far better work has been written about Agnosticism, and Kransy points to most of it. Read that instead.
June 23, 2011
Very enlightening book in knowing that there are other people who are asking the same questions I am and having the same doubts as I am. A basic premise that in retrospect seems so simple and fundamental, but which hadn't occurred to me before is that atheism is as much a leap of faith as any religion or faith. This addresses some basic questions like the nature of good and evil and how (and why!) to have a moral compass when the idea of God is in doubt. Very helpful to me at this point in my spiritual journey.
October 30, 2012
Although a personal tale of his journey for answers, much of what he writes resonates with me.."how can we perceive God when we cannot prove God is, and we have only the representations created by others to foster or feed our perceptions? What refutes atheism is the simple fact that one cannot prove a negative. But if I want to prove God as a positive, affirm he exists in any form, I must believe or feel or imagine a presence of some kind that is beyond what is tactile and beyond sight and imagination or what language can signify."
August 3, 2015
I moved this to my read shelf because indeed, I don't think I will return to it to finish it in earnest. In other words I read as much of it as I felt I could take, because it was a book group choice. Now it seems that it has fallen off the list, and I am no longer compelled to read it. It caught no sympathy from me, although it was a deeply personal rendering of someone tempted by the "consolations" of faith. And it completely failed to arouse any sympathy from me as my experience of faith brought about no such confidence or similar experience.
August 4, 2015
In a world where the debate rages between Atheist writers such as Dawkins and Harris versus fundamentalist organized religious apologists, Krasny's book is an excellent call for a middle ground. The agnostic approach gains respect and the insight it deserves in this part critical essay, part memoir that leaves you wondering about the mysteries of life and thinking of your own personal approach to such topics. A great read.
December 19, 2013
Michael well framed a needed set of comments on the hissing and spitting between my group and atheists. While I do not agree with his conclusion, I am touched by his candor on his own doubts. His rejecting atheism as the natural place all agnostics eventual flow into raises a necessary set of questions for Christians and otherwise, right along with atheists to be asking of themselves.
February 23, 2011
I thought he did an excellent, well-thought out presentation of why he is an agnostic. I learned a great deal from him. Well worth reading.
October 6, 2020
An extremely wide-ranging and beautifully written discourse on belief, God, thought, and self. Krasny brings us along on a roller-coaster ride that delineates the envy that some of us have for those who believe in God. We wish we could because it seems to provide peace, not to mention an increase in longevity, and yet...we can't.
So many great tidbits - this one tickled my funny-bone: "Literary characters helped subvert my sense that the commandments were absolute and provided me with a greater understanding of the wide and complex range of humanity and its frailties. This in turn increase my empathy, which I was obliged to fold into my evolving personal code."
So many great tidbits - this one tickled my funny-bone: "Literary characters helped subvert my sense that the commandments were absolute and provided me with a greater understanding of the wide and complex range of humanity and its frailties. This in turn increase my empathy, which I was obliged to fold into my evolving personal code."
May 20, 2017
An authentic look at doubt. Well done.
August 22, 2018
Huge Krasny fan for his incomparable work as host of KQED's Forum. Interesting & honest exploration of his ideas.
January 21, 2022
Full of great questions. Made me think...
Read
June 30, 2022A lot to think about...
January 8, 2017
I didn't like this as much as I thought I would
April 25, 2011
I won't say that Krasny's book is cliché or uninteresting. It is interesting, and Krasny has an interesting take on a lot of the major issues of agnosticism, but a lot of the discussions are redundant and Krasny doesn't contribute a lot to the literature so much as he synthesizes what has already been written.
Krasny has a lot of insight into the major literature surrounding atheism and agnosticism, so his use of allusion is fun, but not overbearing. The book is very well-written and I strongly recommend it to those who aren't that familiar with what it means to be an agnostic. Those who are agnostic, or are still discovering what that entails, would definitely enjoy Krasny's book and find it enlightening.
For those who are really familiar with the history and the beliefs, though, it's likely going to be fairly redundant. While it's still worth the read, it isn't going to be as entertaining as it might otherwise have been.
Krasny has a lot of insight into the major literature surrounding atheism and agnosticism, so his use of allusion is fun, but not overbearing. The book is very well-written and I strongly recommend it to those who aren't that familiar with what it means to be an agnostic. Those who are agnostic, or are still discovering what that entails, would definitely enjoy Krasny's book and find it enlightening.
For those who are really familiar with the history and the beliefs, though, it's likely going to be fairly redundant. While it's still worth the read, it isn't going to be as entertaining as it might otherwise have been.
January 10, 2011
Okay, I didn't read THE whole book - but enough to get the gist, that agnostics can be good people even if they can't buy into the 10 Commandments per say (since the first couple of commandments have to do with God, who they also - of course - can't buy into)and that agnostics get a bad rap for being wimpy when, to the contrary, they are brave enough to follow neither the believer nor the non-believer way but instead to admit they don't know what can't really be known. He spends a lot of time writing about how he has developed his own personal ethical code (or commandments) and seems almost envious of believers, in particular, for their comforting belief in God and an afterlife. If only...
August 18, 2015
True confessions... I did not read (i.e., complete) this book. I really didn't get very far as I could not get past Krasny's painful narcissim. It was amazing how he could spend pages obsessing over his own life without making any relevant connections or openings for the reader to engage with his story. You'll note similar behavior as he inserts his experiences into discussions/interviews on the KQED radio show, "Forum."
Ironically, I heard him at a book reading respond to a critic's similar observation of his insular prose in "Spiritual Envy" with a dismissive reply, "Duh... it's a memoir."
Oh, Michael...
Ironically, I heard him at a book reading respond to a critic's similar observation of his insular prose in "Spiritual Envy" with a dismissive reply, "Duh... it's a memoir."
Oh, Michael...
December 28, 2010
i thought it would be a good christmas read. instead. it was boring and well. just not that illuminating. ran through it on the subway because well. i felt it was pretty useless. one of those times that the choir just doesn't want to listen. and truthfully, there was one sentence that summarizes everything in an interesting way. and it is - having no answers does not preclude seeking them, just as not believing in a soul does not preclude searching for experiences that feed what we think of as our souls. but yeah. absolutely no need to read the book after that sentence. yeah.
May 13, 2013
As spiritual quest books by NPR voices go, this wasn't too bad. In fact, I think it is an exceptionally quote worthy book. It is also very well annotated and seems like an authentic voice in quest many of us face because we are not confident in our knowing of the divine. I would recommend it to anyone who identifies as agnostic or is interested in reading more on the topic.
Read this instead of "Man Seeks God". Although there is some belly button gazing, this is not a travelogue. It is one man's quest to come to terms with wondering but not knowing.
Read this instead of "Man Seeks God". Although there is some belly button gazing, this is not a travelogue. It is one man's quest to come to terms with wondering but not knowing.
February 19, 2011
I usually don't read a lot of non-fiction; but, I really enjoyed Michael Krasney's Spiritual Envy. As a "practicing" agnostic myself, I have mentally often used that exact description of my own feelings, i.e. "spiritual envy" to illustrate my own agnostic attitude to the many, many believers of my acquaintance.
Krasney has done a good job of describing his own journey and mine. Thanks, Michael.
Krasney has done a good job of describing his own journey and mine. Thanks, Michael.
August 19, 2012
As much as I love Michael Krasney on Forum for his insightful interviews, I expected to enjoy this book more than I did. It was too professorial. He is a professor -and parts of the book I truly loved - but it was not a smooth read for me with unfamiliar historical and literary references. If I had the time to Google when a reference needed defining, I would have learned a lot but do not have that time. Maybe some day I will re-read. I stopped halfway.
September 6, 2011
At first I was interested in his personal experience and why he felt envy of people with faith. Not too far into the book, I realized that his constant complaining and envy were getting to me. Thinking he would eventually find some resolution, I read on. NOPE! No resolution whatsoever. I did feel compassion for him at the beginning....but found it difficult at the end.
February 23, 2013
What I liked about this book were the frequent connections to history and literature. I dien't get the idea that Krasny was trying to establish a case for or against Agnosticism - just setting it in an historic and cultural context. I found it interesting and supportive of my own agnostic beliefs.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews