What do you think?
Rate this book
Prometheus and Atlas
In Prometheus & Atlas, Dr. Jorjani endeavors to deconstruct the nihilistic materialism and rootless rationalism of the modern West by showing how it was grounded on a dishonest suppression of the spectral and why it has a parasitic relationship with Abrahamic religious fundamentalism. Rejecting the marginalization of ESP and psychokinesis as "paranormal," Prometheus & Atlas makes the case that psi is only "super Natural" insofar as our reductive modern scientific models have occluded Supernature for practical purposes. At the same time, Jorjani calls for a conscious recognition of the superhumanly empowering archetypes of Prometheus and Atlas, which he argues have unconsciously driven the daring scientific exploration and discovery of all those cultures that adopted and adapted the cosmopolitan promise of the Hellenic heritage. Embracing the Promethean and Atlantic spirit, and a reach for a fiery fusion of the horizons of the Eastern and Western worlds, would mean the dawn of a new age and an integral society wherein the modern barriers between Science, Religion, Politics, and Art have been dynamited.
"Jason Jorjani's Prometheus & Atlas is what profound philosophical writing used to be but has long refused to visionary in its method and content, sweeping in its scope, literally mythical, and, above all, positive."
— Jeffrey J. Kripal, Professor of Philosophy and Religious Thought at Rice University
"Prometheus & Atlas is the most brilliant treatise relating to parapsychological material that I have ever encountered... The range of scholarship required to make this argument is, in my estimation, nothing short of awesome. I don't think any other writer comes even close to tying things together the way Jorjani has done."
— Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, Host of Thinking Allowed and Dean of Programs in Transformational Psychology at the University of Philosophical Research
"Jason Jorjani's Prometheus & Atlas is what profound philosophical writing used to be but has long refused to visionary in its method and content, sweeping in its scope, literally mythical, and, above all, positive."
— Jeffrey J. Kripal, Professor of Philosophy and Religious Thought at Rice University
"Prometheus & Atlas is the most brilliant treatise relating to parapsychological material that I have ever encountered... The range of scholarship required to make this argument is, in my estimation, nothing short of awesome. I don't think any other writer comes even close to tying things together the way Jorjani has done."
— Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, Host of Thinking Allowed and Dean of Programs in Transformational Psychology at the University of Philosophical Research
457 pages, Kindle Edition
First published February 18, 2016
81 people are currently reading
630 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 - 15 of 15 reviews
November 21, 2018
One of the most interesting and exciting books I've read in recent memory. As a Popperian, I've long been dismayed by metaphysics. Jorjani's awesome work here shares a piece of the puzzle I didn't know was necessary. A rare joy, Prometheus and Atlas delivers an emphatic thesis that opens disparate worlds with a lexicon reflecting a uniquely continental branch of postmodernism. Drawing from Heiddeger's theories of time and history, Jorjani builds upon bridges that connect Cartesian and parapsychological concepts. As a layman might say, he "owns" postmodernism with it's own monuments and strengths.
Layered and remarkably well researched, Prometheus and Atlas challenges paradigms and compels the scientific, secular, religious, agnostic, and atheist minded to look deeply at information often overlooked or dismissed by mainstream authority and to read between the lines. It's a difficult book intended for curious mulling. The historical and academic connections Jorjani reveals threading Hegel, Bruno, Schelling, Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, Feyerabend, Nietzsche, Kant, Descartes, Sir Bacon, Strauss, and Nishida (to name a few) are both visionary and dynamite in fashion. In earnestness, parts of the book read like pathfinding "noble lies," functioning to alert you of genuine truth through uncertainty and mercurial hermeneutics, at times appearing to use absurdity as a shield but never a crutch.
I was introduced to Jorjani through my dear friend Lev who pointed me towards his talks with Jeffrey Mishlove of New Thinking Allowed, and was captivated by the originality of his arguments and the scope of his erudition. One can't help but feel while journeying through this tour de force that they are reading almost forbidden fruit about parapsychological phenomena in a timeless book that will be studied and talked about for hundreds of years if not more.
Layered and remarkably well researched, Prometheus and Atlas challenges paradigms and compels the scientific, secular, religious, agnostic, and atheist minded to look deeply at information often overlooked or dismissed by mainstream authority and to read between the lines. It's a difficult book intended for curious mulling. The historical and academic connections Jorjani reveals threading Hegel, Bruno, Schelling, Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, Feyerabend, Nietzsche, Kant, Descartes, Sir Bacon, Strauss, and Nishida (to name a few) are both visionary and dynamite in fashion. In earnestness, parts of the book read like pathfinding "noble lies," functioning to alert you of genuine truth through uncertainty and mercurial hermeneutics, at times appearing to use absurdity as a shield but never a crutch.
I was introduced to Jorjani through my dear friend Lev who pointed me towards his talks with Jeffrey Mishlove of New Thinking Allowed, and was captivated by the originality of his arguments and the scope of his erudition. One can't help but feel while journeying through this tour de force that they are reading almost forbidden fruit about parapsychological phenomena in a timeless book that will be studied and talked about for hundreds of years if not more.
October 24, 2017
Dr. Faustus' Grad Thesis.
Where do I start?
On the outer surface this book reads like a SUNY Philosophy Graduate Thesis. The style is difficult and the prose is hard to chew. I remember images of those white ceiling tiles with brown stains came to mind as I was reading this(a common sight in NYS public buildings). I found large tracts of this material to be utterly stale and boring, thus if you're looking for the sort of read that's going to inspire your imagination you need to find a different title.
As for the subject I have a bit more to say. Jorjani attempts to rewrite the biographies of several major philosophers(eg. Descartes) as occultists. After he establishes this, he goes on to recast the history of modernity as the departure from the supernatural. He does supply ample proofs however I have not verified these proofs(they did appear in Jorjani's thesis thus were reviewed by a SUNY professor). I found some of his claims to be specious and idiotic, especially those relating to Descartes. Jorjani is careful not to cross the line into "occult" literature, almost avoids the use of the term completely via use of a euphemism "Spectral"("lucifer" does appear in the first few paragraphs).
Jorjani's ideas need some work. They aren't fully cooked. I was disappointed that he failed to access and build bridges to existing movements such as Dark Enlightenment and Neoreaction to which he owes a lot. This also adds to his childish solipsistic reputation. Nick Land stands out here in particular as a forerunner to Jorjani's ideas. The connections of these quadrants of occultism to Nazism are well charted which may cast some light on recent controversies regarding Jorjani. Jorjani also exhibits a childish aversion to "Abrahamic" religions which show, despite his scholarly aire, a lack of understanding of these historical/religious threads.
Jorjani also would appear to be a practitioner of occultism, not only a researcher.
I would suggest reading "Hellboy" instead of this book.
Where do I start?
On the outer surface this book reads like a SUNY Philosophy Graduate Thesis. The style is difficult and the prose is hard to chew. I remember images of those white ceiling tiles with brown stains came to mind as I was reading this(a common sight in NYS public buildings). I found large tracts of this material to be utterly stale and boring, thus if you're looking for the sort of read that's going to inspire your imagination you need to find a different title.
As for the subject I have a bit more to say. Jorjani attempts to rewrite the biographies of several major philosophers(eg. Descartes) as occultists. After he establishes this, he goes on to recast the history of modernity as the departure from the supernatural. He does supply ample proofs however I have not verified these proofs(they did appear in Jorjani's thesis thus were reviewed by a SUNY professor). I found some of his claims to be specious and idiotic, especially those relating to Descartes. Jorjani is careful not to cross the line into "occult" literature, almost avoids the use of the term completely via use of a euphemism "Spectral"("lucifer" does appear in the first few paragraphs).
Jorjani's ideas need some work. They aren't fully cooked. I was disappointed that he failed to access and build bridges to existing movements such as Dark Enlightenment and Neoreaction to which he owes a lot. This also adds to his childish solipsistic reputation. Nick Land stands out here in particular as a forerunner to Jorjani's ideas. The connections of these quadrants of occultism to Nazism are well charted which may cast some light on recent controversies regarding Jorjani. Jorjani also exhibits a childish aversion to "Abrahamic" religions which show, despite his scholarly aire, a lack of understanding of these historical/religious threads.
Jorjani also would appear to be a practitioner of occultism, not only a researcher.
I would suggest reading "Hellboy" instead of this book.
March 13, 2024
A revolutionary analysis of the suppression of the paranormal since Descartes, through Kant and F.W. Schelling, by means of Foucault and Feyerabend’s epistemology. Psychic powers are probably real (Jorjani goes into Sheldrake’s proofs and CIA Psychokinetic incidents + the incredible case of the PK Man established by the Parapsychologist Jeffrey Mishlove), and then the author ACTUALLY analyses the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion as a metaphor for Japan’s subjection to and evolution into a Westernised magical Promethean civilisation!! The best Luciferian text I’ve ever read and one of my favourites ever. Better than Nietzsche or just his evolution? I feel like I will disagree with this guy more when I find out some of his opinions on Iran.
April 8, 2019
A terrible hodge-podge of over verbose hyperbole and jargon to hide the fact the book contains nothing. It is abundantly clear that the author knows nothing about mysticism or the occult, and his basic premise of the 'spectral' is mere 'wishful thinking' and psychic powers. If we actually look at historical accounts of what Jorjani refers to as 'spectral phenomena' it is what one would refer to as real magick (not new age slop) and practitioners were highly trained religious specialists. At best, it's obvious from his writing that Jorjani dabbles in Pop Wicca, and has no knowledge of the occult at all. His philosophy is likewise stunted as he seeks to look for empirical and epistemological evidence to support the 'spectral', when in fact any 101 Philosophy major familiar with the study of religion knows this a failed venue. As for UFO's as a manifestation of psi ability - ridiculous, and I suggest he looks at the link between aliens and schizophrenia. If aliens do exist, why would they travel all the way to earth, and speak to absolute nobodies like unemployed bums and alt-right trash? He seeks the approval of science, for things that cannot be measured. Then there is the fact that he also peddles political 'snake oil' in other books, like global domination by 'White Nationalist Iran'. This book is his most popular one too, the others are even worse...less than one star due to sloppy research and political propaganda.
September 10, 2018
This is an ambitious piece of work in scale and scope, and represents the positive and visionary side of (the usually deconstructive) postmodernist philosophy. However, some important questions remain unanswered and under-represented that makes the work appear incomplete and even unsatisfying in some sense. Here is an initial list:
1. The third big idea set out in the beginning, and its significance, remain unclarified and undemonstrated in the work: ‘’Although there is no objective standpoint outside of worldview warfare, the form of life essentially structured by the spectral essence of technology has a unique power to assimilate all others.’’
2. Friedrich Schelling replaced Kant’s phenomenal and noumenal worlds with conscious and unconscious psychical processes, which the creative genius is able to bridge in a productive manner by intuiting and resonantly modifying aesthetic ideas. I thought this proposition forms a central thesis and promise of the book, in that aesthetic appreciation can transform man’s relationship with techne-poiesis and avert the destining of enframing and its associated dangers. I kept waiting for an elaboration and injunctive processes that man can adopt or embody to de-enframe himself from the ‘world colonizing’ power without jettisoning its transformative agency. But it never came. The morphological imagistic archetypes that can transmute nature in a way ungraspable by conceptual reason never showed up in either description or prescription (saying it may not admit to mechanistic reproduction may be necessary but not sufficient).
3. ‘’Prometheus and Atlas stand for the archetypal or mythic forces in our unconscious that anticipate or frame phenomena in terms of fixed world models; by being conscious of this we can embrace the constructive power of these forces but also creatively reimagine and redefine our relationship to them.’’ How? What can be a starting point to such an endeavour of ‘crafting expressions of those ideas that gradually resonantly modify the ideas themselves.’
4. Finally, the assertion repeated many times in many ways throughout the book ‘’Nature is not objectively out there to inhabit prior to, or outside of, this historical struggle’’ and ‘’shaped by psychical forces’’, could have been more powerful with some concrete examples from physics, biology and even the social sciences rather than leave it as a metaphysical pronouncement. (The socio-political consequences of admitting the paranormal is good, but does quite do the job).
While important points have been made about the nature of technoscience, the paranormal, the philosophy of knowledge (exclusionary marginalization), etc. detailed answers or pointers to the 4 matters above could, in my opinion, raise the work from a critical philosophical research paper to a pioneering herald of the spectral revolution (in its various meanings) in the praxis of ethics and politics, as also in the new complementary synthesis of Science and Art.
I have to admit that the observations above are based on my reading of the Stony Brook university thesis, not the eventually published book.
I look forward to reflections on the aforementioned points from forum members here.
1. The third big idea set out in the beginning, and its significance, remain unclarified and undemonstrated in the work: ‘’Although there is no objective standpoint outside of worldview warfare, the form of life essentially structured by the spectral essence of technology has a unique power to assimilate all others.’’
2. Friedrich Schelling replaced Kant’s phenomenal and noumenal worlds with conscious and unconscious psychical processes, which the creative genius is able to bridge in a productive manner by intuiting and resonantly modifying aesthetic ideas. I thought this proposition forms a central thesis and promise of the book, in that aesthetic appreciation can transform man’s relationship with techne-poiesis and avert the destining of enframing and its associated dangers. I kept waiting for an elaboration and injunctive processes that man can adopt or embody to de-enframe himself from the ‘world colonizing’ power without jettisoning its transformative agency. But it never came. The morphological imagistic archetypes that can transmute nature in a way ungraspable by conceptual reason never showed up in either description or prescription (saying it may not admit to mechanistic reproduction may be necessary but not sufficient).
3. ‘’Prometheus and Atlas stand for the archetypal or mythic forces in our unconscious that anticipate or frame phenomena in terms of fixed world models; by being conscious of this we can embrace the constructive power of these forces but also creatively reimagine and redefine our relationship to them.’’ How? What can be a starting point to such an endeavour of ‘crafting expressions of those ideas that gradually resonantly modify the ideas themselves.’
4. Finally, the assertion repeated many times in many ways throughout the book ‘’Nature is not objectively out there to inhabit prior to, or outside of, this historical struggle’’ and ‘’shaped by psychical forces’’, could have been more powerful with some concrete examples from physics, biology and even the social sciences rather than leave it as a metaphysical pronouncement. (The socio-political consequences of admitting the paranormal is good, but does quite do the job).
While important points have been made about the nature of technoscience, the paranormal, the philosophy of knowledge (exclusionary marginalization), etc. detailed answers or pointers to the 4 matters above could, in my opinion, raise the work from a critical philosophical research paper to a pioneering herald of the spectral revolution (in its various meanings) in the praxis of ethics and politics, as also in the new complementary synthesis of Science and Art.
I have to admit that the observations above are based on my reading of the Stony Brook university thesis, not the eventually published book.
I look forward to reflections on the aforementioned points from forum members here.
December 19, 2020
I don't agree with some of Jorjani's thesis but I really enjoyed this book and learned a lot. I will definitely revisit this book again and again.
I've never found an author whom I agree with even 80% but I really appreciate a solid argument that makes me rethink my positions and Jorjani does a really good job at elucidating his ideas.
The part of this book that I found the most profound was the first part about breaking the enframing done by our masters. I really thought Jorjani referencing some great work proving his point. I would have liked a more spiritual work, akin to Evola, instead of a technological perspective. Jorjani is kind of like a semi-materialist/semi-occultist/philosopher.
Don't even think about reading this book unless your mind has broken at least the chains of the cave. You can but you will probably be offended at something trivial. This is a grownups book. Perhaps you haven't made it up the staircase yet but at least have turned the corner at seen the fire. If you don't know what I'm talking about, just avoid this book.
I've never found an author whom I agree with even 80% but I really appreciate a solid argument that makes me rethink my positions and Jorjani does a really good job at elucidating his ideas.
The part of this book that I found the most profound was the first part about breaking the enframing done by our masters. I really thought Jorjani referencing some great work proving his point. I would have liked a more spiritual work, akin to Evola, instead of a technological perspective. Jorjani is kind of like a semi-materialist/semi-occultist/philosopher.
Don't even think about reading this book unless your mind has broken at least the chains of the cave. You can but you will probably be offended at something trivial. This is a grownups book. Perhaps you haven't made it up the staircase yet but at least have turned the corner at seen the fire. If you don't know what I'm talking about, just avoid this book.
March 12, 2022
I did not expect it to be this good.
The author does not shy away from anchoring his philosophy in Heidegger and others, which gives it a lot of legitimacy.
While the Promethean spirit narrative is not so different than what you'd expect, except for the emphasis on technology, it's the contrast to Atlas that is completely new to me. If Promethean spirit is aligned to knowledge, the Atlantean spirit is aligned to power, and they are of a kin, because as the famous Foucauldian addage goes, they are alike.
The author does not shy away from anchoring his philosophy in Heidegger and others, which gives it a lot of legitimacy.
While the Promethean spirit narrative is not so different than what you'd expect, except for the emphasis on technology, it's the contrast to Atlas that is completely new to me. If Promethean spirit is aligned to knowledge, the Atlantean spirit is aligned to power, and they are of a kin, because as the famous Foucauldian addage goes, they are alike.
February 1, 2021
Jorjani argues for a type of metaphysics with the idea that it can transform humanity. Some of the concepts involving psychokinesis and astrology seem a little wacky & baseless. Still interesting overall read.
I heard about the book after listening to the author describe Heidegger's philosophy. The concepts are difficult to grasp. And most people would find it hard to see how they can relate to reality.
I heard about the book after listening to the author describe Heidegger's philosophy. The concepts are difficult to grasp. And most people would find it hard to see how they can relate to reality.
January 19, 2024
In a certain way, reading
Prometheus and Atlas
has been a very enlightening experience, because I think I now know how most people feel when they read post-modern theory, because what Jason Reza Jorjani has managed here is 400+ pages of pure nonsens.
Granted, it could be said that I can't find head or tails of what Jorjani is saying because he works within a methodological framework that's completely foreign to me, but I would argue that even the methodology employed in the book doesn't add up.
Basically, Jorjani wants to demonstrate how super- and paranormal phenomenon has excluded from scientific enquiry for bad reasons, and that subjecting such phenomenon to empirical studies would help develop the latent psychic potentials in humans.
That's all well and good, but it all falls apart, when all the studies that Jorjani can cite are made by known crackports, all of whom made studies that have either been debunked or nor been able to be replicated by their peers. But mostly Jorjani just rely on anecdotal evidence, taking the writing of holy texts and the statements made by individuals at face value.
If Jorjani wants to subject the super- and paranormal to scientific enquiry, then it also has to able to stand up to scrutiny within the methodology that Jorjani has picked. And I fear that when the super- and paranormal is subjected to a purely material analysis, then it will all fall apart. Just like it have until now.
There's also a weird trend with how Jorjani cites sources. With all the citations in the book, it's obvious that Jorjani wants Prometheus and Atlas to be taken serious as an academic work, but he then falters when he continuos to cite the same source ad nauseum for pages on end. This is the type of shit I would do in high school to pad out an essay. And even in high school I would be told off for doing so, as it basically amounts to rewriting the book or study you cite without adding original research.
That's also the problem that Jorjani runs into. For example, when he touches on the works of Percy Bysshe Shelley and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, it basically amounts to Jorjani just quoting books at the reader without connecting the quotes in any meaningful way. The second issue is that, when you rely on a single source for an extended periode of time, you don't do a proper critique of that source. When the source is just repeated, it by necessity has to be considered true.
In the book's subject matter, I also fear Jorjani has missed the mark entirely. The people interested in material science will already know that the book only portrays pseudoscience, and the people interested in the mystic or occult elements will have already disregarded empirical and material methodologies, rendering Jorjani's argument as irrelevant.
In that sense, Jorjani reminds me a lot of Julius Evola, an author who also made inquiries into the super- and paranoral (and an author who strangely enough isn't mentioned once in this book,) but who contrary to Jorjani tried to keep that study in a strictly occult methodological realm. Where Evola always falted was exactly when he tried to incorporate or reference materialsim in his works, and it seems like Jorjani hasn't learned anything from Evola's mistakes in that regard.
Granted, it could be said that I can't find head or tails of what Jorjani is saying because he works within a methodological framework that's completely foreign to me, but I would argue that even the methodology employed in the book doesn't add up.
Basically, Jorjani wants to demonstrate how super- and paranormal phenomenon has excluded from scientific enquiry for bad reasons, and that subjecting such phenomenon to empirical studies would help develop the latent psychic potentials in humans.
That's all well and good, but it all falls apart, when all the studies that Jorjani can cite are made by known crackports, all of whom made studies that have either been debunked or nor been able to be replicated by their peers. But mostly Jorjani just rely on anecdotal evidence, taking the writing of holy texts and the statements made by individuals at face value.
If Jorjani wants to subject the super- and paranormal to scientific enquiry, then it also has to able to stand up to scrutiny within the methodology that Jorjani has picked. And I fear that when the super- and paranormal is subjected to a purely material analysis, then it will all fall apart. Just like it have until now.
There's also a weird trend with how Jorjani cites sources. With all the citations in the book, it's obvious that Jorjani wants Prometheus and Atlas to be taken serious as an academic work, but he then falters when he continuos to cite the same source ad nauseum for pages on end. This is the type of shit I would do in high school to pad out an essay. And even in high school I would be told off for doing so, as it basically amounts to rewriting the book or study you cite without adding original research.
That's also the problem that Jorjani runs into. For example, when he touches on the works of Percy Bysshe Shelley and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, it basically amounts to Jorjani just quoting books at the reader without connecting the quotes in any meaningful way. The second issue is that, when you rely on a single source for an extended periode of time, you don't do a proper critique of that source. When the source is just repeated, it by necessity has to be considered true.
In the book's subject matter, I also fear Jorjani has missed the mark entirely. The people interested in material science will already know that the book only portrays pseudoscience, and the people interested in the mystic or occult elements will have already disregarded empirical and material methodologies, rendering Jorjani's argument as irrelevant.
In that sense, Jorjani reminds me a lot of Julius Evola, an author who also made inquiries into the super- and paranoral (and an author who strangely enough isn't mentioned once in this book,) but who contrary to Jorjani tried to keep that study in a strictly occult methodological realm. Where Evola always falted was exactly when he tried to incorporate or reference materialsim in his works, and it seems like Jorjani hasn't learned anything from Evola's mistakes in that regard.
December 13, 2024
I’m a fan of Jorjani’s writing style and philosophical vigor, and while this book remains his critical darling, it’s probably my least favourite thus far. Largely because the center doesn’t hold and his thesis gets pulled in all directions with a kind of adhd following any and every thread of genuinely fascinating topics without staying dogmatic about what he’s trying to say. Still, the tangents touch upon every one of my favourite thinkers and artists and the joy of jumping from Dostoevsky to William James to Heidegger to the Book of Enoch is just too hard to pass up and be overly critical of the enterprise.
November 14, 2025
Extremely thought-provoking content and analysis of a number of topics that inform the learner of deep mysteries that exist on the very edge of reality, yet are real. I thoroughly enjoyed the book but I was left with an emptiness by the end due to being taken by the author to the depths of an abyss where a hidden truth lay yet I was abandoned in that darkness just as I reached the gate to the door of the great mystery. The book was very academic and loaded with fascinating facts and threads to pull on. I will definitely follow this author and read more of his works.
October 25, 2018
Excellent
October 10, 2019
Great book! Full of general knowledge~
March 30, 2021
Really helps to make sense of the world cultures in their origins and in their conflicts, but most important the destination that is upon us
September 17, 2023
The Best philosophy book written since Satre’s The Last Chance. Jorjani the only living philosopher is a true genius.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews