Daniel Dennett

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Selected books)
(Books)
Line 28: Line 28:
  
 
==Books==
 
==Books==
 
 
He is probably best known for a number of books on the subjects of [[cognitive science]], [[psychology]] and [[philosophy of mind]], but also delves into Darwinism and religion. Some of his works include:
 
He is probably best known for a number of books on the subjects of [[cognitive science]], [[psychology]] and [[philosophy of mind]], but also delves into Darwinism and religion. Some of his works include:
  
 +
===Selected books===
 
* ''Consciousness Explained''
 
* ''Consciousness Explained''
 
:A book that... well... (looks at title) it explains consciousness. It is known among its detractors (and some supporters) in philosophy of mind by its nicknames ''Consciousness Explained Away''<ref>Anthony S. David. [http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/183/3/265.full#sec-2 Consciousness Explained?] ''British Journal of Psychiatry'', 183: 265-267, 2003</ref> or ''Consciousness Ignored''.<ref>Brian D. Earp. (2012) [http://oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp/Papers/1554456/I_cant_get_no_epistemic_satisfaction_Why_the_hard_problem_of_consciousness_entails_a_hard_problem_of_explanation I Can’t Get No (Epistemic) Satisfaction: Why the Hard Problem of Consciousness Entails a Hard Problem of Explanation.] In ''Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences''</ref>
 
:A book that... well... (looks at title) it explains consciousness. It is known among its detractors (and some supporters) in philosophy of mind by its nicknames ''Consciousness Explained Away''<ref>Anthony S. David. [http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/183/3/265.full#sec-2 Consciousness Explained?] ''British Journal of Psychiatry'', 183: 265-267, 2003</ref> or ''Consciousness Ignored''.<ref>Brian D. Earp. (2012) [http://oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp/Papers/1554456/I_cant_get_no_epistemic_satisfaction_Why_the_hard_problem_of_consciousness_entails_a_hard_problem_of_explanation I Can’t Get No (Epistemic) Satisfaction: Why the Hard Problem of Consciousness Entails a Hard Problem of Explanation.] In ''Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences''</ref>
 
* ''Darwin's Dangerous Idea''
 
* ''Darwin's Dangerous Idea''
 
:Describes the theory of evolution in terms of an algorithmic process and spends some time telling us that we shouldn't be upset or worried by this. Predictably, [[Stephen Jay Gould]] was not impressed.<ref>[http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/jun/12/darwinian-fundamentalism/?pagination=false Darwinian Fundamentalism] by [[Stephen Jay Gould]], with a [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/aug/14/darwinian-fundamentalism-an-exchange/?pagination=false reply by Dennett]</ref>
 
:Describes the theory of evolution in terms of an algorithmic process and spends some time telling us that we shouldn't be upset or worried by this. Predictably, [[Stephen Jay Gould]] was not impressed.<ref>[http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/jun/12/darwinian-fundamentalism/?pagination=false Darwinian Fundamentalism] by [[Stephen Jay Gould]], with a [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1997/aug/14/darwinian-fundamentalism-an-exchange/?pagination=false reply by Dennett]</ref>
 +
 +
===Other books===
 
* ''Breaking the Spell''
 
* ''Breaking the Spell''
 
:A challenge to religious types to analyse their beliefs in a sceptical manner.
 
:A challenge to religious types to analyse their beliefs in a sceptical manner.

Revision as of 17:19, 30 May 2012

I’m so optimistic that I expect to live to see the evaporation of the powerful mystique of religion. I think that in about twenty-five years almost all religions will have evolved into very different phenomena, so much so that in most quarters religion will no longer command the awe it does today.
[1]
Dr. Dennett's beard, seen here attached to the person named Daniel Dennett.

Daniel Clement Dennett is an American author and philosopher who has been compared to Bertrand Russell.[2] He is currently co-director at the Center for Cognitive Studies and teaches as Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University. He is a prominent atheist and a Bright.

Contents

Beliefs

Dennett’s beliefs are shaped by his self-directed studies of artificial intelligence, computer science, linguistics, neuroscience and psychology, as well has his formal training in philosophy. His writings emphasis the fact that religion is a natural and virtually inescapable result of the way the brain functions, and any idea of the "supernatural" is a result of evoultion and biology, not actual encounters with anything supernatural.

Dennett believes that the dogmatic religions of the present will be unable to withstand the onslaught of information that the internet provides and he expects religion to change more during the next decade than it changed over the last century [3]. Dennett expects religion will lose its mystique among most people during the next 10-25 years. [4]

Preachers who are not believers

One of Dennett's more interesting studies involved five Protestant preachers who no longer believe what their church teaches. They were interviewed; three were from liberal churches and two from churches that take the bible literally.[5][6][7] Yet all three of them chose to remain in the clergy, not beling qualified for similarly paid work elsewhere feeling there is still good work to be done.

Participants

  • "Jack" (real name withheld) - Jack's views come from a tradition of a literal reading of the bible. As he began to study, he found it unreasonable that an omnipotent and omniscient God could have created such a poorly thought out world. God’s son had to die for God's lack of forethought in design, and Christian believers should feel lifelong remorse that God's son was killed for such imperfection. Jack also feels parts of the Bible strain credulity[8]. As he studied, he also figured out that the moral message of the Bible is contradictory - violent in some places and sacrificially loving in others. Jack's final argument is that a God wanting to reveal himself would find an unquestionable way of doing this. Any divine message would be clear rather than in code that only linguists can interpret.

Two clergymen became atheists partly from reading authors Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens, both New Atheists.

  • "Adam" read God Is Not Great and finally saw the book was reasonable, though he had believed as a minister for years. There is, Adam feels, something wrong about a god who needed humans to say how magnificent he is. Adam is now convinced atheist arguments are stronger. Adam is in a conservative church and still works there because he has no other source of income but feels he is play acting.
  • “Wes” Methodist, believed literally in Adam and Eve on starting Christian further education but no longer believes in God except as some kind of poetic imagery. His congregation are quite liberal but do not know about his atheism. His fellow clergymen (also women?) do not believe in a literal resurrection of Jesus, a literal Virgin birth and the like.
  • “Rick” had stopped believing in God before he left college, he joined a very liberal church thinking he could not succeed in a traditional church. Rick does not believe in, “creedal stuff” like the incarnation of Christ or the necessity of salvation but stays a clergyman because he knows the types of people there. He preaches as if he believed but admits reluctantly that he is an atheist.
  • “Darryl” openly admits he stays in the clergy primarily to provide financially for his family.
  • “John” works for the Southern Baptists and originally saw Christianity as a religion of love. Reluctantly John became an atheist to avoid intellectual dishonesty but carries on his work because he cannot pay off everything and needs the money.

Books

He is probably best known for a number of books on the subjects of cognitive science, psychology and philosophy of mind, but also delves into Darwinism and religion. Some of his works include:

Selected books

  • Consciousness Explained
A book that... well... (looks at title) it explains consciousness. It is known among its detractors (and some supporters) in philosophy of mind by its nicknames Consciousness Explained Away[9] or Consciousness Ignored.[10]
  • Darwin's Dangerous Idea
Describes the theory of evolution in terms of an algorithmic process and spends some time telling us that we shouldn't be upset or worried by this. Predictably, Stephen Jay Gould was not impressed.[11]

Other books

  • Breaking the Spell
A challenge to religious types to analyse their beliefs in a sceptical manner.
  • The Mind's I: Fantasies and Reflections on Self and Soul, with D. R. Hofstadter (Bantam 1985)
  • The Intentional Stance (MIT Press 1989)
  • Consciousness Explained (Back Bay Books 1992)
  • Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life (Simon & Schuster 1996)
  • Freedom Evolves (Viking Press 2003).
  • Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon (Penguin Group 2006)

Debate

Recently, at a meeting of the American Philosophical Association, Dennett had a debate with Alvin Plantinga, where Plantinga presented the evolutionary argument against naturalism.[12]

Personal life

In 2006 Dennett suffered from an aortic dissection and was hospitalized for some time. Denette's blog, "The Edge"[13], explores this experience and what it meant to him as both an atheist and a philosopher of the human condition.

In popular culture

Eliezer Yudkowsky used Dennett as a character in his philosophical zombie movie.[14]

See also

External links

Footnotes

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support