Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007

Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Brain -> Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/11/2009 6:11:15 PM)
I love this guy, Richard Dawkins and I hope to learn much more about him and read his books in the future. Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvJZQwy9dvE&feature=sub

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/12/2009 5:53:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain I love this guy, Richard Dawkins and I hope to learn much more about him and read his books in the future. Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvJZQwy9dvE&feature=sub I dont understand your Richard Dawkins comment. BTW, I would encourage that this lecture be watched not in the context of belief in god, but the belief in AGW. Dennett's strategic reasons for declaring a belief in god apply quite well to the religion of AGW.

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/12/2009 8:01:05 AM)
Most people learn about a guy and read his books before deciding to love them, but whatever floats your boat.

Fellow -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/12/2009 2:40:43 PM)
Dan Bennett makes a convincing case against organized religion. He does not make me an atheist though. The man assumes the World has been basically explained and he knows the truth. I do not. Not very long ago (considering the history of Earth) it was considered self-evident that Earth is in the center of the Universe. I remember an another fighting atheist Bill Maher making fun of the Heavens Gate only surviving member who called his body a vehicle (to carry the soul). Is it self evident (not needing serious investigation) that the Heavens Gate member is an idiot lunatic?

mnottertail -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/12/2009 2:42:23 PM)
well the tinfoil sorta gave it away. what sort of vehicle was he? a hummer?

Fellow -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/12/2009 3:50:46 PM)
Depends on social position: it could be Lamborghini or WW Rabbit.

GotSteel -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/13/2009 8:21:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow The man assumes the World has been basically explained and he knows the truth. False

Esinn -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/13/2009 8:45:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow The man assumes the World has been basically explained and he knows the truth. False Correct..... Dennett makes no such assumption. However, on the other hand. Theism makes no assumptions ever. They have believed the same ignorant lies for 2,000 plus years. They do not leave room for other opinions. If their religion was based on assumption it would be void. Although the facts of religion are absolutely incorrect, down right silly, often immature and misguided. For their faith to exist in their hearts no room for outside opinions, facts or truths exist - nor can they. This is one of the dangers of religion.

Esinn -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/13/2009 10:53:39 PM)
I just finished the video. It was rehash of stuff I already knew and understood. However, it was awesome.

Fellow -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/13/2009 11:19:08 PM)
quote: Correct..... Dennett makes no such assumption. Correct, he does not. I made such assumption about him and his friend based on the lecture. They are typical men of our time suffering under materialism euphoria. Bennett is also what I call a "naive evolutionist".

GotSteel -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 4:36:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow Bennett is also what I call a "naive evolutionist". [sm=rofl.gif] Let's hear you back that one up.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 6:29:16 PM)
Good speech but again I'm left wondering why the likes of Dennett even care what the rest of the world thinks or fears. If you don't believe in god then what greater freedom does that give you over someone that does and why the personal need to 'brighten' the dim? I think all they secretly want is to replace the authority of the church with the authority of their book sales. It matters little to me what other people believe as long as their beliefs don’t manifest in physical ways. When everyone stops believing in god what next for the atheist, next on the agenda? Atheists need people to believe in god just so they can have someone to tell they are wrong. They should not be beckoning forth a future where they'll be no need for themselves and the books they write. Would be a bit like me saying “I’m a dentist I hope everyone brushes their teeth and we in the future invent a way to grow new teeth to replace old ones.” Religious people do not suffer from their condition in the same way someone with a toothache does so why the need to free them from conscious or subconscious ignorance? I'd go further and say it gives them comfort obviously.

Brain -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 7:26:15 PM)
When I started the thread I was extremely tired and my mind was not thinking efficiently. I do love Dawkins but I meant the other guy. He was new to me but after listening to him I don't see much difference between either of them. Regardless, I'm not sure what you mean by AGW. Acronym Definition AGW Anthropogenic Global Warming AGW Anti-Global Warming AGW Access Gateway AGW Atmospheric Gravity Waves AGW Art Gallery of Windsor (Ontario, Canada) AGW All Going Well AGW Accelerated Global Warming AGW Actual Gold Weight AGW Application Gateway (telecom) AGW Alt.Games.Warbirds (forum) AGW A Girl's World (online magazine) AGW Actual Gross Weight AGW American Wire Gauge AGW Automatic Girth Welder AGW Autonomous Guided Weapon AGW Allowable Gross Weight AGW Anganwadi Worker (India) AGW Accident Generated Water http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/AGW

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 7:39:47 PM)
quote: Atheists need people to believe in god just so they can have someone to tell they are wrong. My question, for both sides, is "who cares what you believe...?" Honestly, I do share my belief structures with some folks, but I don't go hunting up opportunities to tell people what I believe and make them change what -they- believe to suit what I believe. The people that I talk to are either curious and ask, or already share similar philosophical and spiritual views as I do, so we sit around comparing notes. If someone is a theist, and that helps hir sleep at night, more power to hir. If another is non-theistic, and xhe is at peace with the choice, well, then, so be it. The theists can get together and talk about their theist theories, and the non-theists can talk about their non-theistic theories, and just leave one another the heck alone. DC

GotSteel -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 7:52:23 PM)
SL4, that slander doesn't at all reflect reality. For instance Dennett has a day job. Dennett is currently (April 2009) the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, University Professor, and Co-Director of the Center for Cognitive Studies (with Ray Jackendoff) at Tufts University. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett If atheism became moot point within our lifetime Dennett and Dawkins would still have plenty to do and plenty to write about.

dcnovice -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 7:55:36 PM)
quote: I'm left wondering why the likes of Dennett even care what the rest of the world thinks or fears. [image]http://oedipuslex.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/wtc-9-11.jpg[/image]

Brain -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 7:59:39 PM)
He wrote a 2006 best-selling book called The God Delusion so I'm not the only person who “loves” him. I think it takes balls to write a book with a title like that, especially with all the religious fanatics running around blowing themselves up.

Brain -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 8:05:08 PM)
I read what you said three times and I still do not know what you're talking about. quote: ORIGINAL: Fellow Dan Bennett makes a convincing case against organized religion. He does not make me an atheist though. The man assumes the World has been basically explained and he knows the truth. I do not. Not very long ago (considering the history of Earth) it was considered self-evident that Earth is in the center of the Universe. I remember an another fighting atheist Bill Maher making fun of the Heavens Gate only surviving member who called his body a vehicle (to carry the soul). Is it self evident (not needing serious investigation) that the Heavens Gate member is an idiot lunatic?

GotSteel -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 8:07:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW The theists can get together and talk about their theist theories, and the non-theists can talk about their non-theistic theories, and just leave one another the heck alone. That would be great, if the fundimentalists could keep their crazy to themselves instead of trying to affect politics and education you probably wouldn't be hearing from atheists much.

Fellow -> RE: Good Reasons for "Believing" in God - Dan Dennett, AAI 2007 (11/14/2009 8:22:11 PM)
quote: Let's hear you back that one up. Here are Dennett views from Wiki quote: In Consciousness Explained, Dennett's interest in the ability of evolution to explain some of the content-producing features of consciousness is already apparent, and this has since become an integral part of his program. He defends a theory known by some as Neural Darwinism. He also presents an argument against qualia; he argues that the concept is so confused that it cannot be put to any use or understood in any non-contradictory way, and therefore does not constitute a valid refutation of physicalism. Much of Dennett's work since the 1990s has been concerned with fleshing out his previous ideas by addressing the same topics from an evolutionary standpoint, from what distinguishes human minds from animal minds (Kinds of Minds), to how free will is compatible with a naturalist view of the world (Freedom Evolves). In his 2006 book, Breaking the Spell, Dennett attempts to subject religious belief to the same treatment, explaining possible evolutionary reasons for the phenomenon of religious adherence. I call it "naive evolutionism" (extending evolutionary thinking everywhere, even into areas where there is very little room for it). Nobody knows how neural processes and thoughts are connected. The whole thing is purely speculative as natural sciences are concerned. He derives lot of his ideas from linguistics. The last seem to be his original graduate training.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875