Good summary. Dennett's books are popular because he has done ordinary-language
philosophy like his adviser Ryle, as he writes in his chapter about his time in
Oxford. His main trick is to do sharp attacks on theories which he has
identified as false.
His "consciousness explained" book for example does not really explain it. Like
his mentor Gilbert Ryle he says what it is not. Ryle says there is no ghost in the
machine, Dennett argues there is no central self, no observer in the Cartesian theater.
His "freedom evolves" book is similar. He does not really explain how a free
will can emerge, he explains what it is not: it is not action under duress. Persons who
have free will are not forced to act like they do.
I guess Dennett's ordinary-language philosophy can also be found here at FRIAM
occasionally - one aspect I like about the group.
-J.
-------- Original message --------
From: Pieter Steenekamp <[email protected]>
Date: 1/13/25 9:02 AM (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] I've been thinking
I've always been drawn to the sharp mind of Daniel Dennett, and the idea of
diving into his autobiography feels like meeting an old friend for the first
time. As I've been on a bit of a biography kick lately, adding Dennett's
personal journey to my reading list just feels right.
I love the communal aspect of our local library, and I'm planning to see if
they can snag Dennett's autobiography for me. It's probably not on their
shelves, but the magic of inter-library loans could come through for me.
There's something special about the anticipation of waiting for a book you're
eager to read.
To brush up on Dennett's fascinating ideas, I asked Grok to give me the lowdown on his
thoughts about consciousness, free will, religion, and evolution. Here's what I learned.
(My Prompt was "please give me a comprehensive view on daniel dennitt's views on
consciousness, free will, religion and evolution"):
Daniel Dennett, a prominent philosopher, cognitive scientist, and writer, has
made significant contributions to discussions on consciousness, free will,
religion, and evolution. Here's a comprehensive overview of his views on each
of these topics:
Consciousness
Heterophenomenology: Dennett advocates for an approach he calls
"heterophenomenology," where one takes the subject's reports of their
consciousness at face value but then interprets these reports from a third-person
perspective. This method aims to be scientific and objective about subjective experiences.
Multiple Drafts Model: In his book "Consciousness Explained," Dennett proposes the "multiple
drafts" model of consciousness, where consciousness is not a single, central stream but rather the
result of numerous parallel processes in the brain. There is no single place where consciousness happens;
instead, different parts of the brain produce different "drafts" of what's going on, and we
experience consciousness as these drafts are distributed and revised.
Illusionism: Dennett is often classified as an illusionist about consciousness,
arguing that what we think of as phenomenal consciousness (the subjective,
qualitative aspect of experience) is an illusion or, more precisely, a
construct of cognitive processes. He believes that the hard problem of
consciousness is a pseudo-problem because once we understand the brain's
workings, we'll see there's nothing left to explain.
Free Will
Compatibilism: Dennett supports a form of compatibilism, where free will can
coexist with determinism. He argues that while our actions might be determined
by prior states of the universe, we can still be morally responsible for them
if our decisions are based on our desires, character, and rational deliberation.
"Freedom Evolves": In his book "Freedom Evolves," he suggests that free will
has evolved through natural selection, where organisms develop the ability to respond flexibly to
their environments. Free will, for Dennett, is about the ability to act according to one's own
reasons and motivations, not about transcending causality.
Religion
The Brights Movement: Dennett, along with Richard Dawkins and others, has been associated
with the "Brights" movement, an attempt to reframe atheists and agnostics with
a positive term.
Memes and Religion: He views religion through the lens of memetics, a theory where
cultural ideas (memes) propagate and evolve similarly to genes. In "Breaking the
Spell," he argues that religion should be studied scientifically, questioning why it
persists and how it affects human behavior.
Critical of Faith: Dennett is critical of religion's role in society, often
highlighting what he sees as irrational beliefs or the potential harm they can
cause. He advocates for a secular society based on reason and science, though
he does not discount the social benefits some religious practices might offer.
Evolution
Darwin's Dangerous Idea: His book by this name explores the implications of Darwin's
theory of evolution by natural selection, which he describes as a "universal
acid" that eats through just about every traditional concept, from biology to
philosophy.
Algorithimic View: Dennett emphasizes an algorithmic view of life where
evolution is seen as an algorithmic process - blind, automatic, and devoid of
foresight or design.
Critique of Intelligent Design: He has been a vocal critic of intelligent
design, arguing that it's not only scientifically unfounded but also
philosophically problematic, as it often appeals to a 'god of the gaps' for
explanations.
Dennett's work is characterized by its interdisciplinary approach, combining
insights from biology, philosophy, computer science, and cognitive science to
address complex questions about human nature and existence. His views often
provoke debate, particularly because of his willingness to challenge
traditional or intuitive understandings of these topics.
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 at 21:37, Jochen Fromm <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
The library finally has notified me that Daniel Dennett's autobiography "I've
been thinking" is ready to borrow. So I went to the library and got it. As expected
an interesting book. He writes about his time in Oxford and his mentor Gilbert Ryle, his
approach to philosophy and his little life hacks.
He explains for example how he used to stay awake in boring talks: he
waits until all characters of the alphabet subsequently appear in the talk and
then writes down the word. First he waits for a word containing A, then for a
word containing B, etc. If he reaches Z he starts again at A. He says J, Q und
Z would be rare...
As you know Daniel has written a number of fascinating books. Dennett's
law of philosophy for me is that for every big, fundamental question in
philosophy there is at least one Daniel Dennett book:
+ "Consciousnes Explained" (1991) about consciousness
+ "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" (1995) about evolution
+ "Freedom Evolves" (2003) about free will
+ "Breaking the spell" (2006) about religion
We have discussed all four questions here in FRIAM as well: consciousness,
evolution, free will and religion. The conclusions I came too (after many
discussions here and countless visits to the library) are:
+ For subjective consciousness humans have built tools to solve the "what it is
like to be" question of subjective consciousness. The tools are simply the cinemas
and movie theaters which show the stuff that Hollywood produces. Recently the GoPro
cameras which show what it is like to be a hero fulfill a similar purpose
+ Regarding the spell of religion we have built tools too. Churches,
mosques, synagogues and temples are places where the magic of religion is used
to form groups out of loosely coupled individuals. And the magic turns out to
be gene expression, as I tried to explain in the book from 5 years ago
+ For the question of free will we have invented tools too. Mainly language and
"to be or not to be" thinking of course, but as trivial as it may sound,
ordinary things such as notes and calendars help us to remember what we want to do,
thereby guiding our decision making
I have the feeling that the solutions to the biggest and most elusive
questions can be found in the most ordinary common things, hiding in plain
sight.Would you come to different conclusions in one of big questions after our
discussions here?
