Are all atheists 'downers' for religious people? For me watching videos of the late Daniel Dennett is a bit of a downer.
I have an old Think Free entry about him that is not very good. I never studied Dennett directly, only through videos, the odd book - that is, a few glances at some of his writing - and Wikipedia. It's like when you go into a store and see some shabby, third-rate goods on the table. You glance at them but don't study them too closely. Instead, you move on to inspect the good stuff that you actually might buy.
We only have so much time in life and must make certain investments in how to spend it. Dennett was not a great investment for me, so whatever I say is probably partly wrong or could be attacked by Dennett fans as such.
Still, I think I get the gist of his work. And I asked Google Gemini to combine my old entry with whatever it thinks I may have missed. But, of course, that's no guarantee that Gemini gets it right and I did have to tweak the final result a bit.
Part of the problem with studying and talking about Dennett is that he himself admitted that the terminology used in philosophy is problematic. One person means this... another person means that. Alleged understanding arguably comes down to interpretation, which ironically is what Dennett talks about with his notion of the "intentional stance."
I'm at a stage of life where I don't buy books anymore. I have no room at home and the local library's online content - and the internet in general - has become so much better over the years. Sure, I may grab the odd free book left by the entrance at my local Catholic parish and cram it in the home somewhere—but that's it. I don't even buy dollar table books anymore, which was my regular habit for many years.
From watching a Dennett video in the late 1990s after completing my PhD I recall him saying, "I don't buy books anymore. I use the library." That struck me and almost 30 years later, I'm doing the same. So we at least have that in common!
One point I find mildly interesting about Dennett is his view that consciousness arises from the "winner" of competing neurological processes. I don't agree with that. But it did make me think for a few moments (if only to begin to formulate why I disagree).
So with these preliminary words complete, here's the Gemini entry. It combines my old Think Free entry and "anything important I may have missed," which I asked Gemini to incorporate into a new entry.
Ironically, I think Dennett would have liked - or perhaps does like - what I'm doing here. He was fascinated with AI well before other thinkers took the bait. And the recent, rapid development of AI would likely have fascinated Dennett to the nth degree. He passed on - IMO not just died - last April 2024.
I don't mean to disrespect him or his loved ones by putting it that way. I simply believe it. And as a fellow philosopher of life, it would be a disservice to Dennett and myself to pretend otherwise.
A Critical Look at Daniel Dennett's Philosophy of Mind
By Michael Clark and Google GeminiDaniel Dennett, a prominent American philosopher and atheist, has made significant contributions to the philosophy of mind. Known for his use of metaphors, particularly from computer science, to explain complex mental phenomena, Dennett's work is both insightful and controversial.
Central to Dennett's philosophy are his ideas on the intentional stance, multiple drafts theory of consciousness, and free will. The intentional stance suggests that we 'understand' and predict the behavior of entities, including humans and animals, by attributing beliefs, desires, and intentions to them. The multiple drafts theory posits that consciousness isn't a single, unified experience but rather a collection of competing interpretations generated by different brain areas. Meanwhile, Dennett believes that while free will may be an illusion, we can still be held responsible for our actions due to our capacity for learning and making choices.
However, Dennett's work has not been without its critics. His materialistic approach to consciousness has been challenged by those who believe that subjective experiences cannot be fully explained by physical processes alone. Additionally, his views on free will have been criticized as undermining the notion of moral responsibility.
Dennett has also explored the implications of artificial intelligence (AI) for our understanding of consciousness. He argues that while AI systems may become increasingly sophisticated, they are unlikely to develop true consciousness due to the unique properties of biological brains.
Beyond his contributions to the philosophy of mind, Dennett's ideas have influenced research in cognitive science and neuroscience. His work on topics such as perception, memory, and decision-making has had a lasting impact on these fields.
Dennett's philosophy of mind offers a unique perspective on the nature of consciousness, free will, and the relationship between mind and body. While his work has been influential, it is important to consider the criticisms and limitations of his ideas.
Comments