RIP Dan Dennett


Daniel Dennett seated against black background in blue shirt, bowtie and dark jacket
photo source: arstechnica


Daniel C. Dennett was a philosopher of enormous influence and stature, held in the highest regard by philosophers and scientists alike. His work played a huge role in shaping my own philosophical ideas on a to number of topics: from free will (where I still agree with the thrust of his arguments) to the philosophy of mind (where I’ve eventually come to reject his approach). Right or wrong, he was a powerful and inspiring communicator, a luminescent voice of insight and curiosity. 

Apart from any particular philosophical ideas, his work has also had a huge impact on my approach to how philosophy should be practiced. Unlike the vast number of academic philosophers, he wrote with a devotion to the pleasure of *reading*. He criticized philosophers for writing for the pleasure of *writing*, as if getting their ideas on paper were an end in itself. He wrote with personality and wit, recognizing that philosophical investigation is a fully human experience.

I recommend his book “Consciousness Explained” to anyone with any interest at all in philosophy. It is a stirring and exciting look into the philosophy of mind. It’s not that Dennett was right about consciousness. It’s that he brings so much life to the topic, and integrates so much good science and sense, that you are bound to leave the book a bit smarter than you were when you started reading it.

My heart goes out to his family and friends, and to everyone else touched by his genius.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Argument For Compatibilism

Compatibilism is the idea that there is no conflict between determinism and free will.  Incompatibilism is the idea that free will cannot exist in a deterministic universe.  There's been a lot of discussion over which view is correct.  What's remarkable about the debate isn't so much the stubbornness or passion which has been exhibited by this or that party, but the fact that the very terms of the debate are controversial.  There is a great deal of confusion about what the key issues in the debate are and how we should be talking about them.  As a result, there is a meta-debate within the debate itself.  You cannot engage in the debate without also engaging in a debate about the debate--about what issues are at stake and about how the issues should be framed.  So here's what I want to do:  I want to explain why I think incompatibilists are doing a very bad job of framing the debate, and also why compatibilism is the most reasonable option on the t...
Read more

Sam Harris and the Moral Realism/Moral Relativism Myth

There is a popular misconception that, if you are not a moral realist, you are a moral relativist. Yet, most non-theistic professional philosophers may be neither. As I'll explain, I prefer a variety of anti-realism called moral noncognitivism. First, I want to discuss the moral realism/moral relativism myth. Moral realists believe in objective truths about right and wrong, whereas moral relativists believe that moral truths are subjective, or limited by the beliefs and values of particular communities and cultures. Moral relativists are people who say, for example, that genital mutilation isn't absolutely or universally wrong--it's just wrong for some people. Moral realists respond, "No, genital mutilation really is [or, perhaps, really isn't] wrong, for all people and all times--all things being equal." This is usually how the issue is framed in popular culture, particularly in debates over atheism and the role of religion in society. It is not uncommo...
Read more

Luke Skywalker and Rey: Comparing Character Arcs

My second viewing of The Force Awakens only reinforced my admiration.  I'm very impressed by Rey as a character, and so I want to respond to the prevalent criticism that she does not have a satisfying character arc.  I think she stands up better than many people think.  To prove it, let's compare her arc to Luke's in the original Star Wars, Episode 4: A New Hope.   Luke and Rey each have two inner conflicts dealing with the themes of loyalty and trust, but in Rey's case, the conflicts converge and are developed in a more dramatic and I think satisfying way. At the start of Episode IV: A New Hope , Luke wants to be loyal to his aunt and uncle, but also wants to follow his own dreams.  This is his first inner conflict.  His dreams are somewhat vague at first: He wants to get off Tatooine, join the academy, be heroic, etc.  When Ben Kenobi tells him his father was a Jedi Knight killed by Darth Vader, his motivation becomes more focused: He wants to joi...
Read more