Daniel Dennett: Freedom of information and toxic or non-toxic religions

[theocean1973]

Let's just hope, as Sam Harris said, that someone who says they believe in god in public "immediately pays a price in the ill-concealed laughter of other people" as someone would who thinks Elvis is still alive

[ashbash986]

this man impresses noone but himself.

[SkyDaddy7]

LOL! You comment is simple wishful thinking. There are tons of people who think like he does.

Religions are toxic and they train folks to believe in almost anything without proof...Look at FOX News and the crowd that thinks they are getting real news from that channel. These folks will buy in to anything FOX or Talk Radio says as long as it is pakaged with anti abortion & anti gay rhetoric. These weak minded religious folks are led to vote against their own economic well being!

[cmmantunes]

2012;THE END OF RELIGION/. AN ALTERNATIVE YES;MuSHROOM AND TA;K !!!

[jaybuddy5]

What are these truths he is talking about? The improbability of God? Science? I don't think the great philosopher Dan Dennet knows what truth is... And what authority does science have? It doesn't have authority over my mind the way it does his... Science as the lone self critical enterprise is a greater myth than the Greek Gods...

[theinquisitor]

"Science as the lone self critical enterprise is a greater myth than the Greek Gods"

Could you give an example of another method that is equally self-critical?

[jaybuddy5]

Yeah Religion. If religion wasn't self critical it wouldnt have changed in these thousands of years but it has. Every religion that has survived has been critical of itself and capable of growth and change. If even Christianity were not self critical, why would there be so many factions and denominations with almost fundamental differences?

[jaybuddy5]

not to mention Judaism which has changed significantly through eras, continues to attract adherents of all kinds, and has preserved a nation of people and a society.

[theinquisitor]

New religions do indeed spawn from old ones, but that's not due to self-criticism within the religious institutions. The parent religion also remains.

When Protestantism emerged, as a modified version of Catholicism, the Catholic church didn't listen to their ideas the way a scientific organisation would. They treated them as heretics and there were centuries of conflict.

This is nothing like science. Sciences tend to converge on conclusions, whereas religions diverge in all directions.

[theinquisitor]

Judaism, good example. How does Christianity respond to Jewish ideas about Jesus not being the messiah? They dismiss it because their dogma is that Jesus is the messiah.

How does Judaism respond to Christian claims that Jesus is the messiah? They dismiss it because that contradicts their dogma.

[CymroGoch]

@jaybuddy5 The only reason any religion has changed is due to people fighting against them.

[Owm109]

I, too, am curious about these other self-critical endeavors. Though I don't think the great philosopher jaybuddy knows what self-critical is.

See those dark symbols on a glowy background, which can be reproduced and read by a person damn near anywhere on the planet? Science's only authority is that it WORKS.

I won't suggest you change your views, nor stop using the tech that contradicts them...

But only because I find your hypocrisy to be hilarious and want it to continue.

[theinquisitor]

"I don't think the great philosopher jaybuddy knows what self-critical is"

I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he'll suprise us. I just wish people would back up their claims in the first place so I wouldn't need to keep asking them to as if it's not a basic requirement to a coherent argument.

And they never admit when you actually nail them, they just bugger off. It's all very unsatisfying. They could at least have the decency to admit when they've been utterly owned.

[jaybuddy5]

i wish people wouldnt disable comments for strange periods of time!!! weak haha!

[theinquisitor]

"i wish people wouldnt disable comments for strange periods of time!!! weak haha!"

What are you talking about? I never disable comments.

[Tineafa]

You can tell he's an optimist by his beard. A beard can say a lot about a person. He has a beard that tells me to trust him, because the words coming out from it sound generally correct and more or less exactly what I agree with.

[Hitchinian]

GO BEARDS!!!!

[Tineafa]

Bloody hell, you left that reply late :P

[brandonihidalgo892]

Dennett is kind of a pussy, compared to Hitchens and Harris.

[vanderbilt887]

He has more nuanced, and, in my opinion, more thoughtful, rational opinions. He never goes with overtly simplistic rhetoric.

[william629]

Lets just say he's not as aggresive.

[theinquisitor]

Even so, despite taking special efforts to not be offensive in his book "Breaking the Spell", many religious people still managed to take offence.

As he said in the "Four Horseman" video, the religions seem to have contrived to protect themselves by taking offence at even the slightest criticism. It's seeminlgy impossible to say "have you ever considered that you've wasted your life on a fantasy?" without giving offence.

[william629]

Don't get me wrong, I wish he was as flamboyant, and outspoken as Hichens and Harris because he has some very plausible, and achievable ideas on how to spread reason and expose religion.

[Tineafa]

It's just not his way to be over-the-top. I personally like it. At first I was a bit distracted by his beard, but after listening a bit further, this guy is perchance the most compelling voice I've heard in this whole religion debate.

[william629]

I just came from one of his lectures at Oakland University, MI. Very intriguing subject matter. I wish the whole world could've been there to hear him speak, everyone would've benefited!

[theinquisitor]

Excellent. Do you know if the event was recorded and might be available online at some point?

[william629]

I'm not certain, but some of the stuff he talked about can be viewed on the video, Dan Dennett: A secular, scientific, rebuttal to Rick Warren. It's on youtube.

[IceneBoudicca]

I'd like to see a debate with the wonderful Mr Dennett and the less wonderful Ms Palin!! Subject: what should and should not be taught in school. Sex education, creationism?

[MilesB1975]

What a great idea, that should take up about 2 or 3 minutes.

Can Sarah bring her teleprompter?

[paulbottomley42]

Never seen Dennet speak before, but suddenly I like him a great deal. :D

[chmsprg33]

Free me from Dennett's toxic delusions

[arbresistance]

Thank you for this video.

[diggingpitt]

I hate him and want to kill everyone at this Baspheeeming conference. Could a scientist help me build a bomb to blow the place up?!

My kids want to help but they don't know much since they were tied up in the basement all these years.

[theinquisitor]

Hehe, ignorance is the crime, but it is also the punishment.

[48acar19]

I really understand that biggots should be tied up in the basement, but why their children too?

Let their children mock the ignorance of their parents!

[diggingpitt]

See, they warned you that teaching math and chemistry whould lead to this!!! Ignorance was bliss at least for the pope and now it might be over and he'll ahve to get a real job.

[sebreathnach]

"Enforced ignorance" is a good phrase for what happens in my country. No social science is allowed to develop under the oppression of the RC Church... If young people kill each other for years in Limerick, the Bishop is consulted.. And you know what he says: "I believe in one Titus Flavius Caesar....."

[revtyson]

Thanks for video and links!

[swyft187]

it's all about education

"The only good is knowledge, and the only evil is ignorance." -Herodotus

[fluxfreq]

What a practical, lucid response to this controversy. Thank you Dan Dennet!!!

[dannywilkerson1]

"Oh my science!" i am getting - ratings

[dannywilkerson1]

I don't agree with Dennett. We should not advocate for "moderation". We should talk about ending religion. If we/you/me allow them any room, thats where they will hide. It's time we advocate for medication and deprogramming for those afflicted with god belief.

[theinquisitor]

You have no right to control the thoughts of other people with drugs just because you object to their ideas. That's even worse than what religions do. Are you just completely amoral? Don't you believe in freedom and liberty? No society ever prospered under totalitarianism. Not all destructive ideas are religious. Your idea is irrational, dangerous and shows now respect for humanity, just like a religion.

[dannywilkerson1]

hmm... guess you don't believe in stepping in when someone is a danger to themselves as well as others. The next 911 will be caused by people who "protect" the right to be deluded.

[theinquisitor]

I don't believe in thought crime no. I think we should be free to think whatever we want to. What gives you the right to tell me what I can do with my brain to the extent that you will summon police to take me away and have them inject me with drugs to force me to think the way you do? Even if this fascist system arose, how long do you think it would be before this power was abused to turn people into mindless drones? Think this through and be skeptical and scientific like an atheist should be.

[theinquisitor]

Also if enough people thought the way you did, and tried to implement it, the huge number of religious people who pretty much hate each other would all turn on you as a greater common threat to them all. If you don't give a fuck about morality or freedom then just realise that it simply won't work. What you propose is an all out war on freedom of thought and you will lose. I'd die before I let anyone take away my cognitive liberty.

[dannywilkerson1]

This is a war. It's a war against the irrational. If you stand by and do nothing, you enable them to do harm. Delusions should never be tolerated. You are fooling yourself if you think "god belief" isn't harmfull.

[theinquisitor]

Of course it's harmful. But you would cure the disease by killing the patient. All you'll do is replace religion with a far worse tyranny, where anyone can be silenced because the government decides they are irrational. You can't give a centralised authority that kind of power and expect them to not abuse it. You're deluding yourself if you think that people aren't going to abuse it.

[theinquisitor]

Ken Miller, a brilliant evolutionary biologist who defended evolution in the dover trial against the seriously dangerous nonsense intelligent design, is a god believing catholic. I suppose you'd have this productive and decent member of the scientific community hauled away and destroy his brilliant biologist mind with drugs. Let me tell you what is harmful, when people think they have the right to control the thoughts of others. You are just another religious zealot.

[theinquisitor]

The problem with religion is when it's practictioners think they have a right to control the minds of other people. They presume this because they think they have the creator of the universe talking to them. You however have the same arrogance, presumption and amorality of a religious extremist that makes you think you can control others, but you don't even have a crazy delusion as an excuse for your megalomania. Stop being what you hate.

[dannywilkerson1]

Evolution explains the mechanism for how life created through natural processes not magic. No god believer should be defending evolution LOL. They are compartmentalizing. I really appreciate your tolerance in letting me give a dissenting view about tolerance. p.s. "Stop being so damn respectful" -Dawkins

[theinquisitor]

Oh I'm all for being disrespectful. Ken Miller is indeed compartmentalising and it is stupid. The only reason he is able to do good science is because he keeps his god belief out of the laboratory. But the fact is he understands evolution better than we do, it's his job. The right to be disrespectful should include the right of religious people to believe and say whatever they want as long as they aren't threatening anyone.

[Swa6543]

As long as they are not only threatening anyone, but are not legislating their concept of morality on the population at large. When Christianity becomes as benign as astrology!

[theinquisitor]

Don't you think that we are winning the war of ideas anyway? The group that is growing faster than any religion is the non-religious. We have a lot of freedom of information on the internet, and because we have the truth on our side, we can win people over without force, we have the truth to offer them. Force and censorship are the tools of those who hate truth, not those who exalt it. Freedom of information will win the war of ideas.

[sebreathnach]

If you live in a religious country, you will know how difficult it is to create an environment of enlightenment... impossible!

[theinquisitor]

Then the country must be changed, or it will perish from it's own corruption. Enlightenment emerges naturally where there is freedom of information and expression. As long as such a country allows it's people to access the internet, there is hope. Propaganda can only work where information is restricted. The trend in developed countries is away from religion, especially in the younger generation. Enlightenment is inevitable as long as the infrastructure exists, it's only a matter of time.

[sebreathnach]

Time and hardword... but Atwill's book is an extraordinary assistance... A century after James Joyce left to 'forge the uncreated conscience of my race', there might be hope...just about!

[johnclavis]

Sam Harris has addressed this. He explains that we don't need laws making religion illegal, just like we don't need laws making it illegal to believe that Elvis is still alive. All we need are new cultural rules of conversation where you and I are as allowed to verbally criticize religion just as anyone today can criticize Elvis-believers. Get it? No war. Just a meeting of the minds, brother!

[dannywilkerson1]

meeting with the mindless more like it.

[olavka]

"He explains that we don't need laws making religion illegal"

Have you actually read "The End of faith"? Although he doesn't argue for making religion illegal - he does argue for the moral right to intervene both military and economically to physically prevent hostile world views before they grow strong enough to kill us.

This includes liberation of minds that do not want to be saved due to religious indoctrination, such as the Shiites in Irak.

[olavka]

Harris also asks the rethorical question of whether you would be comfortable with a president that believes a nuclear war will trigger the second coming of christ.

I'm utterly convinced that Mr. Harris will be advocating civil war if evangelical christians get political control.

But you are of course right that his main goal is that a society where we can criticize religion - for the sole purpose of eradicating it before it eradicates mankind.

[RATIONALMIND001]

@johnclavis Very well said. That is it exactly. It has always been considered impolite to criticize religion and it’s time for that to stop. I think all religions that believe in conceptual entities are somewhat toxic.

[daveinsd]

Godless communist.

Just kidding. Awesome interview. I wish I could be a lucid.

[takotheoktopus]

Science!

[treeman17]

Huh, I never thought of it like that...

[worldlystone]

Dennet is great!

Thanks!

[italianchappy]

This interview is great. Favorite. Even better than the already extraordinary ones I had listened by Dennet. The strategy Dennet is talking about is of utter importance.

[RabidApe]

first!

yay, new Dennett!

thanks!