Dennett vs McGrath - Part 2 of 9

This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.
The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.
Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett

Alister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.

In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath

Category:

Education

Tags:

• debate
• God
• religion
• atheism
• atheist
• meme
• Christian
• Breaking
• the
• Spell
• Daniel
• Dennett
• Alister
• McGrath

[BionicDance]

"Live Free or Die"

...

"Famous Potatoes"

[Chiangmai007]

Incorrect. E.g. the apostle Paul, who was having Christians put to death, gave up his power to follow Christ upon his encounter with God. Christianity forbids greed & teaches stewardship of talents and resources. But, yes, there are those who have used Christianity to selfish ends and with much deception. Jesus and the apostles warned about these "wolves in sheeps' clothing." Check out the "The Sure Route to Madness" by Larry Crabb in Conversations Journal page 9. Its free.

[MrWildbill20056]

Comparing evolution by natural selection to ideas (memetics by any other name) has been so thoroughly rejected by the scientific community, in general, that this whole line of argument should simply be ignored.

[matthewjhaywood]

@seanhall2006

Babbling is just Dennetts style- he's not as concise as a Dawkins.

[seanhall2006]

@matthewjhaywood

A really great debate wasn't it?

[seanhall2006]

@matthewjhaywood

When I posted that comment I felt that Dennett was babbling and not getting to the point, although I wouldn't feel so much like that now. You were right to correct me on that

[confusedmatthew]

@matthewjhaywood So then its like a parasite or anything else that has something which helps it survive. Why then are we calling it a parasite? Why not say its like a symbiot or just a replicating organism? This is whats wrong with the analogy; everything that propagates its self has something that helps it to survive. Calling it a parasite is simply arbitrary.

[matthewjhaywood]

@confusedmatthew

You missed the point of the analogy. The thing that is "good" for an idea is anything which helps it survive- like a parasite. In this sense, it may be a useful analogy.

[matthewjhaywood]

@seanhall2006

Instead of just claiming he doesn't have anything relevant to say, why not respond to the argument he's making with a counter-argument. Otherwise, there's not much point in you commenting.

[seanhall2006]

These athiests really don't make very good points Dennet is a philosopher you'd think he'd have something relevant to say

[gregormann7]

Pausing at 3:15 to insert an observation. One would expect there to be many points of conceptual agreement, such as 'submission to God', between a genuine revelation of God, and its inevitable counterfeits. The points of agreement are not nearly so important, and tell us far less about which one (if any) is actually true, as are the points of distinction.