Dan Dennett's response to Rick Warren

Philosopher Dan Dennett calls for religion -- all religion -- to be taught in schools, so we can understand its nature as a natural phenomenon. Then he takes on The Purpose-Driven Life, disputing its claim that, to be moral, one must deny evolution.

One of our most important living philosophers, Dan Dennett is best known for his provocative and controversial arguments that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes in the brain. He argues that the brain's computational circuitry fools us into thinking we know more than we do, and that what we call consciousness — isn't.

This mind-shifting perspective on the mind itself has distinguished Dennett's career as a philosopher and cognitive scientist. And while the philosophy community has never quite known what to make of Dennett (he defies easy categorization, and refuses to affiliate himself with accepted schools of thought), his computational approach to understanding the brain has made him, as Edge's John Brockman writes, "the philosopher of choice of the AI community."

"It's tempting to say that Dennett has never met a robot he didn't like, and that what he likes most about them is that they are philosophical experiments," Harry Blume wrote in the Atlantic Monthly in 1998. "To the question of whether machines can attain high-order intelligence, Dennett makes this provocative answer: 'The best reason for believing that robots might some day become conscious is that we human beings are conscious, and we are a sort of robot ourselves.'"

In recent years, Dennett has become outspoken in his atheism, and his 2006 book Breaking the Spell calls for religion to be studied through the scientific lens of evolutionary biology. Dennett regards religion as a natural -- rather than supernatural -- phenomenon, and urges schools to break the taboo against empirical examination of religion. He argues that religion's influence over human behavior is precisely what makes gaining a rational understanding of it so necessary: "If we don't understand religion, we're going to miss our chance to improve the world in the 21st century."

A prolific writer, Dennett's landmark books include The Mind's I, co-edited with Douglas Hofstedter, Consciousness Explained, and Darwin's Dangerous Idea.

TED Talks

Original can be viewed here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/dan_dennett_s_response_to_rick_warren.html

Distributed under creative commons license:
http://www.ted.com/pages/195

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• DanDennett
• 2006

[bowhunter928]

why would you even upload this? i have no stance on this subject except for all it is going to cause is a massive arguement.

[ZuluFightrunner]

@bowhunter928 Damn my foolishness for not knowing in advance that you would have "no stance" on the subject. I will consult you in the future as to which videos I should upload that you will have a stance on, and ignore every other one of my subs to accommodate you.

[noonej]

Dennett has a brilliant mind. It's sad to me that we're currently at a point in history where he is having to use his brainpower to contemplate such asinine things as Christianity, Islam, and Rick Warren. I guess once the "housecleaning" is done and these things are swept into the dustbin of history, THEN intellectuals can get to work on new ideas and discoveries.

[HumanSayNo]

Dear Santa.....thanx very much for doing this talk in your spare time. Did you enjoy the mince pies and brandy, Ethel and I left for you? See you again on the 25th!

[sbagg88]

@womanofgod56 You're right, you can't have something "designed" by natural selection. That's not how natural selection works. Natural selection merely chooses those characteristics that are most likely to allow a given organism to reproduce. There is no design, even though it appears that there is one.

[Shareefllovekdj]

Ha the state own my children hunh? Total mind control.

[volound]

@womanofgod56 i hate to have to say it, but this comment reeks of having an owner who didnt even watch the very video on which it is posted.

[therugburnz]

neither dennett or warren offended me but i did disagree with one more than the other. i'm glad i was given the opportunity to see a talk that might have offended me. i would be happy to see the SARHA SILVERMAN talk that offended someone i do not know enough to not post it so i could be offended directly. offensive as her talk could be i bet it was Designed to be Entertaining!

[informatist]

I want to preface my only criticism of this TED Talk by saying that I whole-heartedly agree with Dennett. Now, on to the point that his great ideas need the benefit of a charismatic presentation... It is no longer enough to be smart in this world (and it could even count against you). That is a cruel plot twist in our evolution that nobody saw coming... Who could have guessed that in the end, you would have to be Sarah Palin, "Beauty Pageant Runner-up", to get your great ideas out there?

[Songbird804]

@womanofgod56 To quote Dennett "The process itself [evolution by natural selection] is without purpose, without foresight, without design [as you define it, with a designer]"

Listen closer.

"The design is there in nature but its not in anybodys head. It doesnt have to be. Thats the way evolution works."

advancement of life happens on its own, with out intelligent guidence becuase its either evolve and improve your survivability or die. Which would you choose?