Daniel Dennett Philosopher Engagement Paper

1
Surname 1
Daniel Dennett Philosopher Engagement Paper
Student Name Professor Name Course
Date
2
Surname 2
Outline 1. Introduction 2. Philosophers
Stands on the Main Questions of Metaphysics,
Epistemology, and Ethics 3. Differences
between Daniel Dennett from our Christianity 4.
Ways in which Daniel Dennett's View is
susceptible to a Christian Critique 5.
Representation of a Challenge from Daniel
Dennett's view to Christianity 6. What would
you say to this person Daniel Dennett? 7.
Conclusion
3
Surname 3
Daniel Dennett Philosopher Engagement
Paper Daniel Dennett is a philosopher and
cognitive scientist. He is a Professor of
Philosophy at Tufts University and is known for
his contributions to the field of philosophy of
mind and philosophy of science. Dennett advocates
that human consciousness can be explained in
terms of brain functioning. He has written
extensively on consciousness, free will, and the
evolution of human cognition (Wallgren 32). He is
also known for his criticism of certain forms of
mysticism and religious belief and his defense of
the compatibility of science and religion.
Dennett is a prominent figure in philosophy and
cognitive science. His work has influenced
contemporary debates about the nature of
consciousness and the relationship between the
mind and brain. Therefore, this paper will quote
and describe the main questions that Daniel
Dennett explains in relation to metaphysics,
epistemology, and ethics and how he explains the
concepts of religion and Christianity. Metaphysics
Daniel Dennett is a philosopher who has
significantly contributed to metaphysics,
epistemology, and ethics. In metaphysics, Dennett
is known for his work on the nature of
consciousness and the mind. He is a proponent of
the view known as eliminative materialism,
which holds that the traditional concept of the
mind as a nonphysical entity is incorrect and
should be replaced with a more scientific
understanding of the mind as a set of physical
processes in the brain. One of the main questions
of metaphysics is the nature of reality and the
relationship between mind and matter. Dennett is
a materialist, which means that he believes that
the physical world is the ultimate reality and
that mental states and processes can be explained
in terms of the brain's activities. He rejects
dualism, the view that mind and matter are
separate and distinct. He
4
Surname 4
argues that mental phenomena can be fully
explained by the interactions of physical
processes in the brain (Wallgren 38). Dennett
also challenges traditional notions of free will
and responsibility, arguing that these concepts
are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of
the mind and the way it operates. He suggests
that free will is an illusion and that our
actions and behaviors result from complex,
unconscious processes beyond our control. In his
work in the field of metaphysics, Dennett also
grapples with the question of consciousness,
which he sees as a complex, emergent property of
the brain rather than a fundamental aspect of
reality. He argues that consciousness is a
product of how we think about and describe our
mental states rather than a thing in and of
itself (Piacente 290). Overall, Dennett's work is
characterized by a commitment to a naturalistic
and scientific approach to philosophical
questions and a skepticism toward traditional
metaphysical concepts that he sees as problematic
or untenable. Epistemology Daniel Dennett has
made significant contributions to epistemology,
the study of knowledge and how it is acquired.
Dennett focuses on what he calls the
"epistemological question," or the question of
how we know that we know (Piacente 297). He
believes this question is key to understanding
the nature of knowledge and its relationship to
reality. Dennett's approach to epistemology is
grounded in the belief that the mind is a natural
phenomenon and can be studied using the same
methods used to study other natural phenomena.
One of Dennett's main questions to epistemology
is his concept of the "intentional stance," which
is the idea that we can understand the behavior
of specific systems, including other people, by
attributing mental states to them and predicting
their behavior based on those mental states
(Wallgren 40). Dennett
5
Surname 5
argues that this approach is helpful because it
allows us to make predictions about the behavior
of complex systems in a more reliable way than
other methods. Dennett also believes that truth
is relative and that there is no absolute truth.
He argues that our understanding of the world is
constantly evolving and that our beliefs about
the world should be revised as new information
becomes available (Piacente 290). Therefore,
Dennett stands for the naturalistic approach to
epistemology and the idea that our understanding
of the world is constantly evolving and subject
to revision based on new evidence. He also
advocates for the use of the intentional stance
as a way to understand and predict the behavior
of complex systems. The philosopher argues that
people's knowledge is fallible and that they
should be open to revising and updating it as new
evidence becomes available. He also emphasizes
the importance of examining the sources and
contexts of our beliefs and considering how they
are shaped by social, cultural, and historical
factors (Wallgren 40). Dennett is particularly
interested in how people's minds and brains
represent and process information. He has
developed influential theories about the nature
of consciousness, the evolution of the mind, and
the role of language in shaping our thoughts and
actions. He also strongly advocates using
scientific methods and evidence in pursuing
knowledge. He has argued against various forms of
skepticism and relativism that challenge the
possibility of objective truth. Ethics In his
work on ethics, Dennett is a consequentialist,
which means that an action's rightness or
wrongness should be judged based on its
consequences. He argues that the ultimate goal of
ethics is to promote the well-being of sentient
beings and that this can be achieved through
reason and evidence to determine the most
effective means of achieving that goal.
6
Surname 6
Dennett is also a supporter of moral realism,
which is the view that moral truths exist
independently of our beliefs or attitudes about
them (Wallgren 54). He argues that moral truths
are not arbitrary or subjective but are based on
the facts of the world and the nature of human
beings. Dennett argued that ethical systems are
based on social conventions and cultural
practices rather than universal moral truths. He
has also argued that moral dilemmas and
disagreements often result from different
cultural traditions and values rather than a lack
of moral knowledge or understanding. One of
Dennett's most influential contributions to the
field of ethics is his concept of the
"intentional stance," which is the idea that
people can predict and understand the behavior of
others by attributing mental states, such as
beliefs and desires to them. According to
Dennett, this allows us to make moral judgments
about the actions of others and to hold them
responsible for their actions (Wallgren 57).
Therefore, Dennett is a consequentialist and a
moral realist who believes that the ultimate goal
of ethics is to promote the well-being of
sentient beings and that this can be achieved
through reason and evidence. He also argues that
the intentional stance is an essential tool for
understanding and evaluating the actions of
others. Daniel Dennett, in a Christian
worldview Differences between Daniel Dennett from
our Christianity Daniel Dennett is known for his
critique of traditional views of consciousness
and free will. Dennett is an atheist and has been
critical of some aspects of traditional
Christianity. One of the main differences between
Dennett and Christianity is that Dennett does not
believe in the existence of God or a supernatural
realm (Tellez and Urrea). He is a naturalist,
meaning that all phenomena can be explained
through natural causes and processes. In
contrast, Christianity is a
7
Surname 7
monotheistic religion that believes in the
existence of a single, all-powerful deity who
created the universe and continues to be involved
in the affairs of humanity. Dennett did not
believe in the concept of the new and the old
testament of the bible. For instance, he wrote
that "the God of the Old Testament is not a
figure to be taken seriously (Tellez and Urrea)."
He also says that Christians should not expect
their faith to impact their daily lives, because
it's not like they will get more money or fewer
headaches just because they believe in Jesus. He
also claims that "there are no miracles" in
Christianity because he believes miracles are
impossible due to the laws of nature (Tellez and
Urrea). In contrast, Dennett believes there are
metaphysical truths about reality however, these
truths are not based on religion but on
scientific evidence. Another difference is that
Dennett does not believe in the concept of free
will as it is traditionally understood. He argues
that our actions and decisions are determined by
a combination of genetic and environmental
factors and that the concept of free will is an
illusion. In contrast, many Christian traditions
view free will as a central aspect of human
nature. They believe individuals can choose right
and wrong and act on their moral responsibility
(Tellez and Urrea). Overall, Dennett's views on
the nature of consciousness, the existence of
God, and free will differ significantly from
traditional Christian beliefs. Ways in which
Daniel Dennett's View is susceptible to a
Christian Critique Dennett's approach can indeed
be critiqued from the perspective of religion.
His approach to philosophical issues is often
considered naturalistic and materialistic, which
means that he believes that mental phenomena can
be explained in terms of the physical processes
in the brain. This view is sometimes at odds with
some Christian beliefs, which hold that the mind
and consciousness are distinct from the physical
body and are the domain of the soul or spirit.
8
Surname 8
One area where Dennett's approach might be
particularly susceptible to a Christian critique
is in his view of free will. Dennett argues that
free will is a kind of illusion that arises from
how people think about themselves and their
actions. In his book "Breaking the Spell
Religion as a Natural Phenomenon," he explains
that because we are so strongly biologically
programmed to believe in free will, we need to
find other ways to explain human behavior (Tellez
and Urrea). He contends that the physical
processes ultimately determine our choices and
actions in our brains and bodies and that we do
not have the ultimate control over our actions
that we often assume we do. For instance, he
argues that there is no need to believe in God
because we have science and reason. This is a
fairly common argument among atheists, but it is
not without problems. This view is at odds with
some Christian beliefs about free will, which
hold that humans can make genuinely free choices
and are not determined by external
factors. Another area where Dennett's approach
might be seen as susceptible to a Christian
critique is his view of the nature of
consciousness. Dennett argues that consciousness
is a kind of illusion that arises from how our
brains process and represent information and that
there is no fundamental difference between
conscious and unconscious processes (Tellez and
Urrea). This view is sometimes seen as
incompatible with specific Christian beliefs
about the nature of the soul or spirit, which
hold that the mind or consciousness is a
nonphysical entity that exists independently of
the body. It is worth noting, however, that
Dennett's views are not necessarily incompatible
with all Christian beliefs and that different
Christian traditions and interpretations of the
faith may have different opinions on these
issues. It is also essential to recognize that
Dennett's views are based on his interpretations
of the available scientific and philosophical
evidence and that all philosophers or scientists
do not necessarily accept his views.
9
Surname 9
In addition, Dennett's view suggests religion
does not exist. There is no such thing as a soul,
God, or even an afterlife. Instead, he says,
religion is just a kind of social group-think
that people develop when they grow up in groups
like families or tribes (Tellez and Urrea). When
people first encounter other people with
different beliefs, they cannot understand how
someone could think differently than they do, so
they must be wrong somehow. Therefore, they
invent something called "God" so that when
someone else comes along who thinks differently
than them, they can accuse them of being wrong
again without having to admit their ignorance
about. Representation of a Challenge from Daniel
Dennett's view to Christianity Dennett's work on
religion is a challenge to Christianity because
he has a very different view of what the world's
religious traditions mean. He thinks the idea
that there is an objective truth about the world,
which we can all agree on, is a kind of illusion.
He also feels that our attempts to understand
people's religions are doomed to failure because
they are based on an effort to find commonalities
between different traditions and cultures. In his
writings and public lectures, Dennett has often
challenged traditional religious beliefs,
including those of Christianity (Tellez and
Urrea). One way in which Dennett's views may be
seen as a challenge to Christianity is through
his naturalistic approach to understanding the
world and human experience. Dennett is a
proponent of the idea that natural causes can
explain the universe and all its phenomena
without recourse to supernatural or divine
intervention. This approach is in contrast to
many religious traditions, including
Christianity, which posit the existence of a
deity or deities who play a role in the workings
of the world. Another way in which Dennett's
views may be seen as a challenge to Christianity
is through his critique of religious beliefs and
practices. Dennett has argued that many religious
beliefs and practices are the results of
evolution and cultural conditioning rather than
being based
10
Surname 10
on any objective truth or divine revelation
(Tellez and Urrea). He has also argued that
religious beliefs can be harmful and contribute
to social conflicts and injustices. These views
may be challenging to Christian believers who
view their faith as a source of truth and moral
guidance. It is important to note that Dennett's
views are just one perspective, and many other
philosophers and theologians may disagree with
his ideas. It is also worth noting that Dennett's
views are not necessarily representative of all
non-religious or naturalistic perspectives. What
would you say to this person Daniel
Dennett? Daniel Dennett's approach to the Bible
is similar to mine he believes it is a
collection of stories, not a set of rules.
However, I do not think most people understand
the Bible as a historical document or a story.
They see it as a set of rules we tend to focus on
in the church. But I think the first thing we
need to do when reading the Bible is to look at
it as an account of God's life on Earth what
happened, why it happened, and how it changed
things. Dennett believes that these stories can
be used to teach us important lessons, but they
are not meant to be followed literally. I also
think we can learn from the Bible without taking
it directly. The Old Testament contains many
stories that are difficult to understand today,
but they are still relevant because they teach us
about our history and culture at the time they
were written. The New Testament also contains
stories about historical events that happened
thousands of years ago, but they teach important
lessons about how we should live our lives today.
The Bible does have some rules for its followers,
like not eating pork or wearing mixed fabrics,
but those rules do not mean people should follow
them literally (Tellez and Urrea). If people read
the Bible as a story instead of a set of rules or
commandments, they will see how different
cultures have interpreted or adapted these rules
over time depending on their religious
beliefs or moral values.
11
Surname 11
Conclusion Dennett's views on metaphysics,
epistemology, and ethics are shaped by his
naturalistic and evolutionary perspective, and he
argues for a reductionist and realist approach to
these philosophical questions. Dennett is a
materialist in metaphysics, meaning he thinks
physical stuff is the ultimate reality and that
everything in mind can be described in terms of
how the brain works. Contrast this with dualism,
which holds that the mind and body are entirely
distinct. Dennett holds that human cognition and
modes of knowing have developed through natural
selection. Like the beaver's dam-building talents
or the peacock's tail feathers, he believes that
our mental abilities and processes deserve to be
studied similarly. Dennett is called a "moral
realist," which means he thinks there's such a
thing as objectively genuine moral ideals and
principles that it wouldn't be fair to dismiss as
a question of taste or cultural relativism. He
also holds the utilitarian view that the best
course of action is the one that results in the
most significant amount of happiness or
well-being for the most crucial number of
people. Dennett rejects the idea that God or the
supernatural exists, one of the significant
schisms between himself and Christians. Since he
is a naturalist, he thinks everything must have a
natural explanation. Dennett's view of free will
is one area that could be particularly vulnerable
to a Christian critique. According to Dennett,
our conception of agency and choice is flawed,
rendering the idea of free will an illusion.
Dennett's outlook on the nature of consciousness
is another potential target for Christian
criticism. Dennett's naturalistic worldview and
interpretation of human experience may be
interpreted as a threat to Christianity.
12
Surname 12
Works Cited Piacente, Albert. "Philosophical
Posthumanism and Intentionality." Journal of
Posthumanism, vol. 2, no. 3, 2022, pp.
287-301. Tellez, Alberto Ramirez, and Wilson
Hernando Soto Urrea. "Religion explained? Debate
regarding the concept of religion as a "natural
phenomenon" in Daniel Dennett's perspective."
Scientia etFides, vol. 8, no.1, 2020. Wallgren,
Thomas. "Mind and Moral Matter." Moral
Foundations of Philosophy of Mind. Palgrave
Macmillan, Cham, 2019, pp. 31-83.