George
Dan Dennett joins Bill Moyers on the Charlie Rose show to talk about his new book ‘Breaking the spell: Religion as a natural phenomenon’. Dennett is the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University. His other books include ‘Darwin’s Dangerous Idea’, ‘Freedom Evolves’, and ‘Consciousness Explained’.
Source
Charlie Rose: Dan Dennett – Breaking the Spell (Part 3 of 6)
take that fucking faith card off the table
We have been to willing to let the fundiefuckturds make the agenda.
The faith card should be completely OFF the table.
I think Moyers did a good job here of listening to Dennett and giving him breathing space to get his points across, while challenging him with the rebuttals of the religious.
@EBlue75, Stop it. Follow your reasoning mind.
ten THUMBS UP!
My bullshit-o-meter was going off when I was a child and broke free of church. A lot of folks didn't realize their innate morality and values were being co-opted by the controlling parasitism that infects Moyer's brain, and let it in. So, most folks are just like Moyers, who thinks his natural urges toward spirituality and value come from an external source, ie, his god, thus proving the improvable. Moyers loves the fallacy claiming atheists are looking for god in a test tube. What a moron.
So Breaking the Spell has been on my reading list for awhile, but I have been hesitating to start it (very long reading list) due to the fact that I thought I knew exactly what to expect for Dennett, but he has once again surprised me, positing a far rich account than what I had expected. I always get questions like those posed by Moyers, but obviously cant hold a candle to Dennett's responses.God (pardon my French… Habit) I really shouldnt be reading yet another book that is taking my time a
*away from my classwork
dan dennett would do well not to believe too thoroughly in what he says. the mind of man is created from nothing to acquire interests. god or no god, creation will never be explainable, nor will its reasons. where am I.. here. why am I here… ?
You know who Lucille is?
love the sugar analogy
this synch is waaay fucked up.
yea waaaaaaay off, like 20 secs off, lol
I don't question creation the same way I don't question a philharmonic orchestra playing Mozart. I don't have to see the conductor in front to know that the order and harmony wasn't possible without a conductor. God is the ultimate scientist, nothing is supernatural, science is just trying to understand God's rhythm. For an all powerful being, to move an atom miles away to cause a chaotic chain reaction that would produce new life is science at it’s best and the best symphony ever played.
Bill Moyers is really getting on my nerves here… Dan is brilliant, but I think Moyers is either putting on an act to appeal to his audience, or he really is that woo-woo credulous. I'm not sure which I dislike more.
Science vs religion is a false dichotomy. Mendel-father of Genetics, Lemaitre -physicist proponent of the BB, Copernicus, Ockham-Occam's razor, Mercally -creator of the earthquake scale, and over 200 scientists were Catholic priests. Many believers had embrace the scientific method to understand the world around us, and yet can discern there's a transcendent spirituality in all of us that science can't explain and only the knowledge of God and a relationship with Him can satisfy.Open your eyes.
"only a really small percentage of scientists TODAY is religious" not really. I am a scientist, and I had worked with dozens of other scientists that are also believers. The issue is that atheists scientists are the vocal ones. What I posted were scientists that were also priests, not only believers. There are millions of scientists believers, or do you think there are no scientists in Muslim countries? Science has the answers to scientific questions, but the God question isn't a scientific one.
The same way an electrician must understand electricity before peeling the wires, you should understand God before committing to question His existence. Understand the deep theological knowledge of the Christ teachings, the sacraments, the life and contributions of the saints, the meaning of existence, the history, God's revelation to all mankind, and then, integrate that knowledge. Only then you can be ready to get real answers to life's questions. God is alive in you, you're just quenching Him
So would you show the consideration before you would question the validity of the theory of evolution or cosmological development?
As someone who spent 30 years seeking god, even studying new testament Greek, I feel I gave a good effort in trying to understand god before realizing that atheism provided a more valid view of the universe.
Would you make the same effort to understand atheism?
I was a non-believer, I know how you feel, being there, done that. It doesn't matter how much you study, is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit which give you the answers. Being a scholar of the new testament or being able to quote each text by memory doesn't grant you any points. The Bible can't be interpreted literally, it has to be understood by the message it was trying to convey and that understanding is given by being in tune with the Holy Spirit and in the same wavelength of the Father…
A bit late but anyway. There are literal references in the bible. The physical ascension is corroborated by the empty tomb. This is not metaphorical or any special message. This was an account of the violation of physical laws. Resurrection as well as superman stunt. Since it was physical ascension, that implies heaven is a physical place. Which is up into space somewhere. How far away, did the body burn in the unprotected space? See how the first lies only spawns more difficult questions.
Moyers has that metaphysical "Please don't take away my binky!" concern going on there.