A week ago, Big Think released this video feaÂturÂing philosoÂpher Daniel DenÂnett talkÂing about the four biggest ideas in phiÂlosÂoÂphy. Today, we learned that he passed away at age 82. The New York Times obitÂuÂary for DenÂnett reads: “EspousÂing his ideas in best sellÂers, he insistÂed that reliÂgion was an illuÂsion, free will was a fanÂtaÂsy and evoÂluÂtion could only be explained by natÂurÂal selecÂtion.” “Mr. DenÂnett comÂbined a wide range of knowlÂedge with an easy, often playÂful writÂing style to reach a lay pubÂlic, avoidÂing the impenÂeÂtraÂble conÂcepts and turgid prose of many othÂer conÂtemÂpoÂrary philosoÂphers. Beyond his more than 20 books and scores of essays, his writÂings even made their way into the theÂater and onto the conÂcert stage.”
Above, DenÂnett, a long-time phiÂlosÂoÂphy proÂfesÂsor at Tufts UniÂverÂsiÂty, outÂlines the “four eras he evolved through on his own jourÂney as a philosoÂpher: clasÂsiÂcal phiÂlosÂoÂphy, evoÂluÂtionÂary theÂoÂry, memetÂic theÂoÂry, and the intenÂtionÂal stance. Each stage added depth to his perÂspecÂtive and underÂstandÂing… Dennett’s key takeÂaway is a request for philosoÂphers to reevalÂuÂate their methodÂoloÂgies, urgÂing modÂern-day thinkers to embrace the insights offered by new sciÂenÂtifÂic disÂcovÂerÂies. By comÂbinÂing the exisÂtenÂtial and theÂoÂretÂiÂcal viewÂpoints of philosoÂphers with the anaÂlytÂiÂcal and eviÂdenÂtial perÂspecÂtive of sciÂenÂtists, we can begin to fulÂly and accuÂrateÂly interÂpret the world around us.”
To help you delve a litÂtle deepÂer into Daniel DenÂnetÂt’s world, we’ve also postÂed below a vinÂtage TED video where the philosoÂpher disÂcussÂes the illuÂsion of conÂsciousÂness. We would also encourÂage you to explore the DenÂnett items in the RelatÂeds below.
RelatÂed ConÂtent
Daniel DenÂnett Presents SevÂen Tools For CritÂiÂcal ThinkÂing
How to Argue With KindÂness and Care: 4 Rules from PhilosoÂpher Daniel DenÂnett
Daniel DenÂnett and CorÂnel West Decode the PhiÂlosÂoÂphy of The Matrix
PhiÂlosÂoÂphy thoughts are incomÂpatÂiÂble with othÂers conÂcepts, when we have no words for our satÂisÂfacÂtion and the sitÂuÂaÂtion we worÂried what to do at the time we looks such knowlÂedge and we are sure we can find out the soluÂtion, but now it’s not posÂsiÂble, thou I think it’s venise and mateÂrÂiÂal matÂter covering,as a human being we should be accept phiÂlosÂoÂphy and this is a good deciÂsion by the real realÂisÂing perÂson, and their opinÂions we nevÂer denied and we sure,we can able to get results
I am an artist, very earÂly on I realÂized that I an dealÂing with illuÂsions, whether it is about after image or that colour can conÂjure up a smell! So Mr. DenÂnet’s talk did not go anyÂwhere near far enough for me. In my research, in order to underÂstand how I can make illuÂsions and how I conÂjure up images in my brain it has been fun workÂing out how our the brain does it. How it is done is a no brainÂer! No MagÂic! UnforÂtuÂnateÂly the lecÂture did not delve in to mechÂaÂnisms of recogÂniÂtion and awareÂness. Of course we all hear that realÂiÂty is difÂferÂent for each one of us. But the reedÂuÂcaÂtion and develÂopÂment of our realÂiÂties is on going, but why? So many interÂestÂing avenues. HapÂpy huntÂing.
The idea that we need techÂnolÂoÂgy to alert us to techÂnolÂoÂgy feedÂing us falseÂhoods is so cirÂcuÂlar — and then, on top of that, to state that we then need laws in order to preÂvent this expeÂriÂence of being preÂsentÂed with counÂterÂfeit info just pushÂes us even furÂther into the jaws of govÂernÂment babysitÂting. There are sociÂeties that are much more secure in their grasp of their own menÂtal malÂleabilÂiÂty, that they have learned, startÂing at a very young age, how to meet the chalÂlenges of those (and “that” in the case of non-human info-seedÂers) who would incorÂrectÂly inform them. That’s the real test. Bring back some of the oldÂer eduÂcaÂtion modÂels and begin lookÂing toward the future adding new modÂels.