News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

The New Atheist Movement is Dead

Started by CrucifyCindy, October 12, 2015, 06:43:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

peacewithoutgod

Quote from: Baruch on November 08, 2015, 10:35:14 PM
I have always liked ...

"There was a crooked man, and he walked a crooked mile.
He found a crooked sixpence upon a crooked stile.
He bought a crooked cat, which caught a crooked mouse,
And they all lived together in a little crooked house."

I must admit that since I've stopped expecting anything different from you, you tend to make me laugh more often than not!
There are two types of ideas: fact and non-fact. Ideas which are not falsifiable are non-fact, therefore please don't insist your fantasies of supernatural beings are in any way factual.

Doctrine = not to be questioned = not to be proven = not fact. When you declare your doctrine fact, you lie.

facebook164


Quote from: Baruch on November 08, 2015, 10:32:47 PM
Dennett's metaphysics seems to me to be reworked classic gnosticism from 2000 years ago. 
Eh? Give example or point me to something that explaines that thought.

Quote from: Baruch on November 08, 2015, 10:32:47 PM
Not very original.  Searle may concentrate on language studies ... but he has those down tight as a drum.  The Chinese Room is a classic thought experiment.
and the chinese room is just ruins. Searle is one of the most dishonest philosophers i know. Dennett, on the other hand, on of the most intellectually honest.

Baruch

#167
Quote from: facebook164 on November 09, 2015, 02:24:37 AM
Eh? Give example or point me to something that explaines that thought.
and the chinese room is just ruins. Searle is one of the most dishonest philosophers i know. Dennett, on the other hand, on of the most intellectually honest.

Curious.  How could one know this ... do you like ... know them personally?

Short description of Dennett's psychology ...

Chain of intentional causality bridging the personal to the mechanistic (common sense human level to atomic level).
Until we complete working out the chain, people assume a homunculus at the core ... anthropomorphism.
From level to level there is indeterminacy that provides the creativity necessary for the will.
So this is a kind of epi-phenomenalism, but in layers, like a cake where each level is a different flavor.

So basically we are robots, who are able to simulate being human, but who actually are not human.
Ancient mythology talked of Talos, the giant bronze robot, powered by ichor (Greek for woo woo) who protected the island of Crete, thanks to Daedalus, the builder of the labyrinth and feather/wax wings for flight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxA3wFYxUB8

Claymation strikes back!
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: peacewithoutgod on November 08, 2015, 11:07:02 PM
I must admit that since I've stopped expecting anything different from you, you tend to make me laugh more often than not!

Yes, I only quote old English nursery rhymes.  Wonder why?  Context is your friend ;-)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

facebook164


Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2015, 06:23:18 AM
Curious.  How could one know this ... do you like ... know them personally?
No, that is obvious from their writings.


Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2015, 06:23:18 AM
Short description of Dennett's psychology ...

Chain of intentional causality bridging the personal to the mechanistic (common sense human level to atomic level).
Until we complete working out the chain, people assume a homunculus at the core ... anthropomorphism.
From level to level there is indeterminacy that provides the creativity necessary for the will.
So this is a kind of epi-phenomenalism, but in layers, like a cake where each level is a different flavor.

So basically we are robots, who are able to simulate being human, but who actually are not human.
Ancient mythology talked of Talos, the giant bronze robot, powered by ichor (Greek for woo woo) who protected the island of Crete, thanks to Daedalus, the builder of the labyrinth and feather/wax wings for flight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxA3wFYxUB8

Claymation strikes back!
i dont recognize anything that follows after the first sentence as even remotely Dennett. can you please separate what you believe Dennett say from your comments?
Dennett does not talk about a homunculus.

missingnocchi

Quote from: facebook164 on November 09, 2015, 07:10:42 AMi dont recognize anything that follows after the first sentence as even remotely Dennett. can you please separate what you believe Dennett say from your comments?
Dennett does not talk about a homunculus.
He actually talks about it quite a bit in his critiques of the Cartesian Theater, which is a term he himself coined to describe the idea that what you see is just an image of the world created by your brain, not the real world. Have you really read Dennett? Here's a video where he alludes to the theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evn_hiE8PDs&ab_channel=BigThink

And here's the wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_theater
What's a "Leppo?"

facebook164

We are talking about Dennetts own view. "cartesian theater" and "homonuculus" is not part of his model. he mentions these concept when critiquing OTHER models. There are some very good citations from Conciousness explained on the talkside of that wikipedian article you referenced.

missingnocchi

Quote from: facebook164 on November 09, 2015, 09:23:16 AM
We are talking about Dennetts own view. "cartesian theater" and "homonuculus" is not part of his model. he mentions these concept when critiquing OTHER models. There are some very good citations from Conciousness explained on the talkside of that wikipedian article you referenced.
Yes, I know he says it to critique... that's why I said they are part of his "critiques of the Cartesian Theater." Nonetheless, he coined both terms in their use in philosophy of mind, and Baruch used them correctly. He said "Until we complete working out the chain, people assume a homunculus at the core," which is precisely Dennett's view on the matter - a homunculus is essentially a place-filling theory people resort to in order to explain the functions of mind for which scientists haven't gotten around to a physical explanation. It's not his theory of mind, but his theory of misunderstanding of mind.
What's a "Leppo?"

facebook164

#173
Quote from: missingnocchi on November 09, 2015, 09:34:12 AM. It's not his theory of mind, but his theory of misunderstanding of mind.
And thus not relevant.

now: let Baruch answer how Dennetts philosophy is gnosticism and why that is relevant.

peacewithoutgod

#174
Quote from: Baruch on November 09, 2015, 06:23:18 AM
Curious.  How could one know this ... do you like ... know them personally?

You need to look up "fallacious arguments" and study them - knowing them is how you detect intellectual dishonesty.

Factual honesty is a different game, it can be corroborated (or not when absent).

Personal honesty - how does that apply here? I don't think it really does. Dennett could have all the personal integrity with wife and friends as Cthulu, who he unfortunately bears increasing resemblance to as he ages, but I would not see that changing the soundness of his observations, nor the quality of the facts which he bases them on.
There are two types of ideas: fact and non-fact. Ideas which are not falsifiable are non-fact, therefore please don't insist your fantasies of supernatural beings are in any way factual.

Doctrine = not to be questioned = not to be proven = not fact. When you declare your doctrine fact, you lie.

missingnocchi

Quote from: facebook164 on November 09, 2015, 09:44:29 AM
And thus not relevant.

now: let Baruch answer how Dennetts philosophy is gnosticism and why that is relevant.

Not relevant? It's part of Dennett's thought. I think you're just mad you got called out not knowing about a major theory of his.
What's a "Leppo?"

facebook164


Quote from: missingnocchi on November 09, 2015, 12:41:35 PM
Not relevant? It's part of Dennett's thought. I think you're just mad you got called out not knowing about a major theory of his.


I asked why Baruch thinks that Dennett is a gnosticist. Almost everything following that post is a derail.

Baruch

I got the Dennett summary from a professional philosopher assessing his views.  Missingnocchi brilliantly noticed that it is a part of his meta-theory of intention, not his theory ... thus his "not-this" ... that helps define "this".  I find both relevant, in defining a thinker.  That and his views may have changed over time.  I will oblige at a later time, as far as gnosticism goes.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Brian37

Where do you get the idea the atheist movement is dead? That is a load of crap. Maybe you don't like some of the tactics some spotlight atheists use, but we are not dead one lick. There are tons of atheist groups and they are not going away.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers." Obama
Poetry By Brian37 Like my poetry on Facebook Under BrianJames Rational Poet and also at twitter under Brianrrs37

missingnocchi

Quote from: Brian37 on November 09, 2015, 02:21:31 PM
Where do you get the idea the atheist movement is dead? That is a load of crap. Maybe you don't like some of the tactics some spotlight atheists use, but we are not dead one lick. There are tons of atheist groups and they are not going away.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism
What's a "Leppo?"