Comments on: Dan Dennett as a Model for Philosophy http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/ Reimagining the Future of Faith Fri, 23 Dec 2011 23:43:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: solve quick tasks earn $$ http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-296 solve quick tasks earn $$ Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:38:44 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-296 Just have bookmarked your blog, and waiting for the next interesting post Just have bookmarked your blog, and waiting for the next interesting post

]]> By: Will Ingraham http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-82 Will Ingraham Sat, 05 Dec 2009 12:09:49 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-82 Jheri's post reminds me of Paul Tillich and The Courage to Be. In that small book Tillich creates a hallowed space for those of us who doubt. Paraphrasing from memory (because I gave my copy to a friend), Tillich says that it is the faith that we hold in spite of doubt that allows us to transcend the confines of "religion" in our existential condition. This shifts the debate away from philosophy and into the realm of theology, I suppose, but perhaps that is where Jheri is headed anyway. Philip, thank you for your enlightening work on this subject. I look forward to getting to know it better now that I have discovered this site. - Will Ingraham Jheri’s post reminds me of Paul Tillich and The Courage to Be. In that small book Tillich creates a hallowed space for those of us who doubt. Paraphrasing from memory (because I gave my copy to a friend), Tillich says that it is the faith that we hold in spite of doubt that allows us to transcend the confines of “religion” in our existential condition. This shifts the debate away from philosophy and into the realm of theology, I suppose, but perhaps that is where Jheri is headed anyway.

Philip, thank you for your enlightening work on this subject. I look forward to getting to know it better now that I have discovered this site.

- Will Ingraham

]]> By: Jheri Cravens http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-78 Jheri Cravens Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:09:15 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-78 Thank you, Philip. Jheri Thank you, Philip.

Jheri

]]> By: Philip Clayton http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-77 Philip Clayton Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:32:16 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-77 Eduardo, I'd like to hear more -- I can't tell whether you're saying that Dan Dennett and I are both just preaching to converts... Jheri, that's a beautiful post. You honor the questions like few others do. I would think that the attitude you bring is more deeply philosophical than what one finds in most of the publications of most of the "professional" philosophers. Would that our actual dialogue could correspond to the standards you set! -- Philip Eduardo, I’d like to hear more — I can’t tell whether you’re saying that Dan Dennett and I are both just preaching to converts…

Jheri, that’s a beautiful post. You honor the questions like few others do. I would think that the attitude you bring is more deeply philosophical than what one finds in most of the publications of most of the “professional” philosophers. Would that our actual dialogue could correspond to the standards you set!

– Philip

]]> By: Jheri Cravens http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-76 Jheri Cravens Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:16:58 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-76 Reading the paper on Dennet's page, I couldn't help thinking about our President and how he kept the high road all through his presidential campaign, no matter what other folks did. Dennet's comments, laced with ridicule and a lack of respect for the minds and thoughts and ideas of others, certainly do not facilitate communication; rather they are a dead stop. After all, who wants to talk seriously to someone who is making fun of her or him, his or her colleagues and the entire basis of her or his thought? All day long, every day, I find myself deeply confused by the notion of God and, frankly, I don't know what to believe. But I think that I won't find out what to believe by listening to Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and their followers. Having gone to emotional hell and back myself while trying to figure out the God-thing, I can tell you pretty certainly that it does no good to deny that the question exists. I prefer my confusion over telling myself a lie -- which is what I would have to do to say either that there is or there is not a God. I just don't know and it is the deepest question of my life -- and, I suspect, of the life of any human whose thoughts go below the surface of things. We know already that things are definitely and absolutely NOT as they appear. It just boggles my mind that anyone has the arrogance to deny the existence of God as though such a denial were an established fact. (I don't say the same about those who affirm God's existence because I think they may know something I don't.) I can't help believing that folks who deny God do so to avoid the hell I went through trying to figure it out. (It isn't just whether God is or isn't; the answer to that question holds a few implications for one's entire life and existence.) At first I intended to post this on Dawkins' page -- but in order to do that, I would have to become a "member" -- which would officially associate me with Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennet, and others there, and I just couldn't do it. Besides which, I think I may be writing my own theology here -- and those guys would laugh at me. Reading the paper on Dennet’s page, I couldn’t help thinking about our President and how he kept the high road all through his presidential campaign, no matter what other folks did. Dennet’s comments, laced with ridicule and a lack of respect for the minds and thoughts and ideas of others, certainly do not facilitate communication; rather they are a dead stop. After all, who wants to talk seriously to someone who is making fun of her or him, his or her colleagues and the entire basis of her or his thought?

All day long, every day, I find myself deeply confused by the notion of God and, frankly, I don’t know what to believe. But I think that I won’t find out what to believe by listening to Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and their followers. Having gone to emotional hell and back myself while trying to figure out the God-thing, I can tell you pretty certainly that it does no good to deny that the question exists. I prefer my confusion over telling myself a lie — which is what I would have to do to say either that there is or there is not a God. I just don’t know and it is the deepest question of my life — and, I suspect, of the life of any human whose thoughts go below the surface of things. We know already that things are definitely and absolutely NOT as they appear. It just boggles my mind that anyone has the arrogance to deny the existence of God as though such a denial were an established fact. (I don’t say the same about those who affirm God’s existence because I think they may know something I don’t.) I can’t help believing that folks who deny God do so to avoid the hell I went through trying to figure it out. (It isn’t just whether God is or isn’t; the answer to that question holds a few implications for one’s entire life and existence.)

At first I intended to post this on Dawkins’ page — but in order to do that, I would have to become a “member” — which would officially associate me with Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennet, and others there, and I just couldn’t do it. Besides which, I think I may be writing my own theology here — and those guys would laugh at me.

]]> By: Paul http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-74 Paul Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:41:22 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-74 Reading Dennet's response frustrated me. It clearly seems that the neo-atheists do not want to dialogue, but instead ridicule and characterize theologians. Ignorance is bliss. Reading Dennet’s response frustrated me. It clearly seems that the neo-atheists do not want to dialogue, but instead ridicule and characterize theologians. Ignorance is bliss.

]]> By: rodney neill http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-49 rodney neill Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:53:41 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-49 I glanced at Dan Dennetts letter and the comments - the sneering smug tone is what saddened me but par for the course from new atheists Rodney I glanced at Dan Dennetts letter and the comments – the sneering smug tone is what saddened me but par for the course from new atheists

Rodney

]]> By: Eduardo Cruz http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Eduardo Cruz Sun, 12 Jul 2009 13:53:35 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-48 What to say? Both sides preach to the convert, one in a sarcastic way, the other in a kind and argumentative manner. Two possible ways out: first, to be able to make the audience laugh at some of their catch phrases, using even catchier ones. I am afraid, however, that this is a rare gift. More democratic, I suppose, is the other alternative: to grab as many convertees as possible. "Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." What to say? Both sides preach to the convert, one in a sarcastic way, the other in a kind and argumentative manner. Two possible ways out: first, to be able to make the audience laugh at some of their catch phrases, using even catchier ones. I am afraid, however, that this is a rare gift. More democratic, I suppose, is the other alternative: to grab as many convertees as possible. “Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.”

]]> By: Michael Fugate http://philipclayton.net/2009/07/09/dan-dennett-as-a-model-for-philosophy/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Michael Fugate Sat, 11 Jul 2009 05:21:52 +0000 http://clayton.ctr4process.org/?p=146#comment-47 I would be interested in the paper, but cannot get link to open. Could you list the questions on your blog? I would be interested in the paper, but cannot get link to open. Could you list the questions on your blog?

]]>