Following my debate with Daniel Dennett, several atheists described Dennett's performance as "pathetic." If you want to see if they are right, you can watch the debate here. The term "pathetic," however, can be used in more than one sense. The Pathetic Fallacy (also called the Anthropomorphic Fallacy) is a term of art that refers to the error of attributing human qualities to inanimate objects. A brilliant recent book argues that this fallacy lies at the heart of the work of thinkers like Daniel Dennett.
Reading Dennett and others, you get the impression that science has demonstrated the material foundations of the human mind. Indeed we as humans are nothing more than atoms and molecules, and our self-conception is a kind of illusion generated by the neurons firing in our heads. Ultimately it is to evolution that we must turn, in Dennett's view, to understand who we are and how we function.
But in Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience, Maxwell Bennett and Peter Hacker challenge this materialist understanding as promoted by Dennett and others. Bennett is a leading neuroscientist at the University of Sydney. He also directs the Brain and Mind Research Institute. Reviewing the state of scientific knowledge about the brain, Bennett concludes that the notion that science currently has "major insights into the workings of the synaptic networks in any part of the brain" is both "misplaced" and the product of "hubris." According to Bennett, who knows what he is talking about, Dennett and other non-scientists are portraying science as having figured out things that science is a very long way from figuring out.
Peter Hacker, an Oxford philosopher who is considered the world's leading authority on Wittgenstein, takes Dennett and like-minded writers to task for attributing to an inanimate object, namely the brain, qualities that are properly assigned to human beings like you and me. Hacker cites Dennett as claiming that brains are conscious and gather information and make simplifying assumptions and use supporting information and arrive at conclusions. Hacker argues that this is a classic case of the pathetic fallacy.
In Hacker's view, brains aren't conscious; we are conscious. Brains don't gather or use information; human beings do. Brains don't draw conclusions; you and I do. Of course we use our brains to perceive and reason, just as we use our hands and feet to play tennis. But it is just as absurd to say that my hands and feet are playing tennis as it is to say that my racket is playing tennis. By the same token it is wrong to portray the brain as perceiving, thinking or even being aware of anything.
If it is humans that possess the qualities that Dennett and others attribute to the brain, it follows that the brain is an inanimate object, like the pancreas. We as human beings function with and through the operation of these devices, but it hardly follows that we are "nothing more" than the sum total of them. Materialism--the doctrine that reduces man to his material makeup--is revealed not as a necessary conclusion of modern science but rather as as atheist dogma masquerading as science.
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
Daniel Dennett's Pathetic Fallacy
Posted Jan 7th 2008 12:02AM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Science, Christianity, Controversy, Atheism
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
- Hereafter on Cho Seung-Hui's Plays
- Jerry Brown on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
- Ryan Anderson on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- andreawalker419 on Breastfeeding an Eight-Year-Old?
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- Meat for Public Schools Often Rejected by Fast Food Chains
- Salahis Subpoenaed To Appear Before Panel Probing Party Crashing
- Will George Stephanopoulos Go Better With My Omelet?
- $1 Billion Spent on Political Ads in '09
- In a Political Popularity Contest, Hillary Clinton Wins
- Tiger Woods' Transgressions and the Gender Split
- Jimmy Carter's Grandson Runs for Office in Georgia
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 59)
31. Linda,
"Do you pray to Jesus with that mouth?"
Can I use that line? It's probably gonna get me killed by an angry mob someday, but can I?
Mokele-Mbembe at 10:00AM on Jan 7th 2008
32. I see D'Souza's contribution to this debate like a bat boy running onto the field of a major league game and trash talking the away team.
If my brain is just a tool that "I" (whatever that is) use to "perceive and reason", just as my hands, feet, and racket are just tools that "I" use to play tennis, then it follows that I may replace these tools and still retain my identity.
If I am more than the sum of my parts and I replace all my parts (particularly my brain), there must be something about me that remains unchanged. What is that?
"brains aren't conscious; we are conscious" Then what are "we"? D'Souza is abusing his identity terms - "we", "you and I", and "human beings".
Poking holes in a D'Souza blog post should be homework for Intro. to Philosophy students. It's certainly more fun than the assignments I remember doing.
eddroid at 10:06AM on Jan 7th 2008
33. Could D'Dopey BE any more wrong in his premise?
"Anthropomorphic fallacy" refers to INANIMATE OBJECTS. The organs of the human body are NOT INANIMATE (thanks for the def., aba)
I will grant you that psychologists like to talk about the 'gestalt' of the whole being larger than the sum of the parts. Perhap THAT is what D'dingdong is trying to say.
It's fair to say that the brain could not function by itself (1962 scifi movie, notwithstanding). But any 3rd grader knows that.
I suppose DD'dingbat thinks that the soul resides in cardiac muscle? Or his "agape"?
----------------------------------------
"Dennett and other non-scientists are portraying science as having figured out things that science is a very long way from figuring out."
-------------------------------------
HARDLY. They are describing that which has been discovered about the neurological system.
MEANWHILE, there is still no proof of any supernatural entity (i.e.soul) in the body.
Linda at 10:08AM on Jan 7th 2008
34. "Where does the shit go when you die?
monty at 7:55AM on Jan 7th 2008"
Depends...if you're hanging by a noose at the gallows, it goes into your boots.
Sorry, Linda, had to do it...it was THERE...my sense of humor DEMANDS that I respond to crap like this. Pun intended!
brandon at 10:11AM on Jan 7th 2008
35. Mokele: OF COURSE you can. Call me if you need some muscle.
brandon: LMAO: I love it. "goes into your boots)
Reminds me that many people die on the toilet, taking a crap (vagus response).
BY THE WAY, D'Sleezeball: The brain is ALWAYS studied with the entire neurological systems; they are inseperable. That includes all five senses.
Sorry, there is no 6th sense.
(Unless you are talking about your spider sense tingling) (No wait, that's touch)
Linda at 10:16AM on Jan 7th 2008
36. Wouldn't a more accurate example of an anthropomorphic fallacy be seeing the face of Jesus on a piece of toast or seeing Mary in the bark of a tree or even seeing god while studying quantum mechanics?
a born atheist at 10:16AM on Jan 7th 2008
37. eddroid,
"Poking holes in a D'Souza blog post should be homework for Intro to Philosophy students."
God (or no God), I would have LOVED that!
Mokele-Mbembe at 10:18AM on Jan 7th 2008
38. Daniel Dennett's Pathetic Fallacy? Close, but the pathetic DD here is really D'Idiot.
Brains are storage facillities. Damage or remove a segmant of the brain and everything changes. Ascribing this as "athesist dogma" is typical God-Nazi hubris. D'Idiot's usually conspiracy theory gibberish notwitstanding, using the rhetorical concept that the brain is 'inamimate' (news for you, Stanford dimwit - an inanimate brain or pancreas only exists in a corpse) is just ignorant.
Tim at 10:27AM on Jan 7th 2008
39. The boot thing reminded me of parental absentee excusal notes:
Please excuse Tommy for being absent yesterday. He had diarrhea and his boots leak.
Please excuse Ray Friday from school. He has very loose vowels.
Irving was absent yesterday because he missed his bust.
Please excuse Jimmy for being. It was his father's fault.
Please excuse Jennifer for missing school yesterday. We forgot to get the Sunday paper off the porch, and when we found it Monday, we thought it was Sunday.
Sally won't be in school a week from Friday. We have to attend her funeral.
My daughter was absent yesterday because she was tired. She spent a weekend with the Marines.
Please excuse Jason for being absent yesterday. He had a cold and could not breed well.
Please excuse Mary for being absent yesterday. She was in bed with gramps.
Gloria was absent yesterday as she was having a gangover.
Please excuse Burma, she has been sick and under the doctor.
Please excuse Roland from P.E. for a few days. Yesterday he fell out of a tree and misplaced his hip.
John has been absent because he had two teeth taken out of his face.
Carlos was absent yesterday because he was playing football. He was hurt in the growing part.
My son is under a doctor's care and should not take P.E. today. Please execute him.
Please excuse Lisa for being absent. She was sick and I had her shot.
Dear School: Please ekscuse John being absent on Jan. 28, 29, 30, 31,32, and also 33.
Mokele-Mbembe at 10:25AM on Jan 7th 2008
40. JSL, I appreciate your response...there are different views on what happens when one dies...1. the idea that when one dies, he/shes automatically goes to heaven or hell 2. the idea that ones soul sleeps 3. the idea that nothing happens at all...our health will one day give way to reveal the truth of everything...
Bridget at 10:27AM on Jan 7th 2008
41. Mr D'Souza,
What would suppose facilitates our ability to draw conclussions? If not the brain, what?
A persons hands and feet do, indeed play tennis, along with many ANIMATE body parts. Yes the brain also helps, athletics being 90% mental and 30% physycal and all( to paraphrase Yogi)
I am reminded of a quote by Thomas Jefferson( father of the constitution, remember)...."Question with boldness even the very existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of a blindfoldded fear."
I think what Mr Jefferson was saying there is use your BRAIN.
mac65 at 10:30AM on Jan 7th 2008
42. Lmao, Moke. Good stuff!
a born atheist at 10:36AM on Jan 7th 2008
43. ATHEIST
Reply to: 12. I see today, and yesterday, you address the people you answer as, "Atheist", which is what they are... but not who they are... They have a name at the bottom of their post.
I address you as William, because that is who you are, not what you are. Ron
___________
Dear Ron,
I've explained this before. Many times, when I'm reading a post, I can't tell whether the person is a Christian, or speaking out against the insanity of Christianity.
So, at the top of each post, I clearly LABEL my position. I am speaking as an ATHEIST. My post is arguing on behalf of the ATHEIST position.
______________
Reply to: Atheism is not a religion, it just means you do not beleive in something. Ron.
__________
That's the same MISTAKE that Dinesh makes.
There is no Central Committee for Atheism. There is no Rule Book
Atheism is a matter of individual opinion.
MANY Atheists share a belief that the scientific evidence has PROVEN, conclusively, that a "God" as defined by Christianity does NOT exist.
At times, yes, I do consider "Atheism" to be a religion. If I'm asked for "Religion" on a document, I write down "Atheist." When I'm sworn in as a witness in court, I always caution the judge that I will NOT take an oath that includes "so help me God." And they have to change the oath to accomodate my religious belief.
Dinesh makes a silly mistake in almost every post. He's a Catholic, so it's expected. They live in a silly Imaginary World where their Pope is infallible on matters of doctrine. I've seen the guy. He's not infallible on matters of anything. The Popes are drawn from a small pool of idiots who are willing to take a vow never to have sex with a woman in order to serve God, and the Bible clearly says God doesn't want that.
Dinesh is actually an Agnostic, but still writes under the disguise of "Catholic" in order to sell books and collect grant money. I'm not that dishonest, or greedy.
_______
Reply to: history proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the entire new testament was taken from the Egyptians 3000 yrs befor Christ
________
Actually, no. The "almah" - slash - "virgin" prophecy was based on a mistranslation of a word in the Septuagint, and that dates much later.
William Hays at 10:38AM on Jan 7th 2008
44. atheist,
they will always pass on being christian because they are blind fol;owing the blind. instead of being scorned they are truly to be pitied. the atheist community are a sad lot who have a bleak most dismal world view. and worse, they have no hope. why if this earth and living here is all there is it is a most cruel joke. who could,in their right mind, find anything redeeming unless there is more. i find atheism is an assault on all the is rational and reasonable and its very foolish. can i get a witness???????
brian at 10:44AM on Jan 7th 2008
45. ATHEIST
Reply to: 28. What many of you don't understand is that the issue Dinesh is raising happens to be totally metaphysical and therefore exists outside the realm of traditional science. Greater minds than ours still concede this, though some on this blog seem to think that a simple observation of Alzheimer's patients answers the question. JSL
___________
I don't agree. First, most Christians are gullible enough to believe in nonsense. That means, as a group, they are DUMBER on some level than Atheists.
Therefore, the concept you speak of... does NOT come "Greater minds than ours."
Common Catholic mistake. Dinesh is just repeating a piece of utter NONSENSE that he memorized in a school run by Jesuits.
______________
Reply to: Philosophy 101 presents this question as one of the most enduring, perplexing, and important.
___________
Please post a link. If you try, you'll see that you're wrong.
Catholic Theology 101, not Philosophy.
__________________
Reply to: The brain is a middle-man between the conscious person and the world. I am persuaded that Hacker is correct and it only stands to reason that degenerative brain disorders would disrupt the brain/soul relationship
__________
No, Hacker is stating a bit of Christian Fundie Babble.
When a scientist discusses or treats mental conditions, he uses the exact terminology that Dennett uses.
William Hays at 10:47AM on Jan 7th 2008