Daniel Dennett's Pathetic Fallacy

Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...

Mo Rocca Feed

Daniel Dennett's Pathetic Fallacy

Posted Jan 7th 2008 12:02AM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Science, Christianity, Controversy, Atheism

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.

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [875]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 59)

Previous 15 Comments | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

61. Mokele-Mbembe; I as well had/have a lot of fear about THE END, but knowing that this is all we get makes every second of life that much more beautiful.

I would love to be reincarnated and follow my wife from life to life, but knowing this is it makes every second with her more beautiful than the last.

I'm an agnostic sap.

Ryan Anderson at 11:22AM on Jan 7th 2008

62.
SOPHISTRY!

The brain is not inanimate; it is a key part of a whole functioning, reproducing ANIMATE organism (human beings).

Logic is not served by arguing for Descartes dualism (mind versus body). What is known each year about brain function continues to eliminate what previously was explained by such hypothetical constructs as mind, soul, personality, id or ego. What we cannot explain today by biologists and neurophysiologists, might be tomorrow. The urge to resort to supernatural explanations might be strong, but is not rational. Dinesh would be well served to study more biology to round out his studies in history, philosophy, and literature.

Materialism is not science co-opted by atheists. It is a fundamental premise of science as a source of knowledge. It has served us well.

jamesg4336 at 11:24AM on Jan 7th 2008

63. linda,

"do your part"? what is that part? what about when your parts over? where to then? are you saying your nothing more than a blip on the radar screen? your mind should inform you of something more than that. otherwise why should you care. now if eternity is out there, then everything we do here matters,and matters greatly. so with an eternal perspective doing your part has more meaning. do you not agree? sure, you have to!! thats why god said he has planted eternity in our hearts. even though you reject it you would still like to believe it and have proof its true.

brian at 11:24AM on Jan 7th 2008

64. I get it now.

brian is trying to convince himself, not us.

amekf at 11:26AM on Jan 7th 2008

65. mokele,

there is more. god says there is more. the more there is is what we were created to be. the fall has taken from us our true selves and our true destiny. we were made to enjoy god forever, not just a few years. we were never intended to die. in fact its just a transition into a better awareness. sure we fear he un-known but god says he will walk with us. there is more hope in GOD that with out him.

brian at 11:30AM on Jan 7th 2008

66. ATHEIST

This comes from the National Catholic Reporter, dated 2001.

LINK; At a 2000 Vatican conference on AIDS, Camillian Fr. Felice Ruffini, undersecretary to the Pontifical Council for Health Care Workers, said that even in marriage in which one partner is infected with HIV, condom use is always prohibited. "Certainly, it's difficult, it's tough to be able to maintain matrimonial chastity in this case," Ruffini said, but moralists cannot make "an exception to Christ's law."

____________________

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-77556898.html
_________

LINK: More than 4.5 million South Africans are HIV positive or have AIDS. The South African Catholic newspaper Southern Cross voiced its support for Dowling in an editorial published the week before the bishops' meeting. "Condoms, when used to save a life, provide one way, albeit an imperfect one, of stemming the AIDS pandemic," the editorial said. "In that light,

**** the church is called to reconcile its total ban on prophylactics ****

with the philosophy of the sanctity of life."

In the end, Dowling's proposal was rejected by the bishops' conference after a discussion described in news reports as lengthy and sharply divided.
___________________

“Parents must reject the promotion of so-called ‘safe sex’ or ‘safer sex,’ a dangerous and immoral policy based on the deluded theory that the condom can provide adequate protection against AIDS.”

Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo and Bishop Elio Sgreccia of the Pontifical Council for the Family [“The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality,” Origins, February 1, 1996].

“If a husband violates his marital vows and sleeps with other women, he must make sure that he does not transmit the virus to his wife, else he would be violating the principle of justice. This is where the principle of ‘lesser evil’ comes in.”

American Jesuit theologian Fr. James Keenan, addressing a media forum in the Philippines [“Catholic theologian endorses condom use to prevent transmission of HIV,” The Advocate, August 10, 2001].
________

This last one... a Jesuit who understand the danger, but follows orders... duh.

William Hays at 11:31AM on Jan 7th 2008

67. fellows,

i have a lunch appt. it will be awhile before i can get back to this insightful discussion but do know that god so loves the world that he sent his only son that whoever believes in him should not perish but have ever-lasting life. that life is here and now,not later. it is on going. it is a dimension you can not have priviledge to because you do not believe in god thus you discount the spiritual realm of your existence,to your own peril. your sleeping with the enemy and don't even know it. where are my christian brothers and sisters to take over this blog? i need a witness for sure!!!

brian at 11:35AM on Jan 7th 2008

68. (Breaking my rule about brian little b)
--------------------------------------
"do your part"? what is that part? what about when your parts over? where to then? are you saying your nothing more than a blip on the radar screen? your mind should inform you of something more than that. otherwise why should you care. now if eternity is out there, then everything we do here matters,and matters greatly. so with an eternal perspective doing your part has more meaning. do you not agree? sure, you have to!! thats why god said he has planted eternity in our hearts. even though you reject it you would still like to believe it and have proof its true."
-----------------------------------
"my part" is doing good for people and the planet and the beasties. I sleep with the thermostat at 55 degrees to keep consumption down. I no longer use paper cups, I volunteer at the local animal shelter, I volunteer as a nurse at clinics, etc etc.
--------------------------------------
Yes, we all have our tiny fraction of time on this planet. Use it joyfully.
--------------------------------------
Everything I do matters, not for eternity, but for this life I am living. It may be difficult to understand, but I don't need eternity for meaning. Dead is dead.
--------------------------------------
"god" planted nothing in my heart. Maybe some excess cholesterol, but that's hereditary, not "god".
--------------------------------------
"eternal existence" is for children. Adults live their lives, if they are lucky, to old age. Then plan for death. If one is REALLY together, removes the burden on loved ones. I plan to donate my body to science, i.e. medical school. Cadavers are priceless for them.

Linda at 11:37AM on Jan 7th 2008

69. Fabio -

Again, we are not underestimating the importance of the brain. The brain and "conscious self" are not mutually exclusive. That isn't what is being said here. What is being said is that, though they are not mutually exclusive, they are separate and distinct.

You made a point about brain transplants. First, you are making the common mistake I brought up earlier - you are trying to answer metaphysical questions with traditional science. Moreover, with a very speculative science. We can't do brain transplants and so we cannot assume the results. You are doing just that and it is the weakest kind of argument.

Certainly, the brain is a repository of information...memories, experiences, etc. All these shape a person.

But consider this: if I think about a certain personal memory that conjures feelings of injustice, I get mad. Let's look at a few questions.

1. Is it my brain that gets mad? Or is it something deeper? A "conscious self" that is connected to the brain, but separate in its own right, which understands the injustice? Does the brain act autonomously here? Or does the brain sift information down to the "conscious self," which then communicates a response to the brain resulting in anxiety, adrenalin, increased heart rate, etc?

2. If I were given another brain with its own hurts and experiences of injustice, would I grow angry at those memories and hate the perpetrators? Or would my "conscious self" understand the difference and merely pity the former owner for having had to endure such?

See, I am not offering a final answer. We can be PERSUADED about metaphysical questions, but never sure. You, on the other hand, seem to have a certainty...and one that is completely unjustified. You not only use a wrong instrument (science) to measure a metaphysical situation, you speculate a certain reality based on an imperfected science (brain transplants).

I am persuaded, though thought, observation, and listening to arguments, that there is a difference between the "brain" and the "mind." I think it was Bertrand Russell who said, "Matters remain the province of philosophy until science can definitively answer them." Science is at a loss on this one, you'll have to reach for something a little more appropriate to the question.

This is why the charge of "Sophistry" doesn't hold up either. It doesn't matter how much science has accomplished in this area, it still can't answer the question yet. This betrays a bias toward science as a sort of god in which one places faith in the absence of evidence. Hmmm...where have I heard that criticism before?

JSL at 11:42AM on Jan 7th 2008

70. Hello William H.

I do not in anyway agree with any of DD blogs. I think he is a horrible spokes person for any religion and tend to agree with Father John who often posts on this blog. However I would not classify myself as an Atheists either (not that their is anything wrong with that:)

I have a question about your comment:
MANY Atheists share a belief that the scientific evidence has PROVEN, conclusively, that a "God" as defined by Christianity does NOT exist.

Do Atheists only feel this way about Christianity? Or are other religions included? Just curious . . .

Gwen at 11:43AM on Jan 7th 2008

71. Well,
When did it come to pass that you as athesits are in any way able to pass judgement on any of GOD's people. You give all kinds of verses trying to tear down the bible, you mock anyone who trys to give you any information on the reasons your life is so pathetic. This blog is not about Jesus Christ. It is about using your brain for something more than trying to convince a Christian there is no God. Why don't you stick to the subject at hand. We have all made the our points on why you should believe and I for one am really tired of you people trying to push your non-believe down mine and other Christian people. I care that your hell bent on going there but, God has told us not to waste time on those who blaspheme because he will deal with you directly. Now get off Jesus back, he is our Saviour and go do something constructive today like find a life. You say we can't wait until Rapture why is that so hard for you dingdongs, to understand. Who in there right mind would want to spend eternity with you non-believers. Not to worry you are headed straight into whatever you call dust to dust and ashes to ashes. While, I am going to keep on serving a GOD who's love is a far as the east is to the west. Who, gives me answers, whether or not it the ones I want I know due to his word that he has a plan and since he knows me better than anyone on this earth I will abide in him. I will worship him and I will rely that what he has in store for me will be eternal and that he will be with me though out this life time in the holy spirit and then in the next he will be Son who took my place and died for me and covered my sins with his blood. I don't care what anyone of you people think, you have put my Lord down one time too many and like I have said, Keep on listening to people like Mr. Hays, and rest of his back sliding group on blasphemers, and you are as the bible says "heaping coals of fire" upon your head. So I would suggest that you take your freak show on down the road your act is getting old on this blog. You don't fool me this atheist acts of yours are just stupidity on parade and I for one do not care to listen on you pick apart my GOD who you swear you don't believe in. So with that in mind please stay with the blog in hand. I believe it has very little to do with what you do or do not believe in.

Rtia at 11:48AM on Jan 7th 2008

72. Rita

Rtia at 11:48AM on Jan 7th 2008

73. Mr. D'Souza,

Are your endless self-declarations of debate victory supposed to convince anyone there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent god that doles out heavenly rewards and torturous punishments?

There really is no winner or loser at a debate. I suppose maybe the only way you may declare yourself a "winner" is if you convinced your "opponent" to convert to your religion as a result of the debate - but that has never happened.

One would think that if there is a god that created our universe, created us, and all that we are and all that we think, that the belief would be inherent in us as inherent as is the need for food, water, and shelter.

But that is not the case. There are more people in this world that do not believe in the god and religion you believe that do believe, and they are surviving quite well while completely bereft of any of the ideology you claim.

Morality is doing what is right no matter what you are told. Religion is doing what you are told no matter what is right. - Anonymous.

Frank at 11:48AM on Jan 7th 2008

74. JSL: the simple response to your remark is that the brain is one part of the neurological system. You must include all the nervous systems that are attached to the brain (voluntary, involuntary, etc). The front of the brain is the repository for all COGNITIVE thought, which is often what we think of as "self". The senses are attached at different parts of the brain, and there is some semblence of "instinctive" control in the voluntary system

(if you touch a hot stove, the movement away does not necessarily travel all the way up to the cognitive center, but emanates from the skeletal nerves)

Otherwise, the brain rules everything in the body (conscious, unconscious, hormonal, vital center, etc etc)

Phantom pain of a severed limb comes totally from the brain.

Linda at 11:52AM on Jan 7th 2008

75. I gotta say it, Rita, you simply crack me up. Thank you for the entertainment.

brandon at 11:56AM on Jan 7th 2008

Previous 15 Comments | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

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. ...

Coming Soon

Most Commented On

Coming Soon

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.