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
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
- Harvey on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- mac on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- not-pboyfloyd 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
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
- Report: Max Baucus Ex-Aide, Now Girlfriend, Met With His Divorce Attorney
- Mary C. Curtis on UpFront: Obama's Security, Unemployment, Climate Change
- Report: Blackwater Guards Used in Secret CIA Raids
- Joe Biden on Chris Dodd: He's 'Getting the Living Bejesus Beat Out of Him'
- House Votes to Tighten Wall Street Regulation
- Abortion in Ireland: Does the Church Ask Too Much?
- More Negative Marks for Obama on Health Care
Reader Comments ( Page 6 of 59)
76. Hi Rita. You sound like your mood is low, or you are not feeling too well. I hope you are OK.
-----------------------------------
Answer to Gwen: christianity exists, so it would be silly to not believe in it.
"christ", for me, does not and never did exist.
I am an atheist.
Linda at 11:56AM on Jan 7th 2008
77. The neurotheology experiments they have been doing lately show that part of the brain is affected when people pray or meditate. This to me would indicate that the consciousness is a function of the brain not a seperate entity.
a born atheist at 11:57AM on Jan 7th 2008
78. ATHEIST
Reply to: 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
______________________
No, this opinion is NOT limited to Christianity.
It's a conclusion based on 2,000 years of accumulated knowledge about the universe.
For example, the Big Bang happened about 13.7 billion years ago.
But the earth and moon didn't condense from a cloud of raw material until 4.6 billion years ago.
For NINE billion years, the universe existed without a planet earth.
Thus, it seems unlikely that this universe was created by a Deity in order to make human life possible.
Many Atheists don't want to make a comment that can be questioned on logical grounds, such as, "Science has proven that God does not exist."
However, since Dinesh sees nothing wrong with publishing Catholic nonsense, I thought I would share with you.
Many Atheists think there is enough evidence to say science has PROVEN that God does not exist.
If there was even a single piece of evidence to the contrary, Atheists would reconsider that position.
William Hays at 12:02PM on Jan 7th 2008
79. Linda, Thank you for your response.
Answer to Gwen: christianity exists, so it would be silly to not believe in it.
"christ", for me, does not and never did exist.
I am an atheist.
Linda at 11:56AM on Jan 7th 2008
What I meant by the question is what are your beliefs when it comes to Islam, Buddhism, or other religions. Some of which are more a way of life then a devote belief in "God"?
Gwen at 12:07PM on Jan 7th 2008
80. Linda,
Nope great, I'm just real tired of people always bringing GOD into conversations that they know nothing of. IF you as a atheists are one then don't you think you should leave GOD out of your conversations. For someone you don't believe in some of your colleagues spend a lot of time trying to tell us how or what he isn't. I personnally believe that you can believe whatever you want to, it's really no skin off by back but, I feel you do not have the right to keep talking about and using GOD in any reference since he is not part of your life. You have chosen this road and so be it. All I'm saying is stick to the blog at hand. Especially, Mr. Hays who can't get passed himself in any blog without making references to GOD. If he is so sure fine, I believe that the human brain and it's functions are on the blog today, not relative to GOD at all. You people have no belief then why keep bringing him into your conversations. Pure, nonsense to me. Leave the believing to the believer and you go your merry way. Rita
Rtia at 12:07PM on Jan 7th 2008
81. I am by no means an expert in any field, but as a common man (which so many of us are and should therefore have a little more humility in our 'incredible' levels of knowledge and reasoning), I was very interested in this article -http://www.nderf.org/vonlommel_skeptic_response.htm - with what I thought was a key excerpt for the current discussion found below:
From these studies we know that in our prospective study of patients that have been clinically dead (VF on the ECG) no electric activity of the cortex of the brain (flat EEG) must have been possible, but also the abolition of brain stem activity like the loss of the corneareflex, fixed dilated pupils and the loss of the gag reflex is a clinical finding in those patients. However, patients with an NDE can report a clear consciousness, in which cognitive functioning, emotion, sense of identity, and memory from early childhood was possible, as well as perception from a position out and above their "dead" body. Because of the sometimes reported and verifiable out-of -body experiences, like the case of the dentures reported in our study, we know that the NDE must happen during the period of unconsciousness, and not in the first or last second of this period.
So we have to conclude that NDE in our study was experienced during a transient functional loss of all functions of the cortex and of the brainstem. It is important to mention that there is a well documented report of a patient with constant registration of the EEG during cerebral surgery for an gigantic cerebral aneurysm at the base of the brain, operated with a body temperature between 10 and 15 degrees, she was put on the heart-lung machine, with VF, with all blood drained from her head, with a flat line EEG, with clicking devices in both ears, with eyes taped shut, and this patient experienced an NDE with an out-of-body experience, and all details she perceived and heard could later be verified. (8)
There is also a theory that consciousness can be experienced independently from the normal body-linked waking consciousness. The current concept in medical science states that consciousness is the product of the brain. This concept, however, has never been scientifically proven. Research on NDE pushes us at the limits of our medical concepts of the range of human consciousness and the relationship between consciousness and memories with the brain....
...Michael Shermer states that, in reality, all experience is mediated and produced by the brain, and that so-called paranormal phenomena like out-of body experiences are nothing more than neuronal events. The study of patients with NDE, however, clearly shows us that consciousness with memories, cognition, with emotion, self-identity, and perception out and above a life-less body is experienced during a period of a non-functioning brain (transient pancerebral anoxia). And focal functional loss by inhibition of local cortical regions happens by "stimulation" of those regions with electricity (photons) or with magnetic fields (photons), resulting sometimes in out-of-body states.
To quote Michael Shermer: it is the job of science to solve those puzzles with natural, rather than supernatural, explanations. But one has to be aware of the progress of science, and to study recent literature, to know what is going on in current science. For me science is asking questions with an open mind, and not being afraid to reconsider widely accepted but scientifically not proven concepts like the concept that consciousness and memories are a product of the brain. But also we should realize that we need a functioning brain to receive our consciousness into our waking consciousness. There are still a lot of mysteries to solve, but one has not to talk about paranormal, supernatural or pseudoscience to look for scientific answers on the intriguing relation between consciousness and memories with the brain.
Definitely makes one think about how 'vast' our current knowledge really is concerning the mind.
RD Miksa
RD Miksa at 12:09PM on Jan 7th 2008
82. Rita
Why already on the defensive?
Rita believe what you want to believe and let the others believe what they want.
Religion teaches you to fear those that have different beliefs. That it is of the devil. Atheists and agnostics can also be good, kind and giving people. That is not exclusive to Christianity.
Nonbelievers are not part of an organized group. Beliefs are unique to each individual. Arguing with some on this blog is not "waging war on the devil", it is just a waste of your time.
amekf at 12:12PM on Jan 7th 2008
83. William - Thank you for your response
Gwen at 12:13PM on Jan 7th 2008
84. Mr. Hays,
Your big bang theory is what it is, only a theory along with rest of your so called theories. If you really want the truth I believe you whole life is a theory in what a human being is trying to prove and can't seem to get through his theories to do more than talk about more theories. Repetitive much?
Rita
Rtia at 12:17PM on Jan 7th 2008
85. Rita, this:
"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."
Is where Dinesh brought us right into this blog. He is attacking what he thinks is part of our "dogma."
My dogmas are running around outside enjoying the warm weather. I will have to towel them off when they're done.
brandon at 12:17PM on Jan 7th 2008
86. If not in the brain, where lyes the mind?
No BS about the soul, please. The last time I checked the soul did not show up on any anatomy charts.
I think it's way past time to come out of the dark ages and realize we don't have an unseen, unknown force in our bodies called a soul.... would it leak out if we are cut? even deeply cut? poked in the heart with a stake? It is as ridiculous as virgin birth, demons, 3 day old reserection, and an invisible man(men) in the sky.
If your mind is not in your brain, Dinesh, you had better find another doctor, as you need immediate treatment to restore your mind to its rightful place.
mac65 at 12:19PM on Jan 7th 2008
87. My apologies, Gwen. I misread your post. As with William, atheism is atheism (no "god")
------------------------------------------
Rita: glad you're OK. Remember, though, in the USA we have free speech, which includes opinions about "god" and religion.
In this blog, DD is trying to find another way to put down atheism as it relates to the body and mind. We atheists are responding to that.
My suggestion is: if you don't like the way a particular person posts, you can look down at the name, and just skip it. I do that sometimes, when I see something over and over and over.
Linda at 12:25PM on Jan 7th 2008
88. My dogma is also at home, whining and pooping.
Linda at 12:26PM on Jan 7th 2008
89. 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
--------------------------------------------------
The only "belief" that atheists share is the nonbelief in any deity. Other than that there is no shared dogma or ideology among people who call themselves atheists for there is no atheist "bible" or any one person or entity that speaks for or originates ideology for atheists.
I don't believe that science has disproven the "Christian" god anymore than science has disproven Zeus, Woden, Isis, Raiden, or any other "god". That is the old circular reasoning:
"Prove that "God" exists!"
"No, you prove that God doesn't exist!"
Circular arguing can be use by any and all religions, superstitions, legends, and any other phenomena.
What can disprove the existence of a god(s)?
Time and geography.
Time has "disproved" the existence of Zeus, Isis, Woden, Thor, and all other god(s) before our time. Even though billions of people lived and died with the complete belief and worship of those god(s) of the past.
Geography "disproved" the Christian god to Muslims born in Saudi Arabia or Iran. Geography "disproved" the Christian god to Hindus born in India and Bangladesh.
Geography "disproved" the Hindu god(s) to Christians born in Spain and the United States.
Geography "disproved" the Muslim god to the Buddhists born in China and Tibet. Etc, etc.
Eventually, time and geography will "disprove" any and all god(s) of our present.
The only thing we can hope for is that with our remarkable ability to record our history, we are able to learn from our past and become more in equilibrium with the world we live in. Sometimes we will get it right and sometimes we will get it wrong. But again, if we are able to learn from our history then we will become more right than wrong.
Frank at 12:26PM on Jan 7th 2008
90. Ever hear of a Skinner Box Experiment where the rat learns by experience that one lever gives it food and the other gives it an electric shock? Every time Rita makes a post I read it hoping to find some kind of concept or argument that makes Christianity more sensible to me -- and every time I do I get the kind of disappointment a child gets when after eating an entire box of cereal he realizes there is no free toy inside. Conclusion: I am dumber than a rat.
Mokele-Mbembe at 12:28PM on Jan 7th 2008