| BookTalk.org News |
| • If you are having trouble with logging into your account or making posts please know that we are working to resolve this issue. Please delete your temporary Internet files and cookies (at least those for our site) and stay tuned to see if that resolves the issue. If not our web designer believes he can find the code that is causing the issue. |
| Show us where you live! |
 |
| Donate & Support BookTalk.org |
Please support our free community by making a credit card donation through our secure PayPal account. We appreciate and depend on the generosity of our members. Thank you!
•
See who supports us
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Mr. Pessimistic  Assistant Professor Silver Contributor


Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3449
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JulianTheApostate  Sophomore
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Posts: 289
Gender: 
|
Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:43 am Post subject: Positive first impression
|
|
|
I started the book this evening and got through the first chapter fairly quickly. This time I can read everyone else's feedback first, instead of being one of the first people to start the discussion.
My initial impression was rather positive, though after reading Mad's criticism I trying to figure out why. Compared to the other books on religion we've discussed here, Dennett comes across as a better writer and a more intelligent thinker. Though I didn't learn much new from Chapter One, except regarding the lancet fluke, Dennett is setting the stage for a book that sounds promising.
However, I'm rather skeptical of Dennett's hope that many theists will read his book. Between Dennett being an atheist philosopher and his attitude towards religion, religious believers would be rather alienated. Edited by: JulianTheApostate at: 9/4/06 3:18 pm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ginof  Freshman Bronze Contributor

Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 200
Gender: 
Location: San Francisco, CA

|
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:19 pm Post subject: Re: Positive first impression
|
|
|
Julian,
Totally agree with your last paragraph. And having read ahead, it gets worse.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Saint Gasoline Intern
Joined: 04 Jan 2006
Posts: 151
Gender: 
|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 1:45 pm Post subject: Re: Positive first impression
|
|
|
Being a part of Dennet's choir, I am finding these first few chapters rather bland and uninteresting. I can understand his chatty tone, however, and why he is dwelling on issues concerning taboos and such. For anyone who is not a lay-theist of some sort, these first chapters can be mildly annoying. But, having had experience in debating theists myself, Dennett is only doing what is necessary. These are the types of points that would initially prevent someone of a typical religious mindset from reading his book.
As far as the comparison with the ant parasite goes, I don't see any problem with the analogy. One shouldn't expect analogies to cohere perfectly--otherwise it would cease to be a comparison, but would become a tautology. In terms of what Dennet is discussing, the analogy works. The ant parasite guides the ant to do something that is not conducive towards its survival, just as ideas may do similar things in human beings. Whether one is voluntarily chosen and the other is forced is not really relevant to the point Dennett is making. He certainly isn't trying to imply that religious beliefs are "forced" upon people against their wills. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic  Assistant Professor Silver Contributor


Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3449
Gender: 
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic

|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MadArchitect
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 2609
Gender: 
Location: decentralized

|
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:48 pm Post subject: Re: Positive first impression
|
|
|
Mr P: Whether or not I buy the whole theory, it is a good means of bookkeeping to think of these memes as self perpetuating as in the method of genes.
I think both the idea of memes and Dawkins presentation of the transmission of genes are useful as a form of bookkeeping. But I also think that acclimating yourself too much to that point of view -- which is both statistical and retrospective -- tends to distort the transmission of information (both genetic and cultural) in the phenomenon as it happens.
By way of explanation, let me give an analogy. Keeping a log of sports statistics can be useful for certain tasks, that is, as a form of book keeping. But those looking at those statistics from a retrospective point of view isn't necessarily helpful in improving your game because they don't necessarily take into account what you're doing at any given time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
| Recent Topics |
|
|
|