"disenchantment" - TITLE I this is the latest book by Daniel Clement Dennett , released recently by the National Institute Publishing. At the inauguration of this blogotwórstwa promised you, and especially the yourself, a few words about it after reading. As I am from some time "shortly after", then write the following.
"disenchantment" promises much, and even a lot. Already subtitle - "Religion as a natural phenomenon" - betrays the author's broad ambitions, willing to explain the origin of religion from the Darwinian perspective. True, the author stipulates that the book does not report claims to present a complete, finite theory of religion as an environmental adaptation (and is rather just an invitation to take an interdisciplinary attempt to build such a theory), but its very evolutionary fis allowed to feed hope that we will have to deal with the text of the strukury different than a loud atheist manifestos by Dawkins , Hitschensa or Onfraya . Although Dennett is a philosopher, but it is very Anglo-Saxon philosopher. Buried in kognitywistyce, philosophy of mind and philosophy of science: Also in memetyce and - not least - in evolutionary biology. It's perfect for doing cognitive equipment to try to weave a theoretical outline of podtytularnej "religion as a natural phenomenon."
Is something made to measure such a profile? I have big doubts. Falls into the "disenchant" some interesting ideas that could serve as starting points for teoriotwórczej works, but I have a feeling, a significant part of the volume of text is another variant of the atheistic demonstrations. Manifestation is different from the above linked mainly due to the fact that not so violent, radical and militant. From a certain point of view (I reserve that is not my!) Could even see in this critical stonowaniu sizeable loads of empathy ideological, cultural, diplomatic tact and skill Dennett, if not the impression that it is simply a consequence of the inconsistency, the text was to be analytical, time after time, however, it crawls propagandistic intention. As it is dressed in a suit of scientific creativity, it must hold a theoretical smartness alone and do not dissipate after reading emotions. But to give you Dennettowi inclination to an agreement over the non-palatable divisions world view and understanding of the position pro-religion . The author wishes to enter into serious debate with religious people and makes sure that you do not feel bad in his company (such Dawkins, for example, it is evident in the nose).
smuggling propaganda in the text of a declaratory analytical - it is the first and most general sigh. Fuss szczegółowszych I have a few more (one of which found its perfect (no ba!) articulation in my commentary on the recipes of the "disenchantment" on the blog "unweaving rainbow" ), but I will not marudził too, because there is still undecided who to read for good discouraged, and would be a shame (despite the above remarks, "disenchantment" is an interesting and useful cognitive reading). If you do not forget (or rather not, because on some issues I'm terribly unforgiving) that I will drive one more pins in Dennett at the end of the text to the end there was too much Hollywood. And now let it happen only good things.
As I said, it's not hard to find in this book concepts (or rather the ideas of concepts) is interesting, intriguing and inspiring self-reflections on the lessons. The first one is this: according to Dennett the institution of religion is a fundamental adaptation of a late effect, namely, the intentional stance. It is characterized by each animal mind, if he treats some other parts of the world as
- operating facilities, which are
- limited beliefs the world
- specific desires and
- enough common sense to behave rationally these beliefs and desires. (p. 144)
Every creature that moves, there must be something like a mind, which keeps her away from things dangerous for her and helps you find the good stuff , even the humble clam, unwilling to move off the place has one of the important features of the mind - avoids the danger of removing the shells of their food, "leg", it will alert whenever anything. Responds yes to any vibration or shock, which probably in most cases, nothing to be afraid, but the motto mussel better safe than sorry (involuntary reasons for its alarm system.) Ruchliwsze developed a method to distinguish the animals, in particular, they can divide detected invalid movements (like the rustling of leaves or rolling seaweed) and a potentially important - "Alive" or "biological" movements of another plant operated , other animal equipped with a mind, which may be a predator, prey, a partner or a rival from the same species. This is, of course, make economic sense. If you are afraid of any movement which detects, you'll never find dinner, and if you do not disturb the movements of dangerous, he will soon become someone's dinner. (p. 143)little that we combine ourselves, it is also - in a section of the route to the summit of the evolutionary improbability - we started combine that combine or other objects around us. In itself, this does not have anything to do with the birth of religion, but this adaptation brings us (in any case, Dennett leads) to further clarify możebności zagwozdki: where it comes from the institution of the funeral?
our innate need to gain the intentional stance is so strong that we have serious difficulties with the exception of this attitude, it becomes something wrong. When a person dies that we love, or even just a well-known, we face the challenging task of cognitive updating: revision of all our habits of thought so as to meet the world in which there is no longer a system of intentional. (...) pain and confusion of thought, which we experience the loss of a loved one, is largely caused by a frequent, almost obsessive become aware that our habit of intentional attitudes haunt us with the mechanical persistence of the machine. We are not able to just delete the file records of our memory, and what's more, I do not want to be able to do so. Many of these habits is kept by the fact that succumbing to them makes us happy. Ponder them and us to them, anything goes, like a moth to a candle. (...)
However, there remains a problem: they are a potential source of disease, which meant that it developed in us a compensation mechanism for innate, strong repulsion , that keeps us away from the corpses. Attracted and repelled by the longing for an aversion to corpses beloved person, we fall into a state of deep anxiety. It is almost certain that this crisis has played an important role in the emergence of the world's religions. (pp. 146-147)Thus, according to Dennett, as a result of evolutionary pressure from a very old man laid the groundwork for much later religious systems. The latter - pełnokrwiste understood as social institutions - have memetic pedigree, however its appearance would not be possible were it not for the specific interests of the adjustment. But before the first great-official religious-mandated community enjoys an intermediary between this and the other world - focused on the codification of the framework represented by each institution, a lot has happened. With the idea already underworld, the man began to manage it more efficiently. Aim clear: possible full implementation of the broad interest of cognition. So Dennett explains divination (which, apart from the cognitive function can be well explained pragmatically: if you do not have the possibility to make a rational decision in certain circumstances, and a choice you are doomed, simply for the control responsibility for that option to someone else, preferably someone from the assumption knows more and better, it is best to let them know everything!), so finally, the myth explains the evolutionary sense:
gems of folk wisdom for the whole world should think that a small knowledge is sometimes dangerous. Rarely noticed the application, which can be derived from this idea, is the court that sometimes it is safer to replace the incomplete knowledge of a powerful myth. (p. 198)proposal that is defended in the "disenchant" bearing a quotation from the book Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity Roy Rappaport :
in the world (...) where the physical processes that govern its elements are somewhat unknown, and even more so unpredictable, empirical knowledge about these processes can not substitute faith in their more or less secret integrity, and perhaps more adaptive value of these processes is obscure veil of the supernatural than exposing them to the wrong understanding that płynęłoby of empirically accurate, but incomplete interpretation of the naturalistic. (p. 198)Burial, omens, myths - it's all part of what Dennett calls the "folk religion" and differs from "organized religion." The first is simply a construct largely unconscious ("The same is done" based on iron and inalienable rights of natural selection). Organized religion is something that we face today, and so the product dense rozkminy on increasing the efficiency of the border between two worlds.
Had a whole "disenchantment" wanted to spin up after this and similar circuits to build explanatory (worse or better) hypotheses, it would be delicious. But, as I said, the lion's share of work is a reproduction of even the familiar tropes of "God imagined" versions of soft. I just read that about the difference between religious faith and scientific faith, a zapalniku conflict, which is ruled by religion and of the dangers of modern the disposal, of a responsibility system for their own ideological extremes, with the paradox of religious faith advertise through athletics to invoke the irrational (as in the mouth of an otherwise rational people have to have evidence of the power of the underworld - something like u scored a professor at Bauman poczynionym below for libel " Europe ") that nothing and no one deserves respect only of the fact that it is age or traditional, the lack of freedom of the children from the pervasive religious indoctrination, and the need to make choices based on the actual, full as possible knowledge of , etc. etc., you know what's patients. All of this, let me repeat once again, is given a very elegant and may have power to convince opponents. My "but" applies only to the fact that I was expecting a slightly different story on the topic (and again see the subtitle).
At the end of the protest supporter of the pro-animal philosophy and ethics to some detail of what this narrative. My impression is that Dennett is somewhat biased towards the environment under the sign of Animal Liberation. Writing about the "illusion of a fanatic," which defines as a "license to kill," he notes as follows:
(...) some people are simply thirst for blood, or strong emotions, and as our manners are becoming more civilized and nonviolent, in people growing desire to find those responsible, which will provide a "moral" justification for their bluster, this can be a "liberation" of laboratory animals (in which the subsequent fate of the activists have to get involved too), avenging Ruby Ridge by bomb in Oklahoma City, killing doctors who perform abortions, sending anthrax in the letters to "bad" officers federal, murdering innocent people under the guise of fatwas, the martyr's death in a jihad, or "settlement" (men armed to the teeth) in the West Bank. (p. 329)Cited set of attitudes toward other people / animals inhumane looks as if he had used mental activities such as "which item does not fit within?" As our manners are becoming more civilized and nonviolent a sphere of human life are not subject to the process of civilizing and violence in it is not reduced. Speech, of course, a great branch of the global economy, which profits the production of meat and dairy products and other zoonoses. Dennettowi recommend film "Behind the Mask" , showing people where the government administrations per plain speak "ekoterroryści" (ai Dennett on the 381st "disenchantment" does not refrain from sticking to them that injurious patches) . Or read a book "Freedom for Animals" Ingrid Newkirk , "about the genesis and principles of operation Animal Liberation Front . The compilation of people who, under the principle of civil disobedience - Without causing anyone's death or physical injury? - Sabotaging the philosophical and economic order of our "more civilized" modernity person with the activity of exchanging arms for their own living someone else's ideas, it is unfair. Especially in the hands of someone who is by profession deals with the propagation of a rational overview of all things.
On the same line dowaliłbym still presented at the 209th the view that the farm animals gained more than lost their domestication (especially bearing in mind the fate of the modern high-yielding cow, pig, chicken and other "machines" to produce meat tissue, protein and other products of mass consumption), but certainly more than once occasion to find similar considerations in the future. Meanwhile, it makes no sense to do small things with narrative case for half the show. Once again (któren already?) Noting the considerable value of the cognitive whole, I conclude anything you write Christmas: When people begin to think critically, a system that "worked" for generations, may implodować from day to day. (p. 194)
Amen.
PS. The link interview with Dennett on wraży about the "rationalist"
0 comments:
Post a Comment