[extropy-chat] Edge: Thank Goodness! By Daniel C. Dennett

[Ensel Sharon]

On Fri, 3 Nov 2006, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:

> without being frozen.  As is shown easily enough by Dennett's example of 
> the medical industry, you don't need to use violence to promote your 
> beliefs, in order to harm people with wrong beliefs.  Yes, you *can* 
> hurt other people by being lax with yourself, forgiving yourself your 
> nonsense, holding yourself to too low a standard.  It is this 
> understanding of strictness that makes modern medicine effective.


There's a big difference between hurting someone, and not helping them as
much as you could.

If I hit you with my car, you have reason to complain.  If I fail to push
you completely out of the way of the car that was going to hit you, too
bad.

Further, this notion that we are at the "end of history" or the "end of
science" and therefore can make broad statements (as you did above) about
"wrong beliefs" is absurd.  Even a cursory study of history shows that
every people attach the same importance to their current understanding of
the world, and the next generation always looks back with a smile.  Our
generation will _not be any different_.


> To compare Dennett to a religious fundamentalist is silly; if you wish 
> to insult him with some trace of plausibility, compare him to an 
> academic theologian.  And to suggest that they are automatically on the 
> same level, or committing the same mistake, because they dare to air 
> their views and advise others on what to think - that is foolish.


It's very ironic that Dennett would chastise others for wasting time and
kilowatts on "foolish" pursuits - and label "inefficient" mental
activities as morally negative ... yet he chooses to spend his time
plucking _very low_ philosophical fruit.

I've read Voltaire, I've read Diderot, I've read d'Alembert.  I don't need
someone from "edge.org" to give me some lame rehash 250 years later.