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

[Ensel Sharon]

On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Fred C. Moulton wrote:

> On Fri, 2006-11-03 at 22:57 -0500, Keith Henson wrote:
> > Besides, it's the wrong way to approach the problem.
> > Ranting against epidemic disease didn't save a single life.
> > What was needed was to understand what causes infectious diseases.
> > People have religions like they have chicken pox.  
> 
> There are several different ways of viewing religion. If one views
> religion as being infected by a set of bad memes then ranting can make a
> difference if the ranting has an impact on the bad memes.  Consider the
> decline of infectious disease with the advent of better sanitation.
> Dennett, Dawkins, Harris and others are hopefully causing a more
> critical focus on the memes associated with religion.


I agree.  I have no problem with the ranting - as I mentioned above, I am
agnostic on the subject of religion, and my feelings certainly aren't
hurt.

The problem is Dennett claiming that harboring X meme is morally negative,
and that one "owes" it to some third party or parties to either justify
ones beliefs or change them.

And that is incorrect.  It's just as incorrect as the inquisition or The
Terror or McCarthyism.

Not to mention my previous point that this is all extremely low hanging
philosophical fruit that was beaten to death 250 years ago.  I can't
believe Dennett has nothing better to do ... [1]




[1] But I'll fight to the death to allow him to do it blah blah blah...