On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:13 AM, David Nyman<david.ny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think his exploration of
> the constraints on our actions in "Freedom Evolves" is pretty much on
> the money.

So I can't comment on Freedom Evolves, as I haven't read it.  But I
have read some of his articles and seen him debate and give
interviews.  So that sounds like Dennett alright - rearranging deck
chairs, redefining words, whatever it takes.

>From the wikipedia article on "Freedom Evolves":

"In his treatment of both free will and altruism, he starts by showing
why we should not accept the traditional definitions of either term."

So, as I said, you can't read quote of Dennett and accept it at face
value, because Dennett doesn't restrict himself to traditional
definitions of terms.  You have to interpret Dennett's quotes within
the context of his web of alternate, non-traditional "compatibilist"
word definitions.

Dennett's main goal is not to show that determinism is compatible with
free will (which it isn't), BUT to show that determinism is compatible
with continued social order and cohesion (which it is...probably).

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to