Daniel Dennett: Arc of Life | Full interview

We're sharing this full interview, recorded two years ago, to celebrate the extraordinary work and thought of Daniel Dennett.

'Some people felt that his practical outlook blinded him to the magic of the world. But this couldn’t be further from the truth. He saw the world as full of magic — real magic, he would say, the sort that is not really magic but a natural effect so finely crafted as to be wondrous to us.'

Award winning author Daniel Dennett was one of the greatest philosophers of our time. Shooting to notoriety as one of the 'four horsemen' in the New Atheist movement, he wrote with acclaim on topics ranging from free will, consciousness and the self.

In this exclusive interview, find out how Daniel's life shaped his ideas.

#fourhorsemen #atheism #philosophyofmind

00:00 Introduction
00:20 A father in the secret service
02:56 Childhood philosophical inquiry
04:30 Alternative career paths
06:20 Development of philosophical ideas
08:00 Origin of Dennett's thesis
11:50 Are you a neurophilosopher?
13:07 What would change your mind?
14:05 Belief-desire reasoning
18:33 Impact of ideas on society
20:25 Have your ideas had a positive effect on the world?
21:30 Truth and postmodernism
23:35 Atheism and children
27:02 The value of religious culture
28:45 Groundedness

[that_heretic]

I was sad to hear it, I wish the best to his family. The man was an intellectual giant and will be missed.

[glenncurry]

Daniel Dennett. One of the greatest minds on minds! Shaky changed my life!

[DaboooogA]

RIP - left a formidable legacy in his wake.

[brionhausgeld]

I do not line up with all of Daniel's explorations, but I applaud his mapping of reality that gives all of us a huge "head start". Thank you, Sir.

[chandrakantkamble]

Very sad to know his demise . Immensely inspiring life🙏

[Rico-Suave_]

I loved Dr. Daniel Dennett, very sad to hear about his passing, I've would have loved to meet him, he was my absolute favorite, an intellectual giant, a legend, true sage, heard he was also very kind gentle person, huge loss to civilization, I will watch tons of his lectures in the next few weeks in his memory, I made a playlist of his lectures and interviews for myself to work through, listening to Dr Dennett lectures would be my idea of Heaven 29:37

[AlfieWaterhouse]

Never met the man. Finished reading his memoir in early April. I’ll just say, “Thank goodness”.

[marcobiagini]

I am a physicist and I will explain why our scientific knowledge refutes the idea that consciousness is generated by the brain and that the origin of our mental experiences is physical/biological .
My argument proves that the fragmentary structure of brain processes implies that brain processes are not a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness, which existence implies the existence in us of an indivisible unphysical element, which is usually called soul or spirit (in my youtube channel you can find a video with more detailed explanations). I also argue that all emergent properties are subjective cognitive contructs used to approximately describe underlying physical processes, and that these descriptions refer only to mind-dependent entities. Consciousness, being implied by these cognitive contructs, cannot itself be an emergent property.

Preliminary considerations: the concept of set refers to something that has an intrinsically conceptual and subjective nature and implies the arbitrary choice of determining which elements are to be included in the set; what exists objectively are only the single elements. In fact, when we define a set, it is like drawing an imaginary line that separates some elements from all the other elements; obviously this imaginary line does not exist physically, independently of our mind, and therefore any set is just an abstract idea, a cognitive construct and not a physical entity and so are all its properties. Similar considerations can be made for a sequence of elementary processes; sequence is a subjective and abstract concept.

Mental experience is a precondition for the existence of subjectivity/arbitrariness and cognitive constructs, therefore mental experience cannot itself be a cognitive construct; obviously we can conceive the concept of consciousness, but the concept of consciousness is not actual consciousness.
(With the word consciousness I do not refer to self-awareness, but to the property of being conscious= having a mental experiences such as sensations, emotions, thoughts, memories and even dreams).

From the above considerations it follows that only indivisible elements may exist objectively and independently of consciousness, and consequently the only logically coherent and significant statement is that consciousness exists as a property of an indivisible element. Furthermore, this indivisible entity must interact globally with brain processes because we know that there is a correlation between brain processes and consciousness. This indivisible entity is not physical, since according to the laws of physics, there is no physical entity with such properties; therefore this indivisible entity can be identified with what is traditionally called soul or spirit. The soul is the missing element that interprets globally the distinct elementary physical processes occurring at separate points in the brain as a unified mental experience.

Some clarifications.

The brain doesn't objectively and physically exist as a mind-independent entity since we create the concept of the brain by separating an arbitrarily chosen group of quantum particles from everything else. This separation is not done on the basis of the laws of physics, but using addictional subjective criteria, independent of the laws of physics; actually there is a continuous exchange of molecules with the blood and when and how such molecules start and stop being part of the brain is decided arbitrarily. Brain processes consist of many parallel sequences of ordinary elementary physical processes occurring at separate points. There is no direct connection between the separate points in the brain and such connections are just a subjective abstractions used to approximately describe sequences of many distinct physical processes. Indeed, considering consciousness as a property of an entire sequence of elementary processes implies the arbitrary definition of the entire sequence; the entire sequence as a whole (and therefore every function/property/capacity attributed to the brain) is a subjective abstraction that does not refer to any mind-independendent reality.

Physicalism/naturalism is based on the belief that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain. However, an emergent property is defined as a property that is possessed by a set of elements that its individual components do not possess; my arguments prove that this definition implies that emergent properties are only subjective cognitive constructs and therefore, consciousness cannot be an emergent property.
Actually, all the alleged emergent properties are just simplified and approximate descriptions or subjective/arbitrary classifications of underlying physical processes or properties, which are described directly by the fundamental laws of physics alone, without involving any emergent properties (arbitrariness/subjectivity is involved when more than one option is possible; in this case, more than one possible description). An approximate description is only an abstract idea, and no actual entity exists per se corresponding to that approximate description, simply because an actual entity is exactly what it is and not an approximation of itself. What physically exists are the underlying physical processes. Emergence is nothing more than a cognitive construct that is applied to physical phenomena, and cognition itself can only come from a mind; thus emergence can never explain mental experience as, by itself, it implies mental experience.

My approach is scientific and is based on our scientific knowledge of the physical processes that occur in the brain; my arguments prove that such scientific knowledge excludes the possibility that the physical processes that occur in the brain could be a sufficient condition for the existence of consciousness.

Marco Biagini

[ludviglidstrom]

“My cousins in Israel” - well, given what’s going on there right now, I think you shouldn’t talk about that country in such a casual way.

[swerremdjee]

Did he mentor the inhumane Michel Levin?