Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett [The Best Bits]

Yes, I do have a Patreon account, thank you for asking:

My other channel about other stuff:

My Twitter:

My tumbr:

My facebook:

Here’s my society6 store if you’re interested in my pretentious minimalist poster designs:

[deepashtray]

It seems that for many people the activity in their head is blurred with the activity of the physical world. It would explain how so many people just don't get why emotions are not evidence for anything but experiencing emotions. I've had countless exchanges with Creationists and Apologists who claim to debunk evolution just to realize that they simply don't get it nor do they seldom show they have the capacity to get it.

[video_enjoyer]

I got an ad for Mormonism before the video. They've taken going door to door to the digital world. XP

[GypsyLeah]

I love when people succinctly state the things I've been thinking. Great job.

[biostemm]

The most logical explanation I've heard is that humans naturally look for patterns/agency in things, and in lieu of any actual knowledge or data, they will formulate an explanation almost "organically", (i.e. not as an immediate action, but as a gradual and almost passive process).

[AntiCitizenX]

I'm actually not a fan of HADD in the way that Dennett describes it. It's too much of a dog jumping at noises and not enough actual spirits. I think a far better explanation for HADD is theory of mind. As a communal species, we have to be able to identify other "minds" in the sense of other beings with desires, motivations, perspectives, etc. This is where animism comes from, in my view, because we tend to endow that mind essence into everything---rocks, trees, waves, etc. Animism then gives rise to polytheism, which gives rise to henotheism, which finally gives rise to monotheism.

[happytobereligionfree]

As a lifelong non-believer, I just don't understand the need for "belief in belief." What is to be gained by the supposed fuzzy feeling inside of an obvious delusion? This is not the same as sentimentality. My reminiscing of past times with my parents, now gone, are a great source of comfort and happiness. Inventing a celestial sky daddy is just bullshit, plain and simple.

[XDRONIN]

It sucks to be an evolved Ape, except maybe for sex; I do like to think that if we had evolved from a different animal like a wolf or a tiger we would have a better society.

[Nygaard]

I like Robert Sapolsky's theory better...

[AGNOSSI]

As usual, an excellent presentation. Thanks TMM. You have my vote - and support - which has never waned. It took awhile, and, for what it's worth, you have earned my trust.

[SuperPuzzler]

I've been thinking about the whole "outside of spacetime" thing. Now, I'm still not gonna up and believe in God, but what if said god actually generates its OWN spacetime field? Like how Barry Allen generates the Speed Force. Or for a closer but less familiar analogy, how Ultraman Nexus creates the Meta Field. If this god is also infinite, as a lot of believers say he is, then that would mean its own spacetime field is ALSO infinite. As such, it could create a universe within a universe- much like Rick Sanchez whenever he needs a new car battery, but with more narcissism and zero ability to grow as a person.

Now, I'm no physicist or cosmologist, or anything else that would be relevant to the science involved, so I can't tell you if this god could create an infinite universe within its own infinite spacetime field without the two annihilating each other or something. Maybe it could if it's truly omnipotent. Or maybe our universe is actually finite in size, and reaching the end of OUR spacetime would lead to the beginning of GOD'S spacetime. Or maybe it would loop around. I honestly have no idea, and I've no evidence to back ANY of this up, which is why I don't believe any of it's true.

But I love sci-fi, so this stuff is fun to think about.

[clintronnow]

I thought John C. Wathey's book, The Illusion of God's Presence: The Biological Origins of Spiritual Longing, was better. imho =D

[thescapegoatmechanism]

Your suspicion that no one understands the nature of God is openly admitted by several Christians (e.g. Luther, Pascal, Kierkegaard). That's not necessarily a problem for them nor is that particularly heretical. Serving others is the name of the game for Christianity, not theorizing about the nature of God as many philosophers of religion do.

[intronaut]

Of course religion is a naturally occurring phenomenon. Did that actually need to be said?
It occurs, so it exists within the universe, so It is not supernatural. Q.E.D.
Am I missing something?

[johnharvey]

In regard to religion arising naturally from the human mind... I think if we allow that to be called a natural process, then I'm not sure what couldn't be considered natural. If he just means that it doesn't come about via a conscious effort but rather follows procedurally from how our minds work, then I'd counter by saying that a conscious effort to create religion would follow just as procedurally from how our minds work.

[xdassinx]

Yeah, a lot of times when they don't believe something they'll quickly turn to one of the “jinglely keys” like “it's a mystery”, “we'll find out when we're in heaven”, or “fake it till you make it”.

[Troubleshooter]

You just gave me an excellent reason to dig into my own copy of _Breaking the Spell_, which I've had for a bit but hadn't tackled yet. Thanks!

[SmangItDrums]

Dr. Justin L. Barrett had also tackled this subject, and is a leading purveyor of the CSR (cognitive science of religion). Granted, this is all new territory to me, so I'm not speaking for Barrett at all. If anything, I am curious as to other people's opinions and perspective on the matter of religion as a natural phenomenon.

[coffeefrog]

When I was religious, I was told to love God. When I said I wanted to love him but didn't feel anything for God, I was told that wanting to love God is the same as loving God. Somehow that contented me for a while. :/

[trillionbones]

That is remarkably close to my understanding of God and religion. I'm gonna buy that book

[gepisar]

Reminds me very much of Prof M. Schermer's series "Think like a scientist"