Daniel Dennett vs Alvin Plantinga Debate REMASTERED

This is the remastered and repaired audio from an exchange between Dr. Alvin Plantinga and Dr. Daniel Dennett. The audio was really bad in every iteration I found online, so I had my sound producer Sawyer Hudson doctor it up. The doctored version is still pretty bad but you can at least make out about 98% of what's said.

For a little background on this exchange, Dr. Plantinga was presenting a paper he wrote entitled, "Science and Religion, Where the Conflict Really Lies." Dr. Dennett was tasked with commenting on the paper. That's it. He was tasked with responding to the content. But unfortunately Dennett went way off topic and kind of went on a rant against religious belief. Because of this, to lay audiences it ended up sounding like a debate (even though it wasn't).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LINKS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOCIAL

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GET IN TOUCH

#Plantinga #Dennett #Debate

[praiseoflight]

Plantinga (Presents his paper, “Science and Religion: Where the Conflict Really Lies): 0:46
Dennett (Responds to Plantinga): 44:46
Plantinga (Responds and defends his arguments): 1:21:02
(Funny moment): 1:27:40
Q&A: 1:30:24
Question 1 (for Plantinga) about the reliability of our faculties (regarding EAAN): 1:30:32
Question 2 (for Dennett) about rational belief and his Superman scenario (terrible audio for the questioner): 1:31:04
Question 3 (for Plantinga) from Michael Tooley, about the debate at Baylor (and Behe), then about the EAAN: 1:35:36
Question 4 (for Plantinga), more about the EAAN: 1:41:24
Question 5 (for Dennett) on naturalism, probability, and metaphysics: 1:45:27

[journeyfiveonesix]

Alvin Plantinga: Is this microphone working?
Youtube viewers: no.

[RadicOmega]

Daniel Dennet didn't engage in Plantinga's premises in the SLIGHTEST! He just went on his New Atheist rant and completely strawmanned everything Plantinga said!

[camwg]

Excellent, you have no idea how many times I listen to the original audio, thank you!

[digimikeh]

Plantinga's Evolutionary argument against naturalism is extremely powerful..

[july]

Thank you for putting the resources into the clean-up.

[christiangadfly]

I'm so relieved Dennet mentioned premise one. Maybe he'll address it next time.

[Ketiseb]

Thank you for cleaning this up, but it is really hard to listen to even at this state. Still, after listening to the initial audio, I applaud you. Have a good one.

[LoveYourNeighbour.]

Perhaps the person originally responsible for making sure this was properly recorded, lacked 'FIRST PERSON EXPERIENCE.' I'm just saying... Thanks for clearing it up a bit for us, Cameron.

[eliwhaley]

God bless you, I thought this was lost forever

[DerickTherving]

I would pay for this to be transcribed and then voice acted.

[TheologyUnleashed]

I feel like this could be made better. How do get the original file?

[estimatingsoftwarequotesof]

Whether you agree or disagree with the overall argument, Plantinga is a genius.

[utopiabuster]

We have to understand how Dennett attained his "infamy". The original "Four Horsemen" included a woman named, Ayaan Hirsi Ali. This was before the publicist had come up with the name. In order for the "Horse-{men}" advert to work, Hirsi Ali was removed and replaced with Dennett who was recommended by Sam Harris.
The whole idea of the Four Horsemen was orchestrated for profit. Don't get me wrong, it's obvious Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett are true believers but there can be no doubt profit was a motivating factor, especially considering the misogynistic dismissal of Ali.

It's clear Dennett was outclassed. Plantinga able to articulate his "Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism" in laymen terms from the modality of the argument he constructed according to philosophical formats using mathematical symbolism as with all his arguments. While Dennett was left with the "sky-daddy" tropes typical of atheist arguments.

Dennett is known for his redefining of terms making his arguments particularly unstable, noted even among secular philosophers.

As I've maintained, and what Plantinga proves in this discourse, given level playing fields in which atheist must defend their position, atheist and atheism fails on all fronts, so all the atheist is left with is denial, rejection, rhetoric and mockery.

We have to appreciate academics like Plantinga and many others. Because of their efforts theological philosophy has gained impressive status and stature.
Unfortunately, the result of this one sided power struggle is that many universities are eliminating their humanities departments which includes philosophy.


God Bless.

[Mentat]

Great work, Cameron! I may not think Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument is any good, but I still think this great discussion deserves a big audience.

[kieran]

Atheist Philosophers like Daniel Dennet and his denial of first person experience because "the mind is physical" is akin to the denial of space travel because "the earth is flat." The semantic excuses and convoluted epistemology used to explain away first person experience are very much akin to the conspiracy theories used by flat earthers to explain away the data.

This was just Alvin schooling Dennet, and Dennet diverting and spitting his dummy out.

[daman]

I've realized the structure of the EAN is very similar to that of psychophysical harmony, just with truth, rather than appropriate phenomenology

[andrewhart]

Regarding Plantinga's EAAN, the response "natural selection would favour truthful cognitive faculties" was refuted by him in this way: under naturalism, beliefs about truth don't necessarily precede action in the way it seems to us. Rather the brain works on its own according to complex genetic instructions, completely deterministically, and thoughts and beliefs about truth are formed somewhat in the aftermath of predetermined actions. Therefore these predetermined actions dictate your behaviour that may contribute to your survival, but your beliefs about truth are wholly separate from them, thus you have no reason to believe that your truth-perception is reasonably accurate.

[MixtapeKilla]

Science, The Universe & The God Question

I wanna see Dr. John Lennox & Dr. Alvin Plantinga debate Dr. Peter Atkins & Daniel Dennett at Rice University

[gagebeam]

Did Dennett know he could use his full time to present an argument?