Just How Free Is The Question Of Free Will For Many Millennia

Just How Free Is The Question Of Free Will For Many Millennia
Colby Brownell
Chad Brodbeck
ENC 1102
December 4th, 2016
Just How Free Are You Mankind has pondered on the question of free will for many millennia. There are discussions of free will that pop up in
religion, academia, politics, popular culture, and day to day life. To most, it might seem that humans havefree will. Humans strive to be independent
individuals, following precise schedules and strict regulations, always chasing after some dream of what they want from life. Humans more and more
seem to be in control of everything happening on earth. However, a simple acceptance of the given reality is not enough. Our conception of free will
ties into all aspects of human endeavor. If we are not the ones calling the shots then what is? What would change if we suddenly realized that we are
not the ones choosing our actions, what would that entail for our societies, principles, and systems of morality? Who will hold the unaccountable
accountable? Even if humans didn't have free will would it be beneficial to still believe they did? Proving whether or not humans have free will is
tricky business. Numerous philosophers grappled with these questions for their whole lives, and more recently science has started to delve into the
unconscious nature of human choices. Mark Balaguer in his book on free will set out to evaluate the arguments against humans having free will. The
oldest argument for why humans can't have free will stems from determinism. Determinism is the philosophical
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Mutations in Nature and Culture Essay
Mutations in Nature and Culture
Many other words, both positive and negative, spring to mind when one hears the word "mutation." In a scientific sense, one might think of the random
variations that lead to evolution in species. In a sci–fi/ horror flick sense, one might think of a vicious monster that after contact with some radioactive
substance became terribly disfigured. But rarely do we associate mutations with ideas pervasive to our culture. Daniel Dennett suggests that memes
undergo a certain kind of mutation that is inherent to the creative evolution of culture.
The most important distinction to be made between mutation as it applies to biological evolution, and how it applies to creative evolution is the
function of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This may account for some of the messiness involved in trying to examine how mutations of creative thought occur; they are constantly crossing over
between cultures. There is no neat diagram as with the branching of species to demonstrate the path that, for example, a thought may take on its way to
becoming a theory.
This begs the question, then, how much control can the individual hope to exert over the way that ideas combine and affect one another within his or
her own mind? Dennett writes that our ideas are limited by our personal histories and experiences (450), but this limitation is not conscious on the
part of the thinker. Perhaps what are limited by our experiences are not the ideas we can possess at a given moment in time, but the way in which
these experiences lead us to organize our thoughts. If we attribute creativity to a disorganized trading of memes in space, then how much can we credit
an artist with her own brilliant work? But if instead we regard the thinker as organizer of thoughts, creative mutations occur as a result of a new method
of organization based on what Dennett calls the thinker's "style."
"Each particular creator, each novelist or composer or computer programmer, is sped along through Design Space by a particular idiosyncratic set of
habits known as style. It is style that both constrains and enables us, giving a positive direction to our

Review Of ' Dennett And Picard '
Dennett and Picard
Zifei Li
Dennett suggests writing a program or designing a robot that feels pain to initiate a more detailed pain experiment. The example of computer
simulation of hurricane shows that to conduct a qualified simulation program requires a definite theory of the conditions and behaviors of the object to
be simulated. First, we write a program according to the theory of pain, input the descriptions of conditions in text, then the computer types the
descriptions of results in text. But this time it only gives an exterior behavior, so the program is modified to out the interior results including the
reactions of C–fiber and heart rate. After some trials, the program's feedback output has all the descriptions of neurophysiology and mentalistic
psychology. Now we have simulated the external and internal causes and effects of pain, but not the pain itself. Then the program is rewritten to
output 'There is a pain ...'. After this move, the quality of the pain is also added to the descriptions of results. However, we should aim the program to
do, not to output descriptions, i.e. the challenge is to make a machine that indeed feels the pain rather than describe the feeling of pain. In this case, the
describing system can be the control system for our new robot. Then the robot is attached to different objects like flywheel and flashing lights that can
move and there we have a robot that technically reacts to a pain stimulation.
When distinguishing if artificial

Where Am I Daniel Dennett Summary
In "Where Am I?" Daniel Dennett pontificates upon the state of human existence specifically personal identity in a humorous fashion. His writing
ponders whether your spatial location is tokened within the brain or body, should the two be separated. First, I will explain the basic overview of the
work. Then I will identify myself as Yorick or Hamlet, and give Dennett's objections to such a statement. Finally an argument will be provided to defend
my identification of self against Dennett's objection.
Further elucidation is needed for complete comprehension of the work I will be referencing. In the story Dennett undergoes a drastic science fiction
surgery wherein his body and brain are separated by scientists. This is done in order for his body ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Such habit stemmed from the social norm of your body's location being "where" you are. However, I ultimately yoke my identity of self to Yorick.
Dennett expresses abject displeasure to this assertion. He indicates that sensory input that the brain perceives must be provided by the body. He
provides a logistic look at this perceived flaw. At this point he says that should your brain order your body to rob a bank, by my identification of self
being Yorick, the law should imprison my brain. However, the body would still be allowed free roam of theWorld and could very well be plopped
merrily on a beach. Therefore the perception would be that you are not being punished for the crime at all.
I contend that my sense of self is still anchored in Yorick as should my body be imprisoned I contend that I could have my brain "hooked up" to a
new body and would then perceive myself as free. After being hooked to this new body, I would still possess all my same memories, beliefs, and
personality traits inherent to myself. I would also cease to perceive myself as being in confinement in the jail. However, a new brain hooked into my
incarcerated body would not identify as me nor would it possess the same inherent traits. Thus it would seem I can be separate from my body while it
would be impossible to separate me from

The Impact Of Consciousness On Modern Day Psychology
The study of consciousness in modern day psychology is becoming increasingly difficult to explain. In the early days of consciousness studies it may
have been explained as our experience or awareness (Blackmore, 2010). However, over a number of years, there have been many psychologists who
have contributed many important theories towards the explanation of how consciousness works, and its initial existence. As Chalmers states: "There is
nothing that we know more intimately than conscious experience, but there is nothing harder to explain" (Chalmers, 1995 p.200). Being one of the
leading philosophers in consciousness, David Chalmers introduced the idea of the Hard Problem in 1994. Chalmers defined the hard problem as:
"The questions of how physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience" (Chalmers, 1995 p.63). Chalmers suggested that he found
it difficult to understand how a small mass of grey matter such as the brain could produce conscious experience. These ideas of a 'hard problem' in
consciousness were rejected by a number of theorists, which will be discussed later in the essay. Another idea which Chalmers has put forward is the
zombie. A zombie, according to Chalmers is a being identical to you and I, speaks like you, acts like you, but is not conscious (Blackmore, 2010). A
zombie contains no qualia (a physical conscious experience). The idea of the zombie put forward by Chalmers is extremely important in the explanation
of consciousness and has been

An Analysis Of Daniel Dennett 's ' Consciousness
Introduction As our scientific paradigm has shifted towards a materialist account of the world, many thinkers believe that appeals to the supernatural
cannot provide truth. Consequently, beliefs that had once been considered adequate must now be reworked if not torn down entirely to fit this new
world view. Daniel Dennett's book Consciousness Explained attempts to provide an account of our internal experience (i.e. Consciousness) that is
rooted in the materialist world view. Though he is not the first to undertake this project, he takes issue with what he perceives to be the popular
materialist account of consciousness, and seeks promote his own theory. With this essay I aim to offer an informative summary of the book followed
by an evaluative dialogue of its central claims.
Dismissal of Dualism Before introducing his theory Dennett offers a brief dismissal of Dualism. Dualism is the belief that there exists along with the
body an immaterial soul. Depending on the variation of Dualism, the soul either contributes to or produces what we perceive to be conscious
experience. Dennett takes issue with this view through inspection of the body's interaction with the soul. He argues that the soul being an immaterial
entity shouldn't have any causal relationship with the material body. The aforementioned argument is grounded in empirical observation. As far as we
know there isn't any evidence of unobservable material thing having causal interaction with the material world.

A Comparison Of Determinism And Free Will Theory
Magd Al Harbi
A Comparison of Determinism & Free Will Theory
Kent State University
Introduction
One aspect of human existence that I think is particularly interesting is the extent of control of which we have over the decisions we make. In life,
there are many decisions to be made, from simple ones that seem almost subconscious to complex decisions that can take days to ponder on. There
are decisions that we make that directly affect others, indirectly affect others, and decisions that we believe do not affect others, or even ourselves, at
all. There are decisions that we believe do not matter and would have no impact on our existence. Two theories that shed some light on these aspects
are the theory of determinism from ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
By "pleasurable", Hume means a sensation that simply makes us feel good. An assertion such as this brings forth the reason behind Hume's theory that
humans are bound by determinism–firstly, we are born to naturally make decisions based on the most pleasurable outcome, which is not something we
can control, therefore, it is a pre–determined characteristic of humans (Hume, 2006, p. 76). Secondly, Hume argues that the feelings we receive
regarding things are determined mostly by elements out of our control. Therefore almost every sensation and feeling we incur is not made by that of
our own volition but by a combination of countless ideas and impressions that have occurred in our life that we are not able to scrutinize or
comprehend fully because there are far too many to analyze.
Thirdly, Hume integrates the complexity of social norms into his theory as well. Depending on the situation, gaining social approbation from the
community can cause more pleasure for someone than acting out of a selfish motive, due to the social disapproval making a decision could present
(Hume, 2006, p. 10). For example, upon studying this theory, I found myself thinking about a time in which I was working on a project with a group
and felt like skipping one of our group meetings because I was exhausted from work and

The Recipe for Nature
The Recipe for Nature
Missing Works Cited
Nature is a fluid coalescence of complex magnificence resulting from an algorithmic mastery of simplicity. It is no doubt an awe–inspiring entity that
invokes both great curiosity and bafflement in those who attempt to account for its existence and splendor. It is often seen as overly reductionistic, if
not ВЎВ§dangerousВЎВЁ, to try to condense the (mindless?) brilliance of nature through any sort of mechanistic or logical means. And here we are
faced with what Daniel Dennett calls DarwinВЎВ¦s dangerous idea: ВЎВ§that all the fruits of evolution can be explained as the products of an
algorithmic processВЎВЁ (Dennett, 1995 p.60). It is no surprise that this idea might present a problem for the Homo–sapien ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Therefore, chance and randomness might disallow for the concept of ВЎВ§survival of the fittestВЎВЁ and instead allow for otherwise less–adept
members of the species to have increased reproducibility and thus an increased genetic impact on subsequent generations. The fact that events can
alter or in part determine which members of a species are more likely to survive and reproduce, leads to the fact that the specific outcome (e.g., which
particular genes will be passed onto the next generation) of an algorithmic process is not fixed, just that the inherent nature of the causal procedure is.
For instance, the algorithmic process of natural selection does not provide a certain mold by which to predict the most viable members of a species,
only that it is guaranteed that the most well–adapted members of a species will necessarily correspond to the most viable.
We now return to the question of how the complexity and intricacy of nature can be accounted for by an algorithmic process constituted by an
inundation of simple steps. William PaleyВЎВ¦s well–known watchmaker analogy is particularly useful here, in that it illustrates the problem of
complexity of design (i.e., of a watch) independent of a purposeful designer (i.e., a watchmaker). If a watch represents a complexity in design that
could not have possible arisen out of purposeless chance or randomness alone, it must therefore have required a significant amount of ВЎВ§design
workВЎВЁ (i.e., work done) (Dennett,

The Conflict Between Religion And Science
Is there a conflict between religion and science, or are both items compatible? This question is addressed in the debate that is written about in the book
Science and Religion, Are they Compatible, by Daniel C. Dennett and Alvin Plantinga. Alvin Plantinga thoroughly debates the topic by covering the
compatibility of Christianity and science. He continues his argument by stating the issue of naturalist and science harbor the conflict not the theism.
Plantinga goes into detail how some scientific theories without the help of theism has conflict and should be considered falsifiable because of the
contradictions they possess. While Alvin Plantinga does make a prominent effort to illustrate how religion and science are compatible, there are
alsosome flaws in his well–developed debate between Daniel Dennett.
Alvin Plantinga begins his side of the debate by using Christianity to demonstrate the how science and religion do not possess a problem together. The
items that are used to illustrate the point that is being made is the different doctrines used in the different types of Christianity, such as the Apostles
Creed. There is not a conflict between the scientific fields of chemistry, physics, or the religion Christianity. He choose to use thetheory of evolution to
compare religion against because the theory of evolution does not state whether it is a guided or unguided process of creation. Plantinga creatively
debates the comparison between the two by using different religious

Review Of ' Dennett 's ' Quining Qualia '
Paper 1 – Question 3: Dennett's "Quining Qualia"
Daniel Dennett looks to quine qualia, or completely disprove their existence, in "Quining Qualia." He is successful in creating a theoretical framework
by which many intuitive arguments for qualia can be struck down. Because of his success, an argument from introspection is difficult to make; Dennett
seems to successfully refute many of the arguments given by intuition or folk psychology. I will adopt Eugene Park's criticism in critiquing Dennett,
showing that an argument from introspection can provide some insight into how qualia might exist. Park argues that relying on memory comparison is
incomplete, and unfairly eliminates direct apprehensibility.
Introduction
In "Quining Qualia," ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This makes qualia inherently private. The fourth and last quality is direct apprehensibility to consciousness. This describes the fact that we know
everything about our own qualia, and we can easily access all of its properties. Dennett explains that because qualia are "properties of my experiences,"
they therefore must be accessible to one's conscious states (229).
The coffee–test case: Intuition pump 7 – Chase and Sanborn Dennett uses the seventh intuition pump to explore the relationship between qualia and
reactive attitudes to those qualia. The situation involves two coffee tasters who work for Maxwell House, ensuring that each batch is of consistent
quality. After six years of tastings, both Chase and Sanborn declare that they used to like thetaste of the coffee, but that this is no longer the case.
Chase says that he thinks that the coffee tastes the same as it did six years ago, but that he has become a more "sophisticated" coffee drinker and his
more unfavorable reaction (or reactive attitude) towards the coffee has decreased his enjoyment of it. Sanborn, however, does not like the coffee
because he says his taste buds have changed, and now the coffee tastes worse than before. Sanborn claims that his taste–qualia have changed, not his
reactive attitude towards the coffee. It is difficult, however, to discern whether Chase and Sanborn are actually correct in

How Does Daniel Dennett Exist
In Where am I?, Daniel Dennett goes through a series of operations and life changing experiences that involves separating his brain and body,
having his body buried alive, and then shares a body between his brain and an 'identical' brain. The topic of the paper is the discussion of where and
when Dennett exists throughout the narrative. It is an interesting topic because it forces the reader to consider the the necessary and sufficient
conditions for a person to exis. In this paper, I will argue that Daniel Dennett exists as Yorick (brain by itself) or the combination of Yorick/Hamlet or
Yorick/Fortinbras. Dennett still existing as Yorick or as the combination of Yorick/Hamlet or Yorick/Fortinbras is lockean theory. This means that
having a body is neither a sufficient or necessary condition for being a person.This is how Dennett is able to survive until the end of the story.... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Behaviorism is mental terms refer to dispositions to behave in various ways. Materialism is mental terms refer to the causes of dispositions to behave
in various ways. Numerical identity is the relation everything bears to itself and nothing else. Two things can only be numerically identical if they are
actually one and the same thing. Qualitative identity is two numerically distinct things that are indistinguishable in their surface properties. Multiple
Realizability of the Mental shows that a single kind of mental property can be realized by a variety of physical materials and processes. A necessary
condition is, that for X to be true, the conditions for X must be satisfied. A sufficient condition is, if X is satisfied, guarantees that X is in the

Playing against a Computer or a Human Research
Background and significance Individuals participating in an interaction perceive one another as rational agents who possess beliefs, desires and
intentions that might be different than their own. Assumptions made about these mental states are used to interpret and predict behavior. Conferring
such attributes to an agent (human, computer, whatever) has been described as adopting an 'intentional stance' (Dennet, 1996). Adopting an intentional
stance is part of our broader ability to mentalize which involves representing and attributing mental states to oneself and others. Research concerned
with understanding the neural system of mentalizing has indentified a network of regions that minimally involve the temporoparietal region (TPJ) and
the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) (Abu–Akel and Shamay–Tsoory, 2011). However, it is not completely clear the extent to which humans readily
mentalize (or adopt an intentional stance) with other humans or non–humans (e.g., computers). Thus an important goal of this study is to investigate
how the neural network associated with adopting an intentional stance is modulated under various interaction conditions in which the interacting
partner and the context are varied. Several studies employing various interactive games have been conducted to uncover the neural basis involved in
adopting an intentional stance. These studies followed a similar script according to which participants were led to believe that they are playing either
against a

Stance Dennett
1.The two views on "belief attribution that Dennett rejects is Realism and Interpretationism. 2.The Physical Stance as stated in the reading, "... if you
want to predict the behavior of a system, determine its physical constitution (perhaps all the way down to the microphysical level) and the physical
nature of the impingements upon it, and use your knowledge of the laws of physics to predict the outcome for any input." Let's take, for example, even
though light switches aren't made to shock people, we might know that if you were to touch the switch with your wet hand, you'll get shocked. 3.The
Design Stance as stated by Dennett, "... where one ignores the actual (possibly messy) details of the physical constitution of an object, and, on the

David Hume's Theory of Ethics Essay
David Hume is considered to be one of the big three British empiricists, along with Hobbes and Locke, and lived near the end of the Enlightenment.
The Catholic Church was losing its control over science, politics and philosophy and the Aristotelian world view was being swallowed up by a more
mechanistic viewpoint. Galileo found the theory provided by Copernicus to be correct, that our earth was not the center of everything, but the celestial
bodies including the earth circled the sun. Mathematicians abounded. Pascal developed the first mechanical calculator and Newtonian physics was
breaking new ground. Not even the arts were immune. Within the same era Mary Shelley authored Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus. The main
theme for this... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The latter being the kind that he uses as a naturalist.
David Hume's most famous quote is "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve
and obey them." To understand the implications of this quote as a basis for an ethical theory you need to understand that every other ethical theory
attempts to derive how things ought to be from how things are. The jumps from matters of fact and relations of ideas perceived by reason, to value
judgments perceived by emotions, are made in Hume's opinion with no logical reason. There is nothing contradictory in the statement the sun will not
rise in the morning, it is not unreasonable. We only feel that it "ought to" continue rising in the morning. The scientific method uses inductive reasoning
to construct a hypothesis and Hume does not contend that it should not be used. It has been useful thus far in making predictions and it is the only tool
that we have for understanding the world around us.
David Hume's ethical theory sits between philosophy and modern day psychology. He uses the empirical method to study the natural tendencies of
human beings to engage their emotions, and in our emotions is where morality could be understood best. One must remember

Analysis Of Dennett 's ' Qualia '
memory has changed when comparing the two. Since qualia cannot be used to verify claims about qualia, they are content–less and incoherent – or so
Dennett's tale goes.
IV. Dennett contra 'Qualia ' Dennett is a man upset. A man upset about qualia– he seems appalled that something could exist which cannot be tested or
used in some way to verify something. In fact, Dennett seems so upset about qualia he created his own idea of it, and argued against that instead of a
more charitably (or correctly) understood definition. How, then, to prove the qualia Dennett uses is a strawman? Let's start by discussing his two
examples –first, with pump 5/6 on neurosurgery. Recall that Dennett believes the neurosurgeon showed that our qualia are less than private and
immediately apprehensible. The neurosurgeon knew our qualia better– we could not tell what was changed between our memory of past qualia and our
current qualia. Dennett thinks pump 5/6 does particularly well in undermining the apprehensibility of qualia– after all, the qualia itself seems useless is
telling us just what has happened during the surgery. Except, qualia never could. The neurosurgeon, if he or she changed our memory, would still
change our qualia – our qualia of the memory. Dennett didn't seem to understand the scope of qualia here – or that we produce it automatically from
intending our consciousness toward anything at all, including memory. We have qualia of remembering, qualia of past states, real qualia

Analysis Of Daniel Dennett 's ' Where Am I ' Essay
A body is just a body without a brain to command it and a brain can only do so much without a body to yield. It's undeniable that the mind and body
are completely dependent on the other to function, but where do they join together to form a unique individual. To what extent do the mind and body
bridge together to form a unique individual? Is there even a bridge that connects them or are the mind and body separate entities who solely rely on each
other to function, but that's where all the shared boundaries that create a person end.
Daniel Dennett tackles these mind and body questions in his essay, Where Am I. In Daniel Dennett's, Where Am I, Dennett agrees to undergo an
operation with would remove his brain from his body and insert an antennae that would enable his brain to control his body remotely. When Dennett
wakes up, he finds that he doesn't know where he is, but not in that sense that he was geographically lost. Dennett has woken up to find himself in his
body without his brain, leaving him with the question, where am I? Is Dennett still in his body, in his brain, or in some cross–section between the two?
First Dennett considers what it would mean if his identity, his "Dennettness" so to speak, were attached to his body, whom he has dubbed Hamlet.
Ostensibly it would make sense if he himself were still in his body. When he first wakes up after the surgery, he is unable to put himself in the vat with
his brain, named Yorick. He can't shake theperception that he is

What Is Dennett Predictive Strategy
Dennett argues first that to believe is to adopt a predictive strategy and second that the most appropriate predictive strategy for human behavior is what
he calls an "intentional stance." The intentional stance is a presumption that people act "rationally," and this is argued to be the strongest stance in
relation to minds. Even presuming that his first position is accurate, the second one has several flaws. The most immediate objection is that human
beings do not appear to be rational agents. To argue that human beings are rational agents requires first that one define what it means to behave
rationally, and second to prove that people act in this way. The best attempt at a theory which would allow for mapping onto actual human behavior is

In Response to Daniel Dennett's "Where Am I?" Essay
One potential worry that one might have upon reading Daniel Dennett's "Where Am I?," is about the complications that might arise from Dennett
categorizing his brain, who he calls Yorick, and his body, who he calls Hamlet, as two distinct entities. One may contend that the brain and the body are
in fact only one entity, connected much in the same way that other people's brains and bodies seem to be connectedВ—however that may beВ—with
the exception of an unusually large temporal gap between Dennett's brain and Dennett's body in this case. Unfortunately, however, this worry is
ultimately unclear and incoherent, but if expressed in different terms, it is possible to make sense of the underlying idea . In this paper, I will describe
this worry, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Now, where am I?'" It is here that one may believe that Dennett makes a mistake by categorizing his brain and his body as two distinct entities.
After all, he claims that his brain, after surgery, will be "kept in a safe place where it could execute its normal control functions by elaborate radio
links" (ibid, 379). In other words, these radio links are intended to take the place of normal neurological pathways such that "no information would be
lost, all the connectivity would be preserved" (ibid, 379). Thus, after surgery, while there does exist a great temporal gap between his brain and his
body, the relevant connection between the two does not appear to be much different than the connection between the brain and the body of someone
with a "normal" temporal gap. And since the connection is still, in essence, the same regardless of however peculiar Dennett's case may be, it could be
concluded that Dennett is no more entitled to name and categorize his body and his brain as distinct entities than anyone else.
Thus, one may further conclude that the only difference between a "normal" individual and Dennett's hypothetical case is the great temporal gap that
exists between the brain and the body in Dennett's case. A difference that one may believe does not have clear philosophical implications. Therefore, it
can be suggested that Dennett, in setting up his scenario in this way, does not contribute much more insight into the В‘self'–phenomenon than many

Objectivity In Autophenonmenology And Heterophenomenology.
Objectivity in Autophenonmenology and Heterophenomenology
In the journal "How to Study Human Consciousness Empirically," Daniel Dennett claims that "people are often just wrong about what they are doing
and how they are doing it." Rather than having an objective and complete understanding of our own intentions and processes, we tend to use
assumptions as knowledge, alter facts to align with our beliefs, and theorize about causes and effects. As a result, studies of traditionalphenomenology
(referred to in this situation as autophenomenology) are often clouded by personal biases and misinterpretations. The evidence of this confabulation is
very similar to a curious child – it reveals itself through one repeated question: why? For example, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This intrinsic subjectivity is important to keep in mind when studying consciousness from a heterophenomenological perspective. The only true basis
we have to determine the individual experience of another person is what they communicate to us. If this communication is inherently jumbled with
misunderstandings and theories of one's qualia, the data on which heterophenomenology is based is flawed and, consequently, so is
heterophenomenology itself. Rather than providing a scientific third–person view of consciousness, it creates more of a collective fictional narrative
that describes the average experiences of others. In analogous terms, heterophenomenology aims to create a textbook, but can only produce a pop
culture magazine. This view may be debated by analyzing the validity of personal experience. The fact that an individual's view of their own internal
processes is flawed could be seen as irrelevant; in the end, what truly matters to the study of consciousness is what one is experiencing. If what one
believes differs from the truth, does this incongruity not reveal key factors of consciousness? Furthermore, these subjective claims can be
cross–referenced with scientific facts to neutralize human error. This can be seen in one of the examples above, in which an individual claims that they
went to a restaurant because they were hungry because they had not eaten in

Where Am I by Daniel Dennett Essay
In Daniel Dennett's piece of literature "Where Am I" tells the hypothetical scenario of Dennett who is approached by the pentagon to undergo a
dangerous mission where he is asked to retrieve a radioactive warhead lodged deep underground. In order to retrieve the radioactive warhead, he must
undergo a brain operation to fully remove the brain as the waves from the warhead only affect the brain.(Page 34) Along with the radioactivity affecting
the brain, the pentagon wanted to monitor the brains activity while underground, thus being another reason for the operation. As Dennett is
underground working on the warhead, his radio transmitters sending signals between his brain and his body began to fail which causes him to lose
control and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The three responses to this longstanding issue in western philosophy include materialism, dualism and idealism. Materialism can be defined simply as
the only things there are all material or physical things. Idealists believe that there are no material things; there are only minds, and thoughts and
experiences. While dualists think that the mental and physical are deeply different in kind: thus the mental is at least not identical with the physical.
Relating to Daniel Dennett's essay "Where am I" if Yorrick (Dennett's brain) were to die would Dennett continue to exist through Hubert (the
computer program that functionally mirrors his brain)? Dennett would not be able to survive because even though Hubert functions like Yorrick,
Hubert isn't able to recall memories and thoughts that make up a large part of Dennett. An example of this would be if you were to put your brain in
a famous singer's body and take their brain, would you be where they were or would you be in school right now? If they were to get interviewed about
their past, what would they say. Memories and our feelings are vital to who we are. The celebrity might claim to be you and be able to tell personal
stories about you. So Even though Dennett continues to have basic function such as breathing and a heart beat, his trust testament to himself, which
included his personality, intelligence, and desires are not shown through Hubert. If Hubert

Daniel Dennett Analysis
Daniel Dennett Daniel Dennett thinks that we are our body and our brain and that is it. His response to the mind body problem is Physicalism,
because he believes that we are only made up of matter and that there is no spiritual part like the soul, for example included. He thinks that "what
you can't see, isn't there and what isn't there, doesn't have to be explained. Correspondingly, Dennett has another philosophy, which overall, states
that our lives would be nothing if we didn't have a brain. He explains how, if we didn't have a brain, we would not be able to feel emotions, or pain
or be able to classify something as beautiful or ugly. We would not be able to see, smell, taste or touch anything as we need a brain to process
everything. I

Daniel Dennett Four Horsemen
Religion and science often contradict each other's arguments and explanations. Evidently, many people believe religious claims over science,
reasoning, and proven facts. The Four Horsemen, also known as the New Atheists, refer to four atheist writers. Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Sam
Harris, and Christopher Hitchens have written several popular books on atheism, and their writings call for new ways of thinking about religion and
interpretations of religion through scientific fact and logic rather than blind, unsupported beliefs. While the words and arguments of the Four
Horsemen seem logical in context, some people are not swayed by their call to question religion. As seen in the debates during Dover and Scopes
Trials regarding evolution ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many people follow the teachings of the ancient texts of religions, such as the Bible and Quran, which were written before the scientific eras of
the new world. Many of these texts mention miracles and beings that go against the laws of physics and nature. Harris describes religion is "the
only game in town" because people want to believe the texts as proven facts even though they cannot be proven. Despite the lack of evidence for
many unexplainable occurrences, people continue to believe in their teachings, and refuse to accept criticism or scientific evidence. During the trials,
Harris's claim became very apparent when people who argued for Intelligent Design became very hostile in the face of opposition to their beliefs. As
discussed in lecture, in the face of challenge, people defended their own worldviews with aggression, which is very evident during the fight to teach
evolution in classrooms in the Scopes Trial and the fight to include Intelligent design in the classrooms in the Dover Trial (Ogilvie,

Where Am I By Daniel Dennett Summary
Jeevan Jacob
Philosophy 100–04
Professor Bates
4/11/14
Word count: 462 Where is the Soul?
In "Where Am I," Daniel Dennett questions the meanings of identity and consciousness. He never truly concludes his questions with an answer but I
believe that the computer that is an exact copy of his brain cannot have a consciousness because it is a computer, not a human being. Dennett makes a
complicated example when his body and his brain get separated, yet he can control his body through technological means. After the old one is
destroyed, Dennett receives a new one that is just as capable as his old one. The story was further complicated when there is an exact copy of his
brain in a computer, who can access control over the new body. Dennett... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As long as the brain is intact and is living through artificial means, then it is possible to control a different body externally. This is quite unlikely,
because brain transplants and extractions have never worked before. Maybe with time, but it is highly unlikely that it would not kill the soul of the
person. If the soul belongs within the body, then it is not possible for the brain to control another person. Even if it stayed alive artificially, there
would be nothing to force the brain to make decisions. That is the reason why we are conscious beings. If one argued for instinct, human instinct is
weak. We are social beings who have forgotten our primal instinct and instead, learn through socialization. This would invalidate any way that the
brain could survive if the soul exists in the body. We have no proof that the soul exists in the body or brain; we have no proof that the soul exists at all.
Maybe our consciousness is a pattern of thoughts and beliefs, with nothing actually behind it. With the intelligence that humans have, it is much more
feasible that there is something behind our patterns of thoughts and beliefs. Perhaps it is something divine. But it is more likely that the soul exists
within our brain than not at all. The human brain is an incredibly intricate organ, a computer is a series of ones and zeros. It is not possible for the
computer to recreate an identical consciousness because that is taking away the essence of the

evolution v. creation Essay
Evolution
Should the stork theory appear in books on reproduction? How about astrological lore in expositions on astronomy? It would be unreasonable to even
consider those ridiculous concepts. This is why the idea of creation should not be considered as the answer to how life began. Rather, the theory of
evolution accounts for the creation of life. Charles Darwin is credited with creating the theory of evolution. Evolution assumes that all natural forms
arose from their ancestors and adapted over time to their environments, thus leading to variation. In evolution, there are many rules the environment
places upon the survival of a species. "There are many misconceptions that creationists have about evolution. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
To say there are no transitional fossils is simply false. The fossil record is still spotty and always will be; erosion and the rarity of conditions
favorable to fossilization make that inevitable. Prinze continues, "Transitions may occur in a small population, in a small area, and/or in a relatively
short amount of time; when any of these conditions hold, the chances of finding the transitional fossils goes down." According to Prinze, there are still
many instances where excellent sequences of transitional fossils exist. Some notable examples are the transitions from reptile to mammal, from land
animal to early whale, and from early ape to human. "The misconception about the lack of transitional fossils is perpetuated in part by a
common way of thinking about categories. When people think about a category like 'dog' or 'ant,' they often subconsciously believe that there is a
well–defined boundary around the category" (Isaak). In truth, categories are man–made and artificial. Nature is not constrained to follow them,
and it doesn't.
Another misconception is that the theory of evolution says that life originated, and evolution proceeds, by random chance. But there is probably no
other statement which is a

Skepticism In The Electric Ant, And The Matrix
Arguably, skepticism surrounds us everywhere. What really defines skepticism? Is it subjective? Does skepticism exist? Generally speaking, it
means to question knowledge and essentially everything we know, in this socialized world. A skeptic is constantly begging the notion "everything is
doubtable, there is no knowledge" (Woodridge lecture). In the skeptic's viewpoint, how do human beings know if anything is "right"? This essay will
look to explain skeptics' objections within the theory of knowledge. In order to better support these objections I will draw conclusions from The
Electric Ant by Philip K. Dick, where am I by Daniel Dennett, and the film The Matrix. Lastly, I will discuss skepticism in the external world. I believe
that skepticism undermines... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He believes that he is an inanimate object mimicking an animate one, yet he feels alive (Dick 103). Expanding deeper, Poole figures he must never
really have run Tri–Plan; it was a delusion implanted in him when he was made along with the delusion that he is human and alive (Dick 102). Poole
is so obsessed with validating his reality that the skeptic within his so–called "brain" drives him to not only disrupt his reality supply construct, but also
to cut his reality supply construct which ultimately leads to Poole's robosuicide. Mr. Poole states that he wants to control his reality construct because
if he controls the construct then he controls his subjective reality that lies within his finger tips (Dick 105). Poole's death provides proof that the
theory of knowledge is being undermined. Poole's suicide undermines the theory of knowledge because even when he grasps his microsecond of
outright reality, his death erases the knowledge that he has acquired. The deleted information that passes through Poole's fried circuits leads us back to
square one–how do we know anything to be true about our own reality? Poole's death leaves that question

Where Is Daniel Dennett (the Road)
Where is Daniel Dennett? Daniel Dennett was a special ops agent for the U.S. government who was placed in a very unique situation. In order to
complete a secret government mission presumably during the cold war, he was required to have his brain removed. Dennett had to have his brain
removed in order to extract a warhead buried a mile beneath Tulsa, Oklahoma. With his brain removed from his body, though still connected and in total
control of his body through radio transmitters, he asked one simple question. Where am I? Though at first most people would say, Dennett is where he
stands and his brain is now controlling him externally instead of internally. Sure this makes sense, but then the question arises, then which thing is really
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
His personality was still the same and the only real differences he saw in himself were obviously just physical, though with time these things became
familiar too. Dennett then decided to visit his brain and discovered that during his disembodied state, the scientists had also created a computer that
they called Hubert that mimicked his brain in every way. Dennett now came to a new realization that he would have to live with. "If there were two
bodies, one under the control of Hubert and the other being controlled by Yorick, then which would the world recognize as the true Dennett? And
whatever the world decided, which one would be me?" If this actually did happen, another body using either Yorick or Hubert. There would be no real
way to differ the two to see which person really is Dennett. This also brings to light another question, if this actually happened, which Dennett would be
the real Dennett? As Dennett pondered this question a new more riveting question arose in Dennett's mind. "My strongest intuition was that in such an
eventuality I would survive so long as either brain–body couple remained intact, but I had mixed emotions about whether I should want both to
survive." Dennett came to the realization that as long as he had a body to brain connection he could survive. This also meant that there would be a
great possibility for two Dennett's to exist, which for obvious reasons he did not like. The other Dennett would rival him in every aspect of life. So

Philosophical Analysis : ' The Consciousness Mind '
Kayla Southworth
Professor Rondel
PHIL 101–1001
December 2, 2015
Chalmers immaterial conscious Consciousness for many years has been a debatable topic between people, where some take the materialist approach
while others take the dualist approach. Metaphysical materialism is the view that there is no such thing as spooky substances only matter. This type of
view goes on to say that phenomenon's such as the conscious is just byproducts of material substances interacting with one another. Materialist's views
for a long time were hard to rebuke. However, in 1996 David Chalmers wrote The consciousness mind, which does rebuke materialism's very view. In
his piece, he has people imagine a world exactly like the one conscious human beings ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Consciousness being immaterial is an successful argument made by Chalmers as he presents it in his piece in the form of an zombie that is identical to
an human being. He, however, presents the zombie as an individual that does not contain an conscious, but can do everything an conscious person can
do without having the ability to make it an experience. This occurs in his piece when he states "...my zombie twin. He is molecule for molecule
identical to me...he will be awake, able to report contents of his internal states... Its just that none of this functioning will be accompanied by any real
conscious experiment" (Rondel's notes). In stating this quote, Chalmers makes the point consciousness is immaterial by making the zombie atom to
atom identical to him making the zombie material, but the only difference between the two is that the zombie cannot experience. This makes Chalmers
argument of consciousness being immaterial successful as it fulfills the criteria of materialism by having the zombie resemble him, but also tests
materialism by having them imagine the zombie not having an conscious. However, materialists may look at Chalmers piece then argue that the
scenario doesn't make sense and that the zombie should in fact contain an conscious. They would make this argument because if the zombie was atom
for atom identical to an human being, the zombie should have a

Daniel Dennett 's Where Am I?
In the essay Where am I?, Daniel Dennett's uses a fictional account of a series of brain and body surgeries to illustrate various philosophical views of
personal identity and the nature of consciousness.
His tale begins by describing a top–secret government mission where he is tasked at retrieving a device that emits a special kind of radiation that
completely destroys brain tissue (and no other bodily tissue). This device is stuck in Tulsa, Oklahoma. In an effort to preserve Dennett's brain during
the mission, scientists surgically remove it from his body and broadcast all of its outputs via radio. Then they hook Dennett's body up to respond to
the output signals and his nerve/ sensory organs are set up to broadcast back to his brain (in a vat in Houston).
In his new life, he experiences minor signal lags and alcohol has lost its intoxicating effects, but apart from that there's not much difference in
experience. Though, once he settles in, a major epistemological question dawns on him: "Where is he?" To answer this, he considers 3 different views
of the relationship between the mind and body.
The first view he considers is that one's body determines where the self is. This view seems to correspond to Dennett's initial "force of mental habit"
(1, p3) by identifying one's location to where one is sensing and interacting with the world. (3) However, Dennett quickly rejects this notion in support
of brain transplant thought experiments where, "one wants to be the donor,

Descartes Mind And Body
The problem of interaction between substances.
Perhaps one of the most controversial issues in the Cartesian view of mind and body is how the two substances interact. In the book The passion of
the Soul Descartes returned to the problem; he suggests that there is a gland in the middle of the brain in charge of the interaction; he maintains that
"from there it radiates through the rest of the body by means of the animal spirits") (Descartes, 1649/1984, p.341). But what does he mean? The
pineal gland is itself physical; Gassendi pointed out that "If it is a physical point, the difficulty still stands, since such a point does not wholly lack of
parts. If is a mathematical point, then such a point, as you are aware is, purely imaginary" (Descartes, 1641/1985, p.236) To ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
and this quantity of motion is "the product of its speed and its size" (Descartes, 1644/2012, p.33), but the conception of speed used by Descartes is an
scalar rather than considered as a vector like velocity (as modern development shows (Gerald Holton and Stephen G. Brush , 2001, p. 210)),
nonetheless Descartes suggests that "the mind does not directly move the external limbs, but simply controls the animal spirits which flow from the
heart via the brain into the muscles, and sets up certain motions in them.." (Descartes, 1641/1985, p. 161), and this allow the interaction of substances
in Cartesian terms, in other words, according to Descartes, the soul only change the direction of the body, but cannot add motion to the physical bodies;
however, this is the problem of the interaction in Cartesian terms: as Dennett explain "any change in the trajectory of any physical entity is an
acceleration requiring the expenditure of energy" (Dennett, 1991, p. 35), thus, the Cartesian explanation should violate the laws of physics, in other
words as Dennett asks "...where is this energy to come from?" (Dennett, 1990, p.35), and this energy cannot come from a

Mary Dennett Excerpt Summary
In Dennett's Excerpt, he describes two possible reactions Mary could possibly have upon her release and first experience of color. These two reaction
have different outcomes in what people would think in each scenario involving Mary's "all physical knowledge of the world." One reaction Mary
could have, is that she could simply exclaim, "so that is what that color looks like." This shows that Mary having "all physical knowledge of the
world," allows her to experience colors in a way that she expected to based on her knowledge and understanding of how colors would be to her brain.
Also she probably has knowledge of specific objects being specific colors. Which brings up Dennett's blue banana example. Dennett puts to the reader
a scenario where

Essay on The Evolution of Religion
The Evolution of Religion
Near the end of his novel, Darwin's Dangerous Idea, Daniel Dennett questions religion and contends that it was an evolutionary process to keep
humans entertained. He says "they [religions] have kept Homo Sapiens civilized enough, for long enough, for us to have learned how to reflect more
systematically and accurately on our position of the universe"(519). Dennett's position is a controversial one, and it is difficult to argue because it is
such an abstract subject. Religion is associated with free will, and has been part of humans for thousands of years. Is religion as we know it useless
now, have we arrived at the point in evolution where it is no longer necessary?
Dennett never completely dismisses ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Armstrong and Dennett agree that religion will disappear altogether. Will beliefs that have survived so many years and tribulations just cease to exist.
The thought that they may evolve instead seems to be is more comforting. Perhaps certain beliefs will merge together, or break off, some religions
might die out while others will gain strength and change direction. The change of religious affiliations is becoming more evident. From 1980 to 1999
in the U.S. the percent of protestants, catholics, and jews either remained the same or shrank, while the "other" percentage rose significantly (http:/
/www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/statab/sec01.pdf). This demonstrates, that even though it may be subtle, religion is changing direction.
Religions have greatly benefitted the human population throughout history. According to Dennett, "They [religions] have inspired many people to lead
lives that have added immeasurably to the wonders of our world, and they have inspired many more people to lead lives that were, given their
circumstances, more meaningful, less painful, than they otherwise could have been"(518). Does this suggest that altruism is only in existence as a
result of organized religion? Altruism and religion both came with the emergence of free will, but not necessarily conjunction with each other.
Religions incorporated altruism into their belief systems, but it is

Daniel Dennett's Ideas and Presuppositions Essay
Daniel Dennett's Ideas and Presuppositions
In response to problems surrounding the ascription of beliefs, Daniel Dennett developed his essay True Believers, where he outlined an intentionalist
theory. My intent in this paper is to explain his ideas and defend on of his presuppositions, namely, that most of what people believe is true. First I will
briefly explain intentionalism and point out why Dennett feels that his syst3em is so useful. Then I will explain the necessary pretension that most
beliefs ascribed are true and explain the validity of that position in greater detail. With a more concise explanation it will then become clear that
Dennett's position is not as implausible as it may seem. With both Identity and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Secondly, it must be assumed that our subject is what Dennett calls a 'rational agent'. Meaning, simply that X will act upon some internal
connection between its beliefs and desires. That faculty of reason does not need be as developed as in the Vulcan sense, but must show some
connection between beliefs and desires along the lines of desires based on beliefs and action based on desires. Moreover, one could not begin to try
and predict the behaviour of an irrational being unless it is on the basis of why it is acting irrationally or why it is broken. Through this stance Dennett
can treat almost any given subject as an intentional one, down to the beanbag chair, which has the desire to mould itself to my body when I sit on it.
However, it is the subject of another paper to distinguish between subjects, which truly possess belief, and those that do not.
Previously I have described the necessary premise that most ascribed beliefs must be true, and now I will attempt to defend the validity of that point.
Dennett, makes his own argument in this case immediately. Foremost, beliefs included in this statement include so many minute details which the
question of whether people believe them or not seems

Analysis Of David Eagleman's Incognito: The Secret Lives...
The Canadian Department of Justice assumes that humans have the free will and consciousness to choose between good and bad decisions, and may
be prosecuted for the decision that they have made (DoJ, 2016). Humans, along with their legal systems, believe that for one to be guilty of a crime,
one must have been proven to have committed the crime along with the malicious intent to go forward with it. However, David Eagleman writes in his
book Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain that this line of justice poses a dilemma, due to its conflict with the biological (mainly neurological)
aspects of decision making. He discloses that the mechanisms within our brain can cause us to commit felonies against our own free will and intentions,
which creates ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He explains how neurologists have proven that all activity within the brain is conducted through the interdependence of different parts of a large
biological network (Eagleman, 2011). This means that the brain has no area where it is not connected and influenced by this large network,
suggesting that the brain has no independence and, therefore, not free. Despite this growing disapproval for free will, Eagleman chooses to continue
to argue under the context that we do have free will because (1) we simply "feel" like we're free, (2) legal systems assume we are practical reasoners
who use conscious deliberation when taking actions, and, most importantly, (3) automatism. Dr. Wayne Renke, a professor of law, defines the term
automatism as, "unconscious, involuntary behaviour" and as a defence to a criminal that his actions must be proved to be voluntary, the product of
choice or will (Renke, 2007). Eagleman uses this concept to propose what he calls the "principle of sufficient automatism". This principle states that
free will may still exists, but it plays a very small role in comparison to the biological processes within humans that are

The Mind : Paper Two
Phi of Mind: Paper Two
I. Introduction In this paper, four important features of qualia will be made explicit. From these, we will examine two specific features of qualia
(privacy and immediate apprehensibility) which Dennett attempts to debunk in his article, Quining Qualia. His reasoning – in the form of intuition
pumps – will be critiqued, and a rejection formulated.
II. Qualities of Qualia Qualia are traditionally held to possess four characteristics that make them unique. They are ineffable, intrinsic, private, and
immediately apprehensible within consciousness. Listing these attributes is all well and good, but what are they? Ineffability refers to the
incommunicability of qualia. Attempting to use language to capture qualia seems to miss part of the experience, or to reduce and simplify the experience
until it can be made to conform to what language can communicate. Qualia seems so content–rich that moving it into public understanding necessarily
entails its simplification. Consider the jalapeГ±o and habanero peppers. If I were to eat both, I would experience two separate qualia – one for the
jalapeno and one for the habanero. In language, I could describe both as 'spicy'. More practically, I could describe the jalapeno as 'very spicy' and the
habanero as 'mutilatingly spicy '. I could be as creative or precise as possible to try to relay the qualia of the peppers, and I could certainly give a
listener an image of some sort of quale one might have. Still, there

Daniel Dennett's Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and...
Daniel Dennett's Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life
Science can give us as good a moral code as any religion. Or so Daniel Dennett claims in his book, Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the
Meanings of Life. Dennett provides the tools to explain human morality, and inadvertently leads the way to the conclusion (which he does not share)
that science can clarify how human morality came about, but not serve as a substitute or model for moral codes, religious and secular alike.
It all begins with Dennett's assertion that everything– everything– is a product of an algorithmic process, which comes about as a result of random
change. By definition these algorithmic processes, evolution included, are "matter ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Consider it exaptation.
Can altruism– true altruism, not altruism among kin, not reciprocal altruism, but the fabled Good Samaritan altruism, exist as a product of evolution?
There is no clear evolutionary advantage to helping those in the "out–group" that deals strictly with biology (which is not to say that there are not
brands of altruism for which there is an evolutionary advantage). Those who accept only matter–first explanations of the world may be likely to argue
that people do not, in fact, commit purely selfless acts. Others, including Mayr, allow that Good Samaritan–style altruism exists, but only as a product
of culture. It would be hard to find an evolutionary advantage to many products of culture. Take monogamous males for an example. Of course there
are plenty of them out there, just as there are plenty of people who commit acts of true altruism, but like altruism, monogamy is hardly the rule. While
the question of altruism is by all means an important question, it may not take us where we want to go.
The question Dennett then asks is, if morals cannot be derived from the value–free natural world, then from where? His answer is "...ethics must be
somehow based on an appreciation of human nature– a sense of what a human being is or might be, and on what a human being might want to have or

The Controversy Over Free Will And Determinism
Introduction
It has been debated over centuries whether us humans have control over our destiny, and if we are really able to decide on our own. The
controversy between free will and determinism has been argued about for years. If we look into a dictionary, free will is define as the power given to
human beings to be able to make free choices that is unconstrained by external circumstances or a force such as fate or divine intervention. Determinism
is defined as a philosophical doctrine that every event, act, and decision is the inescapable consequence of antecedents that are independent of the
human will. Determinism states that humans have no free will to choose what they wish. Due to this fact, contemporary philosophers cannot agree
whether free will does exist, let alone it be a divine influence.
Three major Beliefs
There are three major arguments in the thought of free and they are libertarianism, compatibilism, and fatalism. There are both a religious and secular
position for this argument. The religious aspect of free will is that it is an objective by God, while the secular position is subjective to causal
determinism and the effect of the physical and concrete things on the process of decision–making.
In an article by Alvin Plantinga he tackled a few types of compatibilism, and he believes that he has found an objective to serve as a middle ground in
the free will debate. Plantinga believes that God had already began the process, with an abrupt cause, and since

Comparing Descartes Parfit And Dennett
Descartes, Parfit and Dennett all seem to raise the question about whether or not does "I" exist each philosopher has their own perspective of whether
does "I" which is "self" exist. Each explains a different perspective of the ego theory Descartes arrive at an ego theory that neither Parfit nor Dennett
agree with.
Descartes known as a very bright mathematician and considered to be the founder of modern philosophy didn't always start out as skeptic he believed
that there was a point for everything that we may know until he realized that we tend to be deceived by our own senses which makes them an
untrustworthy source. However some things that we perceive to be true are so evident that they must be true Descartes eventually arrives at his concept
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Dennett belief is that he is separated from his own brain which conflicts with the physical view of the mind giving that his thoughts are some place
inside his own brain. One argument he makes is that he is located in a place wherever his thoughts are he describes when a person is a mental
substance rather than a physical substance it make no sense what so ever to ask the question where am I? because your mental doesn't have an
exact location. Dennett second argument is whether your're the brain instead of the body he makes an arguemnt about you are where your body
is but thats not exactly always true because of brain transplants basically if you were to tranfer your brain into another human beings body your not
where your body is instead you are in another person's body. However you can be disconnected from your body also disconnected from your brain
because your memories is very crucial to who you are. Another argument he makes is that you are not always your brain you are wherever your
senses are your mind can be in one place but your senses are in another. As Dennett describes his story he basically describes the separation of his
mind and body while he undergoes the experiment he realizes he is not where his mind is rather he is where his body is which is in

How Does Dennetts Argument Make Sense?
How Neuroscience Has Made Me Content With Death
This has been part of my own journey of understanding myself while learning to transition from a faith centered community to a scientific community,
and dealing with the personal challenges. My opinion on this topic may change and develop over time, but I wanted to chart my own process and
check my understanding of the topic.
100 billions neurons make up the complex machine known as the human brain. With the connections these neurons make, we can experience the smells
of fresh pine trees. We can think about complex concepts, such as the grammar and syntax that make up this very sentence. We can imagine the infinite,
and imagine ourselves contemplating the infinite. Our brains are amazing in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
How does Daniel Dennetts argument make sense? Understanding the biological components that make up consciousness or our idea of consciousness
is far from showing the complete picture, but it did reveal to me a whole new world of understanding. Looking into the complexity of the forms and the
beauty of the connections neurons made me marvel at the cohesiveness of the self. The indiscriminate "I am". The individual that can connect to the
stimuli around us. Neuroscience is a beauty in itself. Showing how we are the most complicated machines out there, and millions of years of evolution
and change has made each of us stand out as beings able to interact with our own environment with understanding. Now, how does neuroscience make
me content with death beyond the field's indiscriminate beauty? A different foundation. My foundation is no longer mounted in the future–that death is
approaching, immanent and unavoidable. I look to the past, that our neural connections took essentially billions of years to develop, and we are the
most intricate beings that we know of. Our circuits are wired just well enough for us to enjoy the time we have here on earth, and I am grateful that my
mind can sustain itself in its current intricate, sensitive state. When my time comes, I am content with my neural connections subsiding and my
impulses ceasing to be, because I know it took billions of years to get here, and I better enjoy the hell out of this

Dennett Religion
Why is it important that language is much older than religion? Can I not argue that religion was always apart of oral traditions? Dennett suggests it is
possible that religion existed at the same time language was formed, but there is no historical proof. In my opinion, based on anecdotal observations,
all societies have some had some framework of a religion. Humans are constantly looking for ways to explain the unknown, and religion fills the void
nicely.
Dennett criticizes the methodologies of social scientists, yet he is vague about his notion of who should conduct the scientific inquiry. Why is this?
Also, how does the study of agriculture and animal disease correlate to the study of religion? Dennett is officially starting to annoy me.

Just How Free Is The Question Of Free Will For Many Millennia

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Rebecca Buono

More from Rebecca Buono (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Just How Free Is The Question Of Free Will For Many Millennia