Stranger Fruit


Apparently Alvin Plantinga and Daniel Dennett debated a week ago at a meeting of the Central Division of the American Philosophical Association. An anonymous individual live-blogged it somewhat hyperbolically  (?The tension between the titans fills the room?) but the account is worth a read, even if it is clear that the blogger is biased towards Plantinga. Apparently Plantinga attempted to defend Behe and Dennett slapped him around for that.

Short anonymous blogger: Dennett was snarky, nasty and didn?t take Plantinga seriously.

That?s the sort of thing that would get PZ?s blood boiling!

There – apparently – will be audio posted at some stage.


  1. #1 RBH
    February 28, 2009

    The audio is linked in a comment on that thread now. It’s an MP3 here.

  2. #2 DLC
    March 1, 2009

    I guess I don’t see the point in debating cdesign proponentsists creationists. It seems like a big waste of time.

  3. #3 Argon
    March 1, 2009

    Dennett is a ‘titan’ of philosophy? News to me.

  4. #4 Michael Fugate
    March 2, 2009

    Interesting conversation on the debate at blog.talkingphilosophy

  5. #5 rimpal
    March 6, 2009

    Plantinga is a “philosopher”? That’s news to me! Just another one of those “western philosophers” who have claimed ‘philosophy’ for theology.

  6. #6 John Lynch
    March 6, 2009

    @ Rimpal

    That’s a bit of a stupid comment. Plantinga – whether you agree with his religious beliefs or not – *is* a well respected philosopher. Your comment merely illustrates you know nothing about “western” philosophy (whatever you mean by that).

  7. #7 Wayne Alder
    March 8, 2009

    I listened to the debate. It seemed that Dennett’s response and most of the Q and A strayed from (what I took to be) the key issues. For instance, do we have a defeater for all of our beliefs given Naturalism and Evolution?(as Plantinga argues). Dennett mentions a function of the human brain that destroys faulty cognitive faculties (ones that produce false beliefs) but does such a function of the brain plausibly arise from naturalistic evolution? A full human brain has a hard enough time ascertaining truth, is there really a function of the brain that knows truth so well that it destroys faulty cognitive faculties? Perhaps. However, the existence of such a function seems much more likely on Theism than on Naturalism.

New comments have been disabled.