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.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
If the assertion, “Science and religion are incompatible,” simply means, “It is highly unreasonable to accept simultaneously the claims of modern science and the claims of traditional Christianity,” then I agree with it. The trouble is that the word “incompatible” is vague. People often take it…
The rather contentious result of my live-blogging of the Biology of Genomes meeting last month made it very clear to me that the scientific community needs to do a better job of communicating in advance whether a presentation is off-limits to audience live-bloggers. I've since been involved in a…
So, a funny story about this. I posted a snippet of a fantasy story back in August, and enough people said nice things about it that I actually got off my ass and did some playing around to format the full story as an epub. This was, of course, complicated by the fact that computers are awful, but…
With tears in my eyes and my head bowed in deep respect, I share with you the account of Kevin Leitch's vasectomy via Twitter:
http://twitter.com/kevleitch
Kev is an autism and manic depression advocate in West Midlands, UK, who blogs at LeftBrainRightBrain and was one of my earliest followers on…
The audio is linked in a comment on that thread now. It's an MP3 here.
I guess I don't see the point in debating cdesign proponentsists creationists. It seems like a big waste of time.
Dennett is a 'titan' of philosophy? News to me.
Interesting conversation on the debate at blog.talkingphilosophy
Plantinga is a "philosopher"? That's news to me! Just another one of those "western philosophers" who have claimed 'philosophy' for theology.
@ 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).
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.