Charlie Rose

whitebearpaws  07/23/2009 11:36 AM Report

Daniel Dennett is an easy on the ears atheist...I am 68 and still working on not having a visceral reaction when I am confronted on religion...Thanks for your show. I am a fan.

Nathan  09/06/2008 01:57 PM Report

wow, I am thoroughly impressed with Dennett.

JD  08/11/2008 02:24 AM Report

This is not Dennett at his best, although it was kind of him (a big music buff) not to correct Moyers on the John Cage thing, I guess Moyers meant John Williams.

infidel paralysis  06/22/2008 02:25 PM Report

The most cogent idea he espoused was to incorporate in each individual faith a history of all other faiths. Which is dead-on-arrival of course as faith by definition has to be exclusive, ala a greek social org. on a university campus. The myth that 'we' are the best is glue of the ritual. Chosen/Selected by God. Nevermind that it ipso facto 'deselects' everyone else. Mocking many religious 'golden-rule' precepts at the get-go. Dante is content. Religions provide a raison de etre.

Stephen Kuzminski  06/22/2008 08:43 AM Report

Well, I can say, though, that it did work for the interview because he got Dennett to respond to a lot of the questions that believers have. I was just a little annoyed by how simple they were. Also, I have a feeling that Dennett isn't being completely honest about not wanting to get rid of religions. I think is idea about how to open up dialogue and thought with and within religion and religious individuals is something that he hopes will lead to religions' inevitable demise (even if he would like to hold onto some of the traditions).

Stephen Kuzminski  06/22/2008 07:54 AM Report

Bill Moyers is so annoying in his dense approach. Please, don't have him filling in.

Neal Camp  06/04/2008 04:05 AM Report

It seems impossible, as Dr. Dennett hints, for Americans to have such a discussion without assuming the "God" with a capital "G". All deities are irrational no matter what they are named.

James  04/20/2008 01:27 AM Report

In regards to Dennett, I noticed some problem in his thought process. Religion might stop people from thinking. But, only if it is done wrong. The assertions atheistic assertions made in this conversation categorized religion in a highly sociological sense. He seemed to be using a baseline analysis and lacked depth in some areas, adhering to a singular scenario as opposed to a broader world view. He also focuses on religious or spiritual "mistakes" at times, which are in fact very abundant today. There were other things too, lots of common epistemological mistakes.

But! I've got respect for his basic way of thinking, at the same time. Obviously I cannot explain this on a internet comment. I think he has the right thought "schema", but he is in a box limiting his perspective. I'd love to have a conversation with him.

I am not particularly religious myself, thought I do believe in God. It is hard to explain though.

I think there are much better attacks against the idea of Gods existence than are being presented today, as well as a defenses of God. I've driven this God vs. No-God issue into the ground and always notice common themes in every book. It seems like the point is being missed, and the ideas are all rehashes from the past.

McKinlay  04/04/2008 10:34 AM Report

Dear Charlie Rose,

You can tell your friend Ted Turner that I think he's the greatest. I think his thoughts and ideas, and his values, are quite brilliant. And, I like his attitude. It is very fortunate that someone with Mr. Turner's uncommon sense is working so hard to push the world toward the right decisions and actions: I hope everybody takes his lesson seriously and I wish his plans would become the norm. Thanks Charlie Rose and thanks Ted Turner.

Mildred

Barrie, Ontario, Canada

Ayokunle Adeyemi  02/16/2008 04:58 PM Report

I cannot stress enough my hunger to hear Ayaan Hirsi Ali speak to the significant issues that she continues to champion: human rights, women's rights, & democracy. Daniel C. Dennett and Richard Dawkins have dedicated the entire earnings from DVD sales of 'The Four Horsemen', an epic conversation on religion, to funding Ali's security. The issues that she champions resonate strongly with the zeitgist of this 21st century; and it is, for me, imperative that Ali's courageous voice be heard, and heard here, as she represents so strongly the spirit of Charlie Rose.

mike clayton  07/03/2007 03:29 AM Report

wait a second...didn't john cage die in 1992???

TS  05/19/2007 11:04 AM Report

If you would like to read an empirical response Moyers's moronic assertion that humans have an innate desire for god, try "The Function of the Illusions of Control and Freedom" by H. M. Lefcourt ("American Psychologist", May 1973, v. 25, no. 5, pp. 417-425). In short, the greatest mitigators of stress & anxiety are control & prediction. We have an innate drive to ascribe causality (try going a day without it), which provides predictability and facilitates control efforts. When we cannot explain events, especially those that are critical to our lives, we are all the more driven to create an answer. Prayers (along with rain dances, fertility festivals, offerings, sacrifices, and so forth) serve the function of influencing the critical things we cannot explain. That is pure superstition. They serve the same function. (There are many other functions as well: relief of guilt, derivation of power, etc., but this is what speaks to Moyers.) Moreover, Moyers's insinuation that aesthetics derive from spirituality is, at best, a misinterpretation of a correlation. Incompatible religions appeal to the same forms of aesthetics (and ignorance, narcissism, fear, anger, self-righteousness, etc.). Religions use aesthetics as a tool of mystification. The fact that Moyers conflates his appreciation of aesthetics with his notion of evidence showcases the fence he's built around his religious beliefs against the assault of reason. (His series on "Faith & Reason" did the same and was an utter disappointment.) Did anyone else laugh at the juxtaposition of Moyers's uneasy exaltation of faith and his nagging drive to provide evidence? Of course, it did make for a good interview, though Dr. Dennett was under-matched.