Teaching various religion history is what we do in all Swedish schools like the rest of the Scandinavian countries do. That’s one of the reasons why we are the most secular and non-religious countries in the world.
We do the same in Germany, too, since at least 5 decades...and only recently (and with the addition of 18 million mostly non-believers in Eastern Germany) we have turned more and more secular. So, no, teaching only "religion history & facts", is not the sole reason why a nation is more secular than others.
True. Therefore try to use critical thinking to critique Dan's ideas. Lots of fallacies but unfortunately atheists are developing Cult like behaviours too. One example 2:00 Begging the question fallacy Using an analogy to make a point is not proof
@@think-islam-channel that is not an atheistic view but a scientific one. And if proven wrong would and should be corrected. As a Muslim are you prepared to correct the quoran on all of its falsehoods, mistakes, misinformation and hate speech ?
@@think-islam-channel There's no "Begging The Question" fallacy. That fallacy is another term for circular reasoning -- where exactly is his circular reasoning? More importantly, he's not trying to _prove_ anything with his analogy. He's simply making an argument for a curriculum change, i.e., he's arguing for adding the teaching of factual religious history to the core three "Rs" curriculum. Maybe you can clarify your point.
As a Christian theist I actually tend to agree that for the most part are theology's and are deities are a product of our own egos and sentiments. Breaking out of that and allowing the Creator to manifest and reveal Himself is no easy task.
@@greglogan7706 Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.
For some reason, I've always thought that if there was a god, it would look like Daniel Dennett and instead of telling me about the truth of any particular dogma, he tells me that consciousness is actually really easy to explain.
"Surrendered people obey God's word, even if it doesn't make sense." -Pastor Rick Warren That, ladies and gentlemen, is why people fly planes into buildings.
Yes and No. The difference is that the implication of the Rick Warren quote is that the person is moving to reject the God's word but chooses not to because it is God's word. The people who flew the planes into buildings did so because they believed without question, i.e. they did not have this internal dialogue.
TwoDashFaced Man I do not see how this falls into the "begging the question" fallacy. There is no point where the conclusion is assumed in this apparent difference in thought patterns. Please advise.
I've researched Holy Scripture since 1982 and never observed direction to fly airplanes into buildings. I did observe the admonition to not murder or steal, or lie or covet your neighbors servant or possessions. Also advised to love your neighbor and feed, house the poor...
Great idea, just heard a fitting quote by Matt Dillahunty " give a child one religion and you will indoctrinate them. Give a child all religions and you will inoculate them " this will always stick with me, I think we need to learn more about all religions and culture. Knowledge is power and ignorance is no excuse
@@totalcap2989 Oh your one of them people who think the only classes at "liberal colleges" is an arts degree? Ignoring the facts that any college that right wingers claim is a "liberal" college is any college that teaches anything they don't like. So due to the fact you don't seem to know what classes and courses are taught at "liberal colleges" shows your bias.
@@totalcap2989 Yes, do. Just being on campus in an academic environment and you will learn how to think for yourself and how to learn new things on your own. That smug attitude that college is a waste of time and money is the result of indoctrination by those who want to be able to control you through propaganda for the rest of your life...politicians and big business. Remain one of their puppets if you want to, lolol.
If religionists were actually confident that their belief system is true, they wouldn't demand special education, because their belief system would be appealing to a critical thinking adult who has never heard of it before. Every religion actually has those converts.
@@think-islam-channel I think they mean , Catholic schools, Islamic schools etc. The purpose of this is to legitimise that particular belief system without genuine supporting evidence.
John Oliver said " You dont need people opinion on a fact" and initially I agreed with him, but after reading various books especially Dennetts books it suddenly became very clear that what people believe to be true is much more impactful than what is true. This is especially true in a Democracy, if half the US population believes that the economy is is shambles, that unemployment is through the roof and that the 2020 election was stolen through the use of rigged voting machines (all of which are false), they are going to vote based on these false beliefs.
@@Tribecasoothsayer and in the main his books are the same garbage endlessly repeated/ regurgitated over and over and over again,( there is no God); he'll die and be buried and be forgotten and the Bible will remain at the top of the all time best seller list and Jesus's name be known and spoken about world-wide until the absolute end of time.
Christianity isn't religion. It's a personal relationship with Christ. A personal relationship isn't a religion just because the relationship is with God. It's just a relationship where one party is physical and one a spirit. That doesn't make it religious.
@@lawrence1318 *Simple facts and a simple general question for you.* *Fact 1:* Christianity teaches you to thank God for giving life to you and also for giving life to animals for you to take their lives and eat them. *Fact 2:* Christianity teaches you to thank God for choosing you out of many other praying patients to recover from illness as many other praying patients were ignored by God and died. *Question:* Can't you see how the charlatan theologians have fooled your gullible-self to believe in an imaginary God by exploiting your hypocrisy, narcissism, arrogance and ignorance? No offence, just asking.
@@AtamMardes Rather, when are you going to think past your nose and realise that if there is no God and no afterlife, then it doesn't matter what anyone believes, for according to you everyone disappears into nothing forever. So you are contradicting yourself by even talking about these things. Basically you're acting as though when you no longer exist you'll be able to tell others who also no longer exist that you were right and they were wrong. But the fact that deep down inside you know these things are important eternally, should tell you that there is a God and an afterlife.
@@lawrence1318 atheists don’t talk about religion because they secretly know that god exists or something. They talk about it because religion causes hurt in allot of situations. Also having a relationship with god doesn’t matter. If you believe in the existence of a god that created the universe you are religious.
@@ploppyjr2373 You're contradicting yourself. If there is no God and we are all just atoms which are going to dissociate in a few years so that it will be as though we never existed, it shouldn't matter whether anyone is hurt. Stalin and the philanthropist both end up not existing. So you are confused. You are appealing to moral concepts in what is according to you an amoral universe of matter. That you can't see this, shows us you are no philosopher and can't think past your nose. The idea that we are all typing on keyboards, playing tennis, listening to Elvis records, building motor cars and meeting up at restaurants, all suspended out in space and all by chance, is ludicrous. You need to get out of the house a bit more.
..you get the Santa you believe in..or do not believe in.....or need....or become youurself...(Oh ho ho ho home!) from Santa Anthony FYI: check my facebook page out: Santa Anthony" ...we can all participate with EVEN......the iconic understanding and Presence of Santa and MRS Santa (Claus)
The Earth was irrigated from the ground-up? A 600 year old man spent a hundred and twenty years building a boat? And people wonder why religion is dying.
If it was easy to believe it would not require faith. If it was easy to understand it would not require the effort that God wants you to put into studying his word.
All religion should die it's fruitless,, .Religion is man reaching up to God through his own means....Christianity is God reaching down to man through Jesus christ....Christianity is not a religion but a faith....and religion is not a faith....but merely an effort of man's ideas to reach God..which is completely fruitless...✝️✝️know Jesus now
This is the first presentation of Dan Dennett's that I have listened to at the suggestion of Seth from The Atheist Experience. Whether you agree with what he says or not, it's a fine display of rational thinking and eloquence.
Christianity was the religion I grew up believing. Now as an atheist, I have more of an interest of studying it and educating myself about it. Religion is easier to approach when analyzing it from a detached, educational, unbiased perspective.
What you seem to require about teaching religion in school is exactly what we had in Belgium in the mid-seventies. As a note: the most influential teacher I ever had on this, teaching atheistic views as well, was a catholic priest, no other. Still have fond memories of his classes in high school.
@@mrswimmyboy cultural thing. for you that has no sense, in other culture it has. you do realize that you believe in things without seeing evidence and just believe in them because someone said so? you never conducted any own research to confirm those claims, but you do believe in their words... take evolution for example, do you have evidence that man became from the ape? but you still believe in that. :)
@@zoki.to974 First: Evolution doesn't teach that "man became from the ape". Second: you're right saying that for many things I believe, I'm not able to redo the experiments or the researches. But when it comes to religion, NO ONE has ever been able to confirm any claim.
Reading The Four Horsemen. Hawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens. So glad I saw it live. So glad I have a daughter who teaches evolution at Yale, proud mom.
@@Farsadelcatolicismo you must not know how private college education is funded, what evolution is, or even what "Ms." means.You're not off to a great start, "brother." 😘
Id say UA-cam's algorithm. I've watched enough atheist experience and stuff by the other horsemen. This should have shown up in my recommendations much sooner
Most people aren't that concerned with Truth as much as with the false sense of security they get from the illusion of safety in numbers and the soul-crushing conformity that orthodoxy demands. The truth, however, is simply not a matter of consensus and does not require even anyone's recognition let alone anyone's alignment with it to simply be itself. Don't sweat it.
I totally agreed with Dennett’s opinion to teaching about all major religions in school so in that way the students have a better knowledge about each and every religion in this world and their cultures and this will help kids to respect other kids who has another faith.
evolution is full of hoaxes and divide and conquer meme… those who cooperate best survive the best. this kind of theory is what allows the Stalin's and Hitlers of the world to rise… geniuses of history have always known there was a God... “The gift of mental power comes from God, Divine Being, and if we concentrate our minds on that truth, we become in tune with this great power. My mother taught me to seek all truth in the Bible.” --Nikola Tesla "My worldly faculties are slipping away day by day Happy it is for all of us that the true good does not lie in them. As they ebb, may they leave us as little children, trusting in the Father of Mercies and accepting His unspeakable gift. I bow before Him who is Lord of all.” --Michael Faraday, on his death bed, one of the greatest experimental philosophers, Doctorate from Oxford University, holding 97 unsought for distinctions who discovered Electricity “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being.” --Sir Isaac Newton, Principia, Book 3 “I think in the first place that it is very pious to say and prudent to affirm that the Holy Bible can never speak untruth-whenever its true meaning is understood.” --Galileo (Letter to Grand Duchess of Tuscany) “The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order which has been imposed on it by God, and which he revealed to us in the language of mathematics.” --Kepler “All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” --Max Planck “When the answer is simple, God is answering.” “I am not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist.”[20] “Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source.”[21] "There is harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, yet there are people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me to support such views." “The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.” --Einstein “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question." --Dr. Fred Hoyle (scientist who coined the term "Big Bang" who was unafraid to go wherever the facts led him, and who consequently recanted his atheism.) Head of Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis Collins, converts to Christianity "I set out to prove that my atheist position was correct." “Since everything that is in motion must be moved by something, let us suppose there is a thing in motion which was moved by something else in motion, and that by something else, and so on. But this series cannot go on to infinity, so there must be some First Mover.” --Aristotle, “Physics” “One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all... To be forced to believe only one conclusion--that everything in the universe happened by chance--would violate the very objectivity of science itself.” --Werner von Braun, Letter to CA State Board of Education, 9/14/72 "The laws of nature produce no events, they state the pattern to which every event have only and can be induced to happen, must conform. Just as the rules of Arithmetic state the pattern to which all transactions of money, must conform, if only you can get a hold of any money. Thus in one sense the laws of nature cover the whole field of space and time. In another what they leave out is precisely the whole real universe. The incessant " "For every law says in the last resort: 'If you have A, then B." But first catch your A. The laws will not do it for you." --C.S.Lewis 12 min “The exquisite order displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the Divine.” --Dr. Vera Kistiakowski, Prof. of Physics Emeritus, MIT “I stand in awe of God because of what He has done through his creation. Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” --Dr. James Tour, Nanoscientist, Rice Univ. “If physics is the product of design, the universe must have a purpose, and the evidence of modern physics suggests strongly to me that the purpose includes us.” Paul Davies, Superforce, (1984) “As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency--or rather, Agency--must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof for the existence of a Supreme Being?” --George Greenstein, Astrophysicist, The Symbiotic Universe (1988) “If everything in the universe came into being, then the cause of the universe must be transcendent, not a part of this universe,” Strauss argued. “Science kind of stumbled onto something that the Bible declared long ago … that the universe had a beginning.” --yt: Scientific Evidence for God - Dr. Strauss “If some god-like being could be given the opportunity to plan a sequence of events with the express purpose of duplicating our “Garden of Eden,” that being would face a formidable task...it is unlikely that the Earth could ever be truly duplicated.” --Peter Ward, Geologist & Donald Brownlee, Astronomer “Rare Earth” (2000) “It is my science that drove me to the conclusion that the world is much more complicated than science... It is only through the supernatural that I can understand the mystery of existence.” --Alan Sandage, Astronomer (Newsweek, 1998) “Where do you get information from?” Dr. John Lennox, Mathematics, Oxford Univ. “Natural selection reduces genetic information.” Dr. Marciej Giertych, Population Geneticist, EU youtube: The Case For A Creator With Lee Strobel yt: Latest Scientific Evidence for God's Existence - Hugh Ross, PhD yt: Young Earth - Young Universe yt: Scientific Evidence for God - Dr. Strauss
Tyndale Israel Clearly you do not understand evolution. Get some books and read them(proper science books,even 5th grade level ones would do for you I think)
Odd jørgensen “There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular systems, only a variety of wishful speculations.” Dr. James Shapiro, evolutionary microbiologist, Univ. of Chicago
yarpen800 It is interesting that scientists have analyzed the Creation story of the Bible and seen a scientific method embedded within it. Probably one reason so many scientists believe in God and have contributed so much. John Ray-Founder of Biology and Devout Christian Ray quoted experiments by Francesco Redi which contradicted spontaneous generation. Ray said that “My observation and affirmation is that there is no such thing in nature” and he referred to spontaneous generation as “the atheist’s fictitious and ridiculous account of the first production of mankind and other animals.” “He declared fossils were the petrified remains of extinct creatures. This was not accepted by biologists generally until a century later.” I am not religious, btw. Patrick Henry made a very clear statement: "It cannot be emphasized too often or too strongly that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians; not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ....It is for this reason that people of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here." “If you ask an American, who is his master? He will tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ.” --Jonathan Trumbull, c. 1770; Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter Fall 2003, vol 1 Issue 11
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” ― Carl Sagan
It amazes me how well this applies not only to religion, but to politics as well. And here you were thinking politics are not about religious institutions ;-)
Nimuel: Good point! Thinkers on religion from Hitch to Alan W. Watts correctly pointed out the fundamentally theocratic nature of the Stalin & Mao regimes. The personal adoration of Hitler, Mussolini & Trump are covert examples of the same. More explicit were the cults of Hirohito, & of the Russian tsars.
Why do you think North Korea and China do not allow other religions? The state does not want any competition from them. The state is the only religion allowed and the leader is the prophet or god himself.
Politics: A way to direct or otherwise control a group of people. Relgion: A way to direct or otherwise control a group of people. The similarities far outweigh the differences, or so it seems to me. The main difference seems to be that one pushes the idea of the people, state or country. The other pushes the idea of a deity. One has slightly more existance than the other. That's about it.
I was indoctrinated into the Irish version of Catholicism right after birth. It's a guilt-driven version -- the Irish method. Now at age 45, I have been agnostic for near 20 years. Yet, I still at times feel guilty for abandoning nonsense for reason. But if I were to return to any sort of religion, I would feel like a hypocrite, for subscribing to evident nonsense. How grand it would be, to have never been brainwashed (in very much a sense) from the get-go.
+Adrienne Gurge Why define any version of god into existence? Why would a god that you have invented for yourself be superior to any other? You don't have to be an atheist, but the alternative is to select a god that will give you what? Nothing.
***** Yes, but why have any concept of God at all? What purpose does it serve to have a concept of something for which there is no evidence whatsoever?
@@freddan6fly: The Sun rises and sets each day." This sounds like a statement about the Sun. But it is actually a statement about us, about our planet. It tells that we and our planet is moving, not the Sun.
I'm guessing you have birthdays celebrate new years Christmas Halloween! I'm also guessing you refer to the weeks months and even the planets in the sky all by their religious names as well as using religious names throughout your family. No one is free from religion the only difference is religious people are half concious of what they believe.
@@kennyjharland that is not following religion. I don't go to church. I don't believe in a deity. I don't feel guilty about not following the rules of a religious book. I don't feel guilty about natural desires and actions. Because we use common names and because we are influenced by a culture informed by religion did not mean we follow the dogma of a religion. What you said was really stupid.
@@HughMorristheJoker you certainly participate? granted it is unintentionally but none the less you engage in the traditional religious holidays and practices! And you will no doubt "believe" in the men that tell you there is a higher power a benefactor to how and why we are here! Yours Is a big bang chance and natural selection all blind and not conscious but none the less it's a unseen force you believe in and live you life according too! As for you celebrations and festival lol you haven't got any of your own so you still blindly follow all the ones traditionally practiced like birthday and new year!! If anything you're pagan! You might intentionally and verbally say you're atheist but your actions and philosophy are technically religious you just dont acknowledge it.
How many find this amusing ? The Ark Encounter is suing it's 5 insurers for refusing to cover damages a landslide, caused by heavy rains did to its access road.
@@Amberscion Christian Post, Washington Post, Louisville Courier-Journal, Lexington Herrold, Cincinnati Enquirer, CBS, Christian News Network, USA Today, News.co.uk, BBC...
@@undrcoverlouky It's really easy to rattle off a pile of news sources. That's not a source, however, any more than listing the continents is a source for the claim that continental drift occurs... A link to an article would be a source.
@@Amberscion A.) I believe you are confused. A source is where you can obtain something. A source is not the product you're looking for specifically. B.) You're rude. Is Siri broken? You can verify it as I did.
Dont believe “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” Buddha quotes (Hindu Prince Gautama Siddharta, the founder of Buddhism, 563-483 B.C.)
While it’s a nice quote, I just checked it and it’s not exactly what the Buddha said. The actual quote is as follows: “Now, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness’ - then you should enter & remain in them.”
This sounds like someone to quote to defend Hindu faith: “oh, you say I’m irrational? Well look at this one line! Clearly this proves I thought rationally about my faith.
Not only do I agree (and I am a priest in Christian faith) I would say we in religious community need to be in conversation with each other & expose ourselves to each other engaging each other’s tradition and broaden our spiritual landscape
@Glenn Heston Thanks for your response. I appreciate your point. I still hope we can play a positive role in the lives of people and be part of the continuing evolution of huamn thought.
@@johnanderson3700 So, y'ever learn yet why Satan was owed anything, post exile, or to keep any powers? And when any angel could ever impair other angels, like Eve did, unwittingly, ah, to humans?
« Spiritual landscape »: I wonder what the heck that means Spiritual is a woo woo word, that near as I can figure out means nothing. The phrase « spiritual landscape »: reminds me of those awful Rod McKuen metaphors, like « Listen to the warm. »
***** One can't teach religion without teaching doctrinal issues, to some extent. Children should know about the noble eightfold path of buddhists, the five pillars of islam, the seven sacraments of catholicism, etc. I believe simply exposing children to this information is part of a good start, IAW _better than nothing_. In addition to that the history of some religions should be taught in greater depth. A christian should know about christianity becoming the majority religion in Rome under Constantine, the crusades, Luther and the reformation, etc. So that the next generation of teachers may not be as biased.
***** I agree with you guys... I'm even religious, and I have no qualms with educating the public about other religions. Information is power. You can't KNOW too much. You can INFER too much when you don't have all the information. However, when presented as just raw information, there's nothing wrong with teaching Facts. Problem though is its very difficult for many people to really discern fact from opinion. Don't interpret religious texts. Teach what the text says (by virtue of quotation), and be very careful with summarizing and generalizing. One can factually quote the Bible, it is almost impossible to factually teach what "Christianity" believes because just look at all the different sects of Christianity. It's insane. Protestant, Catholic, Episcopalian, evangelical, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, unitarian, 7th day adventist, Presbyterian... There's all those different subsets, then you go into one church belonging to one of those subsets, and you will find division within that single church regarding various interpretations about what "Christianity" teaches. To answer "what do Christians believe" is difficult to say the least.
***** there are verses that speak of violence for sure. However reading through the new testament, I at know point felt like it was conveying a hate induced message, but that was my experience reading the text. That's why I advocate teaching what the text says and little more than that regarding religious doctrine. You can teach religious history, but it should be taught under that pretense (for instance, the crusades are part of religious history, they happened, that's a fact, and to ignore something like that is wrong). Teaching they happened "because of religion" is a different statement though. Not a fact. A theory. Not saying it's wrong, but it is absolutely not a "fact". Thise things trip people up a lot. Also your last statement shows a fundamental difficulty with teaching religion through non religious teachers. Knowledge is not the original sin. Bible never states or implies that understanding the universe is wrong. In fact just the opposite. However an inaccurate interpretation of what the "tree of knowledge" was, and the act of eating from it was in direct defiance of God's command which is the definition of "sin", could falsely lead someone to believe that Christians believe knowledge is sinful which is completely baseless and untrue, and that's why we NEED accurate teaching of various world religions, to remove inaccuracies like that from public thought. Historically it was Christians who undertook the rise of Scientific thought, it was the political leaders of their day (who were also religious leaders as the church was a dominant political leader of the time) that sought to crush it. Another common example is that people say "scientists say the earth is millions if not billions of years old, but the Bible says it's only 6000 years old..." The Bible never says that anywhere, that's another interpretation based on a chronology of the family trees listed, and a view not Universally held (not even close). It's extremely difficult to teach people what Christians believe because you can get ten Christians reading the same passage from the Bible and get ten different interpretations. That's why I advocate for just teaching people what the Bible says, and treading very softly when teaching non religious people what it means, and if you do teach what it means, be sure not to present it as a fact, because it's not, it's an interpretation, or opinion.
***** definition of a theory: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events. Arguing that religion caused the crusades (events) sounds a lot like an idea intending to explain an event. Chill out man. Also, people did not follow the crusades because "they read the Bible and saw that it was in there". Crusades started in the late 11th century. At that time it was purported that the average individual wasn't capable of understanding the Bible and required the help of religious leaders such as priests and the Pope. The Pete going on crusades did what the Pope told them to, not what they read in the Bible. The Catholic Church at the time functioning as much as a political institution as it was a religious one. I would say the crusades were instigated by politics more than religion and the people controlled by the religious leader, not their own conviction. Protestant reformation (Martin Luther and his 95 theses) didn't happened until hundreds of years after (and the definitely had its own fair share of problems, to be sure). Am I convinced that I'm 100 percent right? No, that's just my theory after trying to study the historical event and place it in context. You think it's an obvious explanation, but since when is history ever so obvious? Also, I'm not trying to fight here, you seem to be getting a little aggressive. Just a healthy exchange of ideas, that's all I want, otherwise this is just another silly UA-cam argument.
I grew up Christian as did my wife. At age 30, I left the church officially and became Wiccan/Pagan and she followed me. We let out 3 sons go to church with my sisters and with my wife's sister and since I had studied the Bible as a historical source and as a religious text, not to mention had studied about a great many other faiths and read the sacred books involved with those faiths. We gave our sons their own choice. My oldest became Pagan as well though of a different sect than my wife and I. Our two youngest are both severely mentally handicapped. The middle son cannot seem to grasp anything about religion so he is not interested in any religion but does ask me a lot of questions about beliefs and faith of many religions that he sees online. Our youngest is severely autistic, cannot speak and has the mind of a 2 yr old so he is happy in his own world and we let him be happy. As a history teacher in NC, I was discovered and fired for being a 'devil-worshipper' Legal in NC to do so. I fought it in court the 2nd time and the principal actually bragged to the judge that she was firing me for my beliefs, which btw no students had ever found out. I discussed religion in lessons where it affected the history we were studying. I won my case but it was a koral victory only- I was still fired and then black-balled from teaching because I fought the system in court and won. So my 2 Masters degrees are wasted (Education and Psychology) as my teaching awards. I agree we should teach about all religions or at least the most influential ones. When I was forced to teach about creation - because I also taught science classes some especially when other teachers did not wanna teach evolution and genetics, I would find out what cultural backgrounds of my students were and I would teach the creation myths from each of those religions. The students enjoyed it as did many parents.
BeachsideHank They are now that we disobeyed and he had to go to plan B. Besides what is your definition of deformed and do you see them as having less value?
I think it was hitchens who said, and I quote him very very loosely, "If god is the only reason you don't rape the women of your congregation that is truly evil." I'm trying to find the source now so please forgive me.
How can anyone think that keeping people ignorant of other faiths will keep theirs pure? The very idea of a belief or faith is to believe and/or have faith in your belief/faith. If your belief or faith in your religion is so weak that you fear knowledge of another religion, just how much faith or belief in your religion do you have? If you really want to convert others to your religion, go out and live well, and others will follow.
At 12, I decided to be baptisted. Pretty much, just to make mom happy. It was my decision. At 13, I renounced it all. I tried it; it did not work. I never looked back. But. I was always interested in why people tend to believe in fuckshit insane things. Sure, the bedrock of a religion may be workable. The practice often is horribly not. But it is worth knowing what those bedrocks are. People tend to forget them, much to our detriment.
He is "so calm" because one has to use drugs to counter the bullshit that Rick Warrren puts out. Bullshit that even he does not believe, if the truth were known.
I like one of H L Mencken's takes on 'informed society' and democracy: “As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” And here are a few more gems: The truth is that Christian theology, like every other theology, is not only opposed to the scientific spirit; it is also opposed to all other attempts at rational thinking. Not by accident does Genesis 3 make the father of knowledge a serpent - slimy, sneaking and abominable. Since the earliest days the church, as an organization, has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions. It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was the apologist for the divine right of kings. - H L Mencken, Treatise on the Gods Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in proportion to their readiness to doubt. - H L Mencken, from George Seldes, editor, The Great Quotations, quoted from James A Haught, editor, 2000 Years of Disbelief
Thanks Steeltrap. As a footnote to your HL Menchen quote - judging by the moron we now find in the White House, it looks like democracy has been perfected.
My parents thought they owned me, and it sux because I let them control me for far too long! Telling me what I can and can't do, after the age of 18. I finally got out of my mom's house last year, but I feel sooooo far behind in this life of mine😭It hurts so bad!!!!
Now you have the opportunity to live, learn and experience life yourself... Good luck! Remember to thank your parents when you have lived a little and grown up!!!
At first I thought this guy is actually making a few good points about one of the best books I've ever read. But then at 22:00, he used two sentences from very different contexts to prove his point. This disappointed me "Surrendered people obey Cod's word even if it doesn't make sense". Pastor Rick says this in the chapter where he exhorts believers to surrender to God since it is the heart of worship. True, heartfelt worship will only come from a surrendered heart. "Don't ever argue with the devil. He's better at arguing than you are, having had thousands of years to practice" Now Pastor Rick makes this quote in an entirely different context. He used this to say that it's better to run from temptations than to reason with it.
What you have missed is that you never surrender to God nor do you argue with the devil. What you do is you surrender to stories, in an old book. And you surrender to words of other human beings you interpret those stories in a way you like.. If you are honest with yourself, you know this is true. You have surrendered to Stories, mostly the stories of men dead for more than a thousand years. You cannot judge their honesty, their agenda nor their state of mental health. You are pretending that you know things about the world that you do not know. Others read other holy books and believe quite different things. Things you think are wrong. They too believe they have knowledge that they do not have.
I don’t think it unfair of Dennett to call out Warren. Warren IS guilty of promoting Christianity as the only true religion. Warren IS guilty of telling people not to think critically. Warren IS guilty of denying evolution and promoting I. D. Warren IS guilty of recommending that people submit their ethical sense to the arbitrary mores of an Iron Age culture.
I doubt it. Knowing Rich Warren, he probably found the whole discussion interesting and enlightening. Rick Warren is smarter than to take the bait. Atheists love to argue and debate.
Michael Murphy yea, because argument and debate are very good ways of coming to, at the very least, an understanding of the opposition of your beliefs; and, at the most, can totally change your opponents mind. The real benefit is public argument and debate, because, since your opponents are versed enough in the subject to consider themselves worthy to seriously discus it, it’s safe to assume that they are pretty firmly set in their beliefs; but, the audience is a totally different matter. A public argument or debate can, depending on the platform and persuasiveness of the debaters, change plenty of undecided minds, changes some people’s entire perspective, and bring new life to the arguments previously used for your position. They are both very important parts of rational, civilized, discourse.
@@murphy903 : I'm going to have to agree with Jared Bridge. Debates are important to bring forward the issues, they are a way to be made aware of issues, to be aware of the ideas. "Rick Warren is smarter than to take the bait" ==There is no bait. I don't know who Rick Warren is but he should be able to discuss his ideas like a human being.
Michael Murphy Atheists love to argue and debate? No, but in the domination, at least by passive acceptance, of religion, an atheist may believe there’s need to show another view. Argument and debate seem civilized ways to be honest and true to oneself amid the hostility of organized religions.
petmom ful You are what you say you are. If you’re a Christian, Jesus Christ lives in you. Is He sick, NO. So why are you? Command Satan to go, and take his lies with him.
This is already in the UK education system. Kids learn about all the main religions as well as differing denominations of each religion. They are taught what Creationism is. All of this in Religious Education class. In science they are taught evolution because that, of course, is proven fact. Dennett is extremely wise to propose this and it perfectly fits the First Amendment. It teaches tolerance to young people and at the same time encourages them to think critically and independently about the world around them: allow them to make up their own minds as to what to believe. No wonder so many conservative Christians in America would be against this, it makes it harder to spread their poison!
In Sweden too, since the 60s. It's slightly odd to hear him talk about it as if it's such a radical idea (which I guess it is in religiously extreme countries like the USA or… Saudi Arabia?).
I went to school in Sweden in the 80s, and "religion" as a school subject was then still very much "Christianity, and some cursory stuff about 3-4 other world religions".
mytube001 In Hungary at the begining of the 21st century the same. We learnt about old religions like Greek mythology, ancient Egypts gods, etc. But when we reached the point in history when Christianity was born we doesn't learned about another religions that are still exists.
Years ago, my college chemistry instructor taught me, that if your going to learn another religion, do so by someone of that faith. It might be difficult to take guitar lessons from a flute player…. (Although in some cases, I’m sure this’d work.) What a blessing it is to have fantastic teachers.
My Religious Education teacher was Christian. Personally, I think you should learn from someone NOT of a faith. My teacher was very disparaging of religions not his own.
Max Planck (lived from 1858 - to October 1947) the originator of modern quantum theories and one of the most important German physicists ever. During 19th and early 20th centuries, won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918. He said: "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. . .We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”
There's one huge element missing in Dan's proposal about the teaching of Religion in schools.He doesn't even mention the fastest growing single group, and that's those without any Religious belief. Secular values and attitudes towards Religion will ultimately be the dominant force shaping society. That's because information is readily available on the internet, and information is the enemy of Religion. He's remarkably generous towards Rick Warren, who by most people's standards is certainly a Creationist and the enemy of truth. Dan is clever in not turning off the Religious in the audience, who in the USA are bound to be largely Christian. Hopefully they made it to the end without turning off.
Information is not an enemy of faith in God but it is an enemy of hypocrisy and many traditions. Wisdom is the proper timing and application of information.
Information is the enemy of specific faith because amassed factual information provides reason and proof to either maintain the faith, shift it elsewhere or drop it entirely. Thus the reason why religious schools acknowledge the existence of other religions but they give very little information (if any at all) for learning about those other religions. Ties into Dan's general point.
It would certainly be important that Atheism, particularly militant Atheism, be included in the religions presented. It seems to me that the overall histories and factual outcomes of them (not accusing or defending) would be important to present as well so that the students have some idea of what they achieve, e.g., the religion's representation in the belief systems of world leaders, nations, groups, actions that have resulted, etc. For a student to best understand Islam, for example, It is much more instructive to understand the philosophy and average condition of life, freedoms, peace, standards of justice, etc., that have derived from the practice of its tenets in devout Islamic societies like Saudi Arabia than it is to have the tenets presented without any idea of their practical outcomes.
Reflected Miles Militant Atheism is not a Religion. It isn't organised along Religious grounds with Churches and congregations and it isn't founded on faith. There's no reason why Secular viewpoints can't be included in the class discussion, but they most certainly should not be listed alongside the different faiths because those views are not a Religion. I certainly agree that the outcomes of the various faiths ought to be taught, this is important. The way it distorts government policy throughout the world needs to be explored. For example, how it's all but impossible for an Atheist to be elected in the USA. The Middle Eastern countries, and groups such as ISIS and the Taliban should also be examined when it comes to how they have turned countries into rubble. Another outcome is the catastrophic effect that Islam has had on the Muslim scientific community which, for all practical purposes, has collapsed.
You know, he really does kind of have a point. I feel like if we understood where other people are coming from, we could foster more understanding. I don't think there is a case for ignorance being bliss.
When somebody asks "Who" designed such and such an animal, it is a leading question and you have to know that their answer will always be God or Intelligent Design.
Good luck getting teachers to teach about religion objectively. If teachers could be perfectly objective about religion, we wouldn't have any religions to teach about.
Knowing Truth will "make" you free is the quote. NOT knowing Truth enslaves you. NOT knowing is the foundation of belief the foundation of imaginary gawds and religions.
Shawn Steuer No one. Truth does not exist in universal reality. Learning what Truth IN Reality is the quest of each person. A perfect Truth is a perfect realization of Reality.
BELIEF and the BELIEF SYSTEM My primary research is a study to elucidate: WHAT IS “belief” and the “belief system?” What is their duality? What “good or bad” has been and is connected to the belief system? Most people believe that Truth and Reality are conceptual. This means most people invent in their brain what Truth and Reality is...and then “believe” what they invented is real. My goal has been to deprogram and retrain my brain to function without: opinion, bias, preconceived ideas, indoctrinated education AND to eliminate beliefs and disbelief from my analogies. Obviously a daunting task. I consider the evolution of “intellect” just as important as developing “intelligence.” Intellect is the thinking process that has all the tools of discernment that SHOULD be used when working to learn or realize anything as Truth IN Reality. And most certainly applied before belief or disbelief are invoked. The danger I have experienced and see in our humanity...is that belief and disbelief are a form of “certainty” that closes the mind and brain to intellect discerment. I try to steer away from any discussion of the “symptoms” of belief in this study because they always become to emotional and adversarial. However, I do also work to define what the “symptoms” of belief (cause and effect) are and what part does belief play in mankind’s history, personal life, society at large, the world population and governments? So, because this is an ongoing study, I can NOT claim to have any definitive answers. So instead...I offer a few statements to open a dialogue and critical thinking, that hopefully I will use to help further my study. The question is...is there any truth, validity or interesting insight to the following statements? 1. People believe that Truth and Reality are conceptual. This is saying we invent in our heads what they are and then believe what we invent is Truth and Reality. Authoritarians spin pure fantasy as Truth and Reality and force with physical and mental stratagem...the fantasy “belief system” onto people. Believing that a fantasy is Reality creates huge cognitive dissidence because the brain knows better and is in a constant state of confusion when forced to believe fantasy is Reality. When a person stops believing...the universe of Reality becomes clear and the real work of developing my/our Truth of Reality begins. A brain free of beliefs begins to discovers/realizes what real Truth and Reality is. 2. Learning how to think and discover with a mind free of opinion, bias, preconceived ideas and beliefs...with a truly open mind, willing to do the task of intellect discernment, is daunting and truly impossible for most people because they simply have never been shown how and most are stuck in the indoctrinated world of choosing belief or disbelief as their only options. 3. The psychology of belief is that once a person invokes/commits their brain to the belief...it closes the mind to dialectic intellect discernment, logic and reason. Any attempt to change the belief is repelled with anger, rage even physical harm. Belief is a horrifically dangerous mental tool that is used without a full understanding of its dangerous potential. And it is not yet being recognized for the 5000 years of insanity it has wrought on mankind. 4. When belief and disbelief are taken out of the equation...the universe begins to reveal itself to you. Most people cannot fathom NOT having beliefs...even though it is obvious that beliefs are what has been and IS controlling us. We are protecting our “belief system” abuser...this is a form of Stockholm syndrome insanity. 5. My use of big T and R. I try to separate mans invented truth and reality from what I call “real” Truth IN Reality. Truth does not exist in the universe so a search for it is futile. Reality...IS...the universe and what we learn of it becomes our personal Truth. Truth exists inside each of us. A “perfect” Truth or knowing of Reality...would be a perfect realization of the universe Reality. I think we have a long way to go to get to a perfect Truth of Reality level. But it is a MOST admirable and desirable quest...which epitomizes my study and research.
Reality IS the universe. Truth exists in your head just as beliefs do. So do we consider thoughts and emotions part of the universe or Reality? Are Truth and beliefs actually real? This is up to each individual to decipher for themselves.
It's ironic how religious cultures are largely influenced and dominated by Right-wing politics. Politicians *say* they care about family values and morals, but they want to cut welfare programs like Social Security that help millions of Americans. How can one support moral principles and deny the welfare of the needy masses? Do religious people give money to their church and neglect worthy charities? Are people prioritizing conversion and the "afterlife" over human kindness and life as we know it? Do religious people live fully in the present moment, accepting others despite their differences, or do they live life distanced from reality waiting to get beamed up to the pearly gates? These are some of the biggest and subtlest problems with religion.
+Robert Weekes Did it occur to you that some politicians want to cut Social Security so that it doesn't go bankrupt?............Rather than assuming that they want to cut it because they want to deprive retirees, maybe they want to assure that benefits will always be available.........Isn't it better to have lower benefits than none at all?
aks1947 I'll refine my comment, I'm saying that historically more republicans have been behind the initiation of wars. See the last war, here's statistics on the Support for the Iraq war.Representatives voted for the resolution. 215 (96.4%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted for the resolution. 82 (39.2%) of 209 Democratic I'm making the claim that Republicans are so called "the more christian party" where they uphold stronger values,
5:53'Democracy depends on informed citizenship, informed consent.' Priceless. This makes a lot of sense. This explains why bad things happen in democratic societies such as electing the wrong politician )
Exactly. It's why(well, one of the reasons why.., it's a little more complicated) Socrates himself was opposed to Democracy. How can you expect uninformed, or misinformed, commoners to Democratically decide who should rule while being completely ignorant?
First: brilliant! Second: my friend has a severe form OCD and is currently crying in the bathroom because of her sharing almost every idea mr. Denne discussest, but his beard is off center...
I'd love to learn about other religions growing up. I think there would probably be less Christian's when they realize it's a faith built on other religious tales and practices lol
I haven't met one minister that learned anything about comparitive theology after numerous conversations. That in itself is a key indicator that those who study the area the knowledge given is cut down and carefully purged to induct a person into only a very small p0rtion of a vast body of study. They will only ever know how to practice their brand without question, and that is a major indictment of religion as a whole.
I have - you must've encountered less well informed and intentioned preachers on your travels. I do agree, however, that yours are sadly probably more typical of the experiences of others.
@@erict.watson2460 I am a minister who reads widely. Sam Harris's podcast is one of my "don't miss" inputs every week. But many of my colleagues don't take any time to learn outside our denomination (with the exception of the one comparative religions of the world class that was required in my seminary).
I generally love Dan Dennett, but I wish he was a better public speaker. He wanders around his points like a group of Amish people in a Best Buy: enthusiastic but a little confused and fundamentally unable or unwilling to commit to anything in a definitive way.
I found him better in this than some of his other clips but I get the point. I find Hitchens tricky to understand too but mostly because of his references and quotes to cryptic stuff. Dawkins seems the easiest generally, with Sam Harris not far behind.
Dennett has a keen audience, the people who were invited to TED for years. He does a sketch. If you want cogent prose rather than just provocative thoughts, read Breaking the Spell.
Religious adherence is expression of the right amygdala in the limbic region of the brain: threat detection, fear, group loyalty, and submission to authority figures.
I agree, religious history (all types) should be taught in school. It makes perfect sense in the US, being that we are the land of the free. Imagine our children learning about all the history of the world, including the many wars & finding out that many of the wars were fought due to religion. Only problem is that Christians would flip their lids if their children were informed about the facts of religion.
Nope I sure wouldn’t flip. As long as the religion of evolution is fully exposed. Also, if you actually believe your faith, what’s their to be afraid of? However the actual issue of this is who is the fact checker? One easy example is from a Christian Bible only perspective, catholicism isn’t the teachings of Christ. Or perhaps another way to say it is if you took the Bible and followed the teachings in there, you wouldn’t come up with catholicism. Much easier way would to be focused the God or gods of that religion and it’s main character who represented that best in life and what those followers are going towards. Rather than find all the times men misused the religion for their gain. Example. On what the followers work towards. What would Jesus do slogan that you would hope you don’t see followers of Muhammad wearing around. Pretty easy to make judgments there. Buddha. Rich kid that starved himself to death until he hallucinated enough to find peace and then once was enough for him and you must do the same so your life can finally end from all this suffering. Multiple god system never works, because they never get along and those repeated many times. Hindu is really the only last remaining one and they would rather their people starve than eat their 4 legged ancestors. Then you have the religion of nothing or godless. Historically as old as any other. Evolution is just currently the biggest and newer form.
This sums up my main issue with religion pretty well. It's the epistemological irresponsibility of the whole thing. "Dont think, just do what the magic book says" is dangerous and foolish.
Thanks for the new vocabulary word :) I will say, I am a Christian and I totally agree with you - any religion that says "don't think" is very dangerous. Unfortunately, in every faith (especially, it seems, in Christianity), there are charlatans that do exactly what you say - they misdirect, misquote, misrepresent, use psychological devices, 'thought-stopping' tactics, etc. to get their audience to think what they want them to think about, not what the Word of God (yes, I believe the Holy Bible) wants them to think about. A true, open study of Christianity and what the Bible actually says and teaches, though, yields very interesting results. If someone were going to generate a fake religion, the Bible would have been the absolutely WORST way to do it -- the writers (especially of the New Testament) were portrayed as weak, ignorant, deceptive, petty, and afraid. Jesus, claiming to be God, picked an apostle that later betrayed him, and let Gentiles kill him (isn't he God? If so, why so weak?) Matthew, a Jewish tax collector (they were quite literally the considered traitors by Jews) authored one of the Gospels and wrote it to Jews (couldn't they have used someone more noble?) . Another primary writer, Paul, was a Pharisee and advocated the jailing / killing of Christians until he was converted AND apparently a bad speaker. Couldn't they have gotten someone more appealing to write this stuff down? Christianity teaches you can't do ANYTHING of your own effort to save yourself from God's wrath (that's not very encouraging), that you should love even your enemies (wow that sounds weak), to not be showboating your obedience to God (wait, I do this stuff and don't even get CREDIT for it from other people?), and you may actually lose your family or even your life if you follow Christ. Sorry, but if *I* were going to make a religion up -- Christianity is literally the worst way to do it. Yet here we are ;) I invite you do some honest research. I did the same when I was ~20 or so and it's fascinating. Thanks!
I also thought the proposition to be hilarious. Not ridiculous, just the oposite: I think the proposition is great. I find it hilarious to think about the likely outcome, if it could be installed: So many parents would be so disappointed that their children turn out to be atheists after having heard of all the different fantasy tales.
Imagine if they did that for evolution too. Imagine if they actually had to be honest about what they actually know and what they believe to be based on faith. It’s the biggest cult in modern history by a long shot.
@@benjamingilley9629 I know, you live in America. But still: Information is not so hard to come by. You shouldn't brag about you utter lack of education, it makes you look like an idiot.
He looks a little like David Letterman's older brother both of them were smart but in different ways
3 роки тому+1
Sweden has many years of religious studies for (almost) all elementary & high school students since the 60s. In 1997 they became mandatory for all children (previously one could get an exception).
...then you must really also process the same about SCIENCE..."very subjective" no??! even processing to have 'facts' and research as the fundamental basis of Science's faacts and knowledge (see Rubert Sheldrake)...also read the foundation beliefs of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin...NOW accepted as an enligthen Sesuit theologican...originally not allowed to be published via gthe Roman Cathlic Church!!
In Quebec, that is what they do. We have a course called "Morals" and they teach us about various religions. It is given in Secondary 4 and 5. That's at age 15 and 16.
@@alanparedes387 Actually the US isn't that bad, it really depends on the state you live in and what school system you go. I got a great education in Massachusetts (I'm also getting amazing financial aid for college here), we were taught "The bible as literature" in senior year, basically the class was reading the bible from a NON religious view and actually studying it objectively. It made lots of religious kids upset, I was just bored. I saw no value in the book for myself because I already knew it was bs, but reading the bible from a non-religious view is a great way to get people to lose their faith.
@@danmarie6907 ok when was this a 10000yrs ago oops thats not possible nowadays we learn the earth is only about 6000yrs old.Not that bad????? . Its the saudi arabia of the west,WITH NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON CAPABILITIES..............dont you know? sigh if its not "that bad" its at least extremely worrying
Dan Dennett's really smart, and I think smarter than people appreciate. This isn't just about religion. How many times have we come across people who will simply not listen to contrary opinions because "the devil" is so wily and cunning?
Dennett made a great proposal in his book that will unfortunately not work, to be realistic. Religion is too reliant upon the lack of reason for its fuel to ever allow for objective teaching of other religions.
I don't think so. If I understood him correctly, this class wouldn't be about teaching these religions in the sense as to make people believe in (any of) them. It is rather teaching knowledge about these religions, educating about them. Similar to (one could even argue identical to) teaching Greek, Norse or Babylonian mythology. After taking the class you will know about the tenets of the various faiths, you will know what adherents of these faiths believe. This doesn't require belief in any of these religions from the students. In fact, it would most likely have the opposite effect for most students (no doubt the reason why Dennett is a proponent of such a class, and believers opposed to it): by seeing all these religions side by side, students would see parallels, would see that many or all of them propose ideas that seem ridiculous to those who are not raised in these faiths, would see that the faith they're most familiar with is not essentially different from these other faiths, would understand that their faith is just as ridiculous if looked at objectively than the others.
That's just not true. Reason can be used both ways. Reason and rational are tools for human beings. Who's to say there isn't a Creator? Do you, Vincent B, understand the underlying laws and fundamentals of the universe? Do you know how the constructs of space and time came to be? Were you there? If the answer is yes, you are arrogant and utterly wrong. If the answer is no, you cannot claim that reason works against religion.
@@judahdarwin4871 I'm not Vincent B but let me throw in my 5 cents, if you please. I do agree with some of what you say but in order for there to be a case for religion there needs to be more than a "Were you there?" (which I cannot help but hear in my head with a thick Australian accent! 😛). If you point to gaps in our knowledge of the universe then you are literally promoting a god of the gaps. Do you really want to do that? Because, historically, this God of the Gaps has proved to be a nomad who has to relocate into the ever-receding dark corners of the universe while the light of science has been illuminating more and more areas of this our universe. I'm an atheist but nonetheless I will not rule out the existence of a god categorically. But I'm not inclined to believe in one (or several) until and unless a credible case it made *for* one, not a case against the completeness of science. Even if we "were not there" science allows us to gain lots of knowledge about the universe we live in, including its past (remember that because of the relatively slow* speed of light we literally look into the past when we observe distant stars or galaxies; in a sense, we *are there* when we watch these objects through our telescopes). Science has a proven track record of explaining the mysteries that surround us (hardly any of the questions that our ancestors ascribed to the gods are *not* explained by science: thunder & lightning, rainbows, the origin of diseases, solar eclipses, the reason why goats' furs is speckled or spotted, etc.); the existence of a god is yet to be demonstrated. I will therefore say that, yes, reason works against religion because even though gods cannot be ruled out 100% it is unreasonable to put an explanation that relies on their existence on par with an explanation that draws from science. * slow in comparison with the vastness of space
@@jensraab2902 Sorry for the late response. And I doubt this will be a productive conversation since most youtube conversations are productive. Perhaps to have a productive conversation, we should take this elsewhere. Regardless of the future of our discourse, however, I'll offer a short rebuttal. It will probably be unsatisfactory. It seems you are having a problem with the historical clash between religion and science. I do agree that if an institution or organization, people group, whatever, preaches a message that is deliberately against science, they shouldn't be listened to. However, I could make an argument that science and Biblical teachings go hand and hand. I think we look at things the wrong way. We look at science as a way to contrast biblical teaching with. I believe it is the other way around, instead of explaining the Bible through science, we should be explaining science through historical teachings. and this doesn't even have to be the bible. I believe there is truth in almost any religion, that Christianity and Islam are essentially the same fundamentally, but are warped, misinterpreted, or otherwise misunderstood. I have a problem with the idea of humanity raising itself up to proclaim our superiority when we don't even correctly understand ourselves. Early human individuals understood things much better than we do as we developed. Much progression in science came from genuine scientists looking for answers from other people, people from our past. Standing on the shoulders of giants as it's said. Isaac Newton, Galileo, even Albert Einstein tried to understand the universe through the eyes of God. I think that's significant. I see God in science and I think most people would too if they discarded confirmation bias and understood science as an everchanging, unimaginable frontier to explore. Biblical teaching suggests that God has not revealed everything so that we can find it ourselves. Im sure there are other explanations but Im satisfied with this. Mostly because I find the most joy, tremendous satisfaction, in finding new discoveries.
Teaching various religion history is what we do in all Swedish schools like the rest of the Scandinavian countries do. That’s one of the reasons why we are the most secular and non-religious countries in the world.
We do the same in Germany, too, since at least 5 decades...and only recently (and with the addition of 18 million mostly non-believers in Eastern Germany) we have turned more and more secular. So, no, teaching only "religion history & facts", is not the sole reason why a nation is more secular than others.
@@19ghost73 ”That’s one of the reasons...”, OK?
Hardened hearts. Seminary hardens men's hearts. Real men of God see the supernatural power of God and experience him.
@@jreyas6263 LOLOLOL ok then
@@jreyas6263 Education may harden men's hearts, but religion makes them soft in the head.
Truth does not fear inquiry, only falsehood does.
....like the fat, putrid pig in the WH?
Where's his taxes?
True.
Therefore try to use critical thinking to critique Dan's ideas.
Lots of fallacies but unfortunately atheists are developing Cult like behaviours too.
One example
2:00
Begging the question fallacy
Using an analogy to make a point is not proof
@@think-islam-channel that is not an atheistic view but a scientific one. And if proven wrong would and should be corrected. As a Muslim are you prepared to correct the quoran on all of its falsehoods, mistakes, misinformation and hate speech ?
Yes, agree.
@@think-islam-channel There's no "Begging The Question" fallacy. That fallacy is another term for circular reasoning -- where exactly is his circular reasoning? More importantly, he's not trying to _prove_ anything with his analogy. He's simply making an argument for a curriculum change, i.e., he's arguing for adding the teaching of factual religious history to the core three "Rs" curriculum.
Maybe you can clarify your point.
The more I study religions the more I am convinced that man never worshipped anything but himself.-
Richard Francis Burton
You got that right my friend
As a Christian theist I actually tend to agree that for the most part are theology's and are deities are a product of our own egos and sentiments. Breaking out of that and allowing the Creator to manifest and reveal Himself is no easy task.
@@greglogan7706 Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.
Did that include himself? He must've been praying to himself when he prayed & thought he was God/a god. Which way is the mental institution?
religion as a social dominance game, the shrewd over the gullible; the religious elite worshipping themselves
No pictures of a young Dan Dennett on Google. This confirms my assumptions: This man must have been born old, wise, and bearded.
For some reason, I've always thought that if there was a god, it would look like Daniel Dennett and instead of telling me about the truth of any particular dogma, he tells me that consciousness is actually really easy to explain.
Just like Gandalf.
Born old and pompous more like
Like Yahweh
@Brian O Callaghan, doesn’t come across as pompous. Perhaps I’ve missed something or perhaps you’ve imposed your bias to his talk.
When TED still had balls.
well said... TED is nothing more than a cult
Ian Carroll explain your position.
Ian Carroll
How so? I don't really see that
Do you mean that ole' Teddy got a vasectomy? Or did his nuts get snipped off?
citation needed
"Surrendered people obey God's word, even if it doesn't make sense." -Pastor Rick Warren
That, ladies and gentlemen, is why people fly planes into buildings.
Yes and No. The difference is that the implication of the Rick Warren quote is that the person is moving to reject the God's word but chooses not to because it is God's word. The people who flew the planes into buildings did so because they believed without question, i.e. they did not have this internal dialogue.
oremfrien Begging the question?
TwoDashFaced Man
I do not see how this falls into the "begging the question" fallacy. There is no point where the conclusion is assumed in this apparent difference in thought patterns. Please advise.
I've researched Holy Scripture since 1982 and never observed direction to fly airplanes into buildings. I did observe the admonition to not murder or steal, or lie or covet your neighbors servant or possessions. Also advised to love your neighbor and feed, house the poor...
D McK You failed to understand what the comment actually means.
I love you Daniel Dennett. You see potential in humanity, which is one reason why you give these talks. Thank you man.
LOL. I see no nonsense coming from DD. And he deserves those symbols he gets paid.
Great idea, just heard a fitting quote by Matt Dillahunty " give a child one religion and you will indoctrinate them. Give a child all religions and you will inoculate them " this will always stick with me, I think we need to learn more about all religions and culture. Knowledge is power and ignorance is no excuse
Chris McCann : well said .
Excellent quote, thanks for sharing.
🙌🏾🙌🏾🙌🏾
That is so true
Thank you. I've been saying that for years in a longer way. This wording is much more effective.
What a gentlemanly and dignified presentation of arguments! I salute you, Sir.
I received that kind of 'religious education' in a public school in Denmark over forty years ago.
It liberated me.
Brilliant BTW Mr. Denett
But that's it, whatever religion you might be born in does not want to "liberate" you.
I couldn't agree more! My college level theology classes, cemented my atheism!
This is why conservative republicans hate liberal colleges.....because it teaches the ability to question things and to properly find facts.
That’s what the pin head communist manipulators intended it to do. Look deeper
@@danielessex2162 yes go get that art degree lolol
@@totalcap2989 Oh your one of them people who think the only classes at "liberal colleges" is an arts degree?
Ignoring the facts that any college that right wingers claim is a "liberal" college is any college that teaches anything they don't like. So due to the fact you don't seem to know what classes and courses are taught at "liberal colleges" shows your bias.
@@totalcap2989 Yes, do. Just being on campus in an academic environment and you will learn how to think for yourself and how to learn new things on your own. That smug attitude that college is a waste of time and money is the result of indoctrination by those who want to be able to control you through propaganda for the rest of your life...politicians and big business. Remain one of their puppets if you want to, lolol.
If religionists were actually confident that their belief system is true, they wouldn't demand special education, because their belief system would be appealing to a critical thinking adult who has never heard of it before. Every religion actually has those converts.
They also wouldn't need to kill people for trying to leave the religions like our good friends in Saudi Arabia seem to love doing.
What do you mean by special education?
@Alex Atreides Not really. Those crazy megachurches are a small minority
That's an interesting statement because the scopes trial came about because of darwinism.
@@think-islam-channel I think they mean , Catholic schools, Islamic schools etc. The purpose of this is to legitimise that particular belief system without genuine supporting evidence.
Children are going to grow up in a world where most people have a different religion. It makes sense they will need to understand how they tick.
Hopefully all children will grow up knowing all religion's are nonsense and a con mans wet dream, the money religion's make is obscene.
Religious belief has nothing to do with sense (logic).
Roedy Green Yep 👍🏼
@@PaulBrown-uj5le Hopefully all children will grow up not being indoctrinated into anything, and having the freedom of choice.
@FlyboyCGC Because freedom isn't worth praying for?
"Democracy depends on informed consent" - now we know why things are so broken
The mushroom method of government is a classic. Keep people in the dark and feed them sh.. er.. lies. The ignorant are far easier to rule.
John Oliver said " You dont need people opinion on a fact" and initially I agreed with him, but after reading various books especially Dennetts books it suddenly became very clear that what people believe to be true is much more impactful than what is true. This is especially true in a Democracy, if half the US population believes that the economy is is shambles, that unemployment is through the roof and that the 2020 election was stolen through the use of rigged voting machines (all of which are false), they are going to vote based on these false beliefs.
Never heard of DD until today. Great philosopher. I hope he is still alive and kicking and trying to make sense out of the world.
Your message is three years old but I have to reply he is still alive at 79. He has released a number of books over the years.
@@Tribecasoothsayer Thank you. I am glad to hear that.
@@Tribecasoothsayer and in the main his books are the same garbage endlessly repeated/ regurgitated over and over and over again,( there is no God); he'll die and be buried and be forgotten and the Bible will remain at the top of the all time best seller list and Jesus's name be known and spoken about world-wide until the absolute end of time.
@@Tribecasoothsayer Your comment is 11 months old now, just letting you know somebody else appreciated your response to a 3 (now 4) year old comment🙂👍
He’s passed away now :(
"Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool."
Mark Twain
Christianity isn't religion. It's a personal relationship with Christ. A personal relationship isn't a religion just because the relationship is with God. It's just a relationship where one party is physical and one a spirit. That doesn't make it religious.
@@lawrence1318 *Simple facts and a simple general question for you.*
*Fact 1:* Christianity teaches you to thank God for giving life to you and also for giving life to animals for you to take their lives and eat them.
*Fact 2:* Christianity teaches you to thank God for choosing you out of many other praying patients to recover from illness as many other praying patients were ignored by God and died.
*Question:* Can't you see how the charlatan theologians have fooled your gullible-self to believe in an imaginary God by exploiting your hypocrisy, narcissism, arrogance and ignorance? No offence, just asking.
@@AtamMardes Rather, when are you going to think past your nose and realise that if there is no God and no afterlife, then it doesn't matter what anyone believes, for according to you everyone disappears into nothing forever. So you are contradicting yourself by even talking about these things.
Basically you're acting as though when you no longer exist you'll be able to tell others who also no longer exist that you were right and they were wrong.
But the fact that deep down inside you know these things are important eternally, should tell you that there is a God and an afterlife.
@@lawrence1318 atheists don’t talk about religion because they secretly know that god exists or something. They talk about it because religion causes hurt in allot of situations. Also having a relationship with god doesn’t matter. If you believe in the existence of a god that created the universe you are religious.
@@ploppyjr2373 You're contradicting yourself. If there is no God and we are all just atoms which are going to dissociate in a few years so that it will be as though we never existed, it shouldn't matter whether anyone is hurt. Stalin and the philanthropist both end up not existing.
So you are confused. You are appealing to moral concepts in what is according to you an amoral universe of matter. That you can't see this, shows us you are no philosopher and can't think past your nose. The idea that we are all typing on keyboards, playing tennis, listening to Elvis records, building motor cars and meeting up at restaurants, all suspended out in space and all by chance, is ludicrous. You need to get out of the house a bit more.
Looks like Socrates finally started writing things down.
lol
haha!
Love it!
No need for Plato now
Dust...Wind...Dude.
As a human that escaped a cult, I find this something I can not stop thinking about.
What Cult did you escape from?
@@ericgrabowski3896 The Jehovah's Witnesses
@@helenhollis3984 Well im happy youre free now!!
Good for you. I hope you're doing ok.
@@helenhollis3984 isn't it crazy how an organization could high jack your life, make your life about their interests and have you do it willingly
Wow, I had no idea how secular Santa was.
..you get the Santa you believe in..or do not believe in.....or need....or become youurself...(Oh ho ho ho home!) from Santa Anthony FYI: check my facebook page out: Santa Anthony" ...we can all participate with EVEN......the iconic understanding and Presence of Santa and MRS Santa (Claus)
Anthony Valdez - lol. The whole “Santa” thing is just a seasonal gig; in real life he’s a philosopher
Anthony Valdez
Reminds me of the dyslexic devil worshipper who sold his soul to Santa...
You didn’t? He’s like the face of secular.
🤣
The Earth was irrigated from the ground-up? A 600 year old man spent a hundred and twenty years building a boat? And people wonder why religion is dying.
thats the truth of Gods word....Its called the Christian faith...not religion
If it was easy to believe it would not require faith. If it was easy to understand it would not require the effort that God wants you to put into studying his word.
@Justin winter because of the sin of mankind
All religion should die it's fruitless,, .Religion is man reaching up to God through his own means....Christianity is God reaching down to man through Jesus christ....Christianity is not a religion but a faith....and religion is not a faith....but merely an effort of man's ideas to reach God..which is completely fruitless...✝️✝️know Jesus now
@@Mrcrisis2012 I'm sorry, but christianity is a religion
Why do religious people need all the answers now. Throughout history they have always had the “right answers” but simply we all know that is not true
@Matthew:
It's because of the right amygdala in the limbic region of their brain.
Feels good to listen to a sane person for a change.
This is the first presentation of Dan Dennett's that I have listened to at the suggestion of Seth from The Atheist Experience. Whether you agree with what he says or not, it's a fine display of rational thinking and eloquence.
Christianity was the religion I grew up believing. Now as an atheist, I have more of an interest of studying it and educating myself about it. Religion is easier to approach when analyzing it from a detached, educational, unbiased perspective.
What you seem to require about teaching religion in school is exactly what we had in Belgium in the mid-seventies. As a note: the most influential teacher I ever had on this, teaching atheistic views as well, was a catholic priest, no other. Still have fond memories of his classes in high school.
Reason is doing what's right no matter what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told no matter what's right.
Reason is actually reading the Bible and discovering why it's right, and then doing what's right no matter what you are told.
"Surrendered people obey God's word, even if it doesn't make sense." -Pastor Rick Warren
Faith is believing things without evidence which don't make sense.
@@mrswimmyboy
cultural thing. for you that has no sense, in other culture it has.
you do realize that you believe in things without seeing evidence and just believe in them because someone said so? you never conducted any own research to confirm those claims, but you do believe in their words...
take evolution for example, do you have evidence that man became from the ape? but you still believe in that. :)
@@zoki.to974 First: Evolution doesn't teach that "man became from the ape". Second: you're right saying that for many things I believe, I'm not able to redo the experiments or the researches. But when it comes to religion, NO ONE has ever been able to confirm any claim.
Reading The Four Horsemen. Hawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens. So glad I saw it live. So glad I have a daughter who teaches evolution at Yale, proud mom.
teaching lies with people's tax dollars isn't something to be proud of brother.
Thanks for having a smart kid who's making a difference for the better!
@@Farsadelcatolicismo you must not know how private college education is funded, what evolution is, or even what "Ms." means.You're not off to a great start, "brother." 😘
I'm a bit disappoinTED that such a great video uploaded 12 years ago only has 1.2 M views...
Id say UA-cam's algorithm. I've watched enough atheist experience and stuff by the other horsemen. This should have shown up in my recommendations much sooner
1 year after your comment @400,000 more views
Most people aren't that concerned with Truth as much as with the false sense of security they get from the illusion of safety in numbers and the soul-crushing conformity that orthodoxy demands. The truth, however, is simply not a matter of consensus and does not require even anyone's recognition let alone anyone's alignment with it to simply be itself. Don't sweat it.
Blue Heron Long winded answer to explain the algorithm process on youtube.
there probably only a select type of person who would look at this video.
Debaters take note! This is a masterclass in steelmanning another's argument. Brilliantly done!
I totally agreed with Dennett’s opinion to teaching about all major religions in school so in that way the students have a better knowledge about each and every religion in this world and their cultures and this will help kids to respect other kids who has another faith.
It is always so stimulating to listen to such a wyse and learned man.
What a pleasure to learn from any of his speeches.
Keep it up, maybe you'll improve your spelling skills.
How did religion evolve? When was the first time people started talking about God and why? Dan Dennet makes a lot of sense!
evolution is full of hoaxes and divide and conquer meme… those who cooperate best survive the best.
this kind of theory is what allows the Stalin's and Hitlers of the world to rise…
geniuses of history have always known there was a God...
“The gift of mental power comes from God, Divine Being, and if we concentrate our minds on that truth, we become in tune with this great power. My mother taught me to seek all truth in the Bible.”
--Nikola Tesla
"My worldly faculties are slipping away day by day Happy it is for all of us that the true good does not lie in them.
As they ebb, may they leave us as little children, trusting in the Father of Mercies and accepting His unspeakable gift.
I bow before Him who is Lord of all.”
--Michael Faraday, on his death bed, one of the greatest experimental philosophers, Doctorate from Oxford University, holding 97 unsought for distinctions who discovered Electricity
“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being.”
--Sir Isaac Newton, Principia, Book 3
“I think in the first place that it is very pious to say and prudent to affirm that the Holy Bible can never speak untruth-whenever its true meaning is understood.”
--Galileo (Letter to Grand Duchess of Tuscany)
“The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order which has been imposed on it by God, and which he revealed to us in the language of mathematics.”
--Kepler
“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.”
--Max Planck
“When the answer is simple, God is answering.”
“I am not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist.”[20]
“Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source.”[21]
"There is harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, yet there are people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me to support such views."
“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.”
--Einstein
“A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
--Dr. Fred Hoyle (scientist who coined the term "Big Bang" who was unafraid to go wherever the facts led him, and who consequently recanted his atheism.)
Head of Human Genome Project, Dr. Francis Collins, converts to Christianity
"I set out to prove that my atheist position was correct."
“Since everything that is in motion must be moved by something, let us suppose there is a thing in motion which was moved by something else in motion, and that by something else, and so on. But this series cannot go on to infinity, so there must be some First Mover.”
--Aristotle, “Physics”
“One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design and purpose behind it all... To be forced to believe only one conclusion--that everything in the universe happened by chance--would violate the very objectivity of science itself.”
--Werner von Braun, Letter to CA State Board of Education, 9/14/72
"The laws of nature produce no events, they state the pattern to which every event have only and can be induced to happen, must conform. Just as the rules of Arithmetic state the pattern to which all transactions of money, must conform, if only you can get a hold of any money. Thus in one sense the laws of nature cover the whole field of space and time. In another what they leave out is precisely the whole real universe. The incessant "
"For every law says in the last resort: 'If you have A, then B."
But first catch your A.
The laws will not do it for you."
--C.S.Lewis
12 min
“The exquisite order displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the Divine.”
--Dr. Vera Kistiakowski, Prof. of Physics Emeritus, MIT
“I stand in awe of God because of what He has done through his creation. Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.”
--Dr. James Tour, Nanoscientist, Rice Univ.
“If physics is the product of design, the universe must have a purpose, and the evidence of modern physics suggests strongly to me that the purpose includes us.”
Paul Davies, Superforce, (1984)
“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency--or rather, Agency--must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof for the existence of a Supreme Being?”
--George Greenstein, Astrophysicist, The Symbiotic Universe (1988)
“If everything in the universe came into being, then the cause of the universe must be transcendent, not a part of this universe,” Strauss argued. “Science kind of stumbled onto something that the Bible declared long ago … that the universe had a beginning.”
--yt: Scientific Evidence for God - Dr. Strauss
“If some god-like being could be given the opportunity to plan a sequence of events with the express purpose of duplicating our “Garden of Eden,” that being would face a formidable task...it is unlikely that the Earth could ever be truly duplicated.”
--Peter Ward, Geologist & Donald Brownlee, Astronomer “Rare Earth” (2000)
“It is my science that drove me to the conclusion that the world is much more complicated than science... It is only through the supernatural that I can understand the mystery of existence.”
--Alan Sandage, Astronomer (Newsweek, 1998)
“Where do you get information from?”
Dr. John Lennox, Mathematics, Oxford Univ.
“Natural selection reduces genetic information.”
Dr. Marciej Giertych, Population Geneticist, EU
youtube: The Case For A Creator With Lee Strobel
yt: Latest Scientific Evidence for God's Existence - Hugh Ross, PhD
yt: Young Earth - Young Universe
yt: Scientific Evidence for God - Dr. Strauss
Tyndale Israel None of that means anything. >.
Tyndale Israel
Clearly you do not understand evolution. Get some books and read them(proper science books,even 5th grade level ones would do for you I think)
Odd jørgensen “There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular systems, only a variety of wishful speculations.”
Dr. James Shapiro, evolutionary microbiologist, Univ. of Chicago
yarpen800 It is interesting that scientists have analyzed the Creation story of the Bible and seen a scientific method embedded within it. Probably one reason so many scientists believe in God and have contributed so much.
John Ray-Founder of Biology and Devout Christian
Ray quoted experiments by Francesco Redi which contradicted spontaneous generation. Ray said that “My observation and affirmation is that there is no such thing in nature” and he referred to spontaneous generation as “the atheist’s fictitious and ridiculous account of the first production of mankind and other animals.”
“He declared fossils were the petrified remains of extinct creatures. This was not accepted by biologists generally until a century later.”
I am not religious, btw.
Patrick Henry made a very clear statement: "It cannot be emphasized too often or too strongly that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians; not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ....It is for this reason that people of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity and freedom of worship here."
“If you ask an American, who is his master? He will tell you he has none, nor any governor but Jesus Christ.”
--Jonathan Trumbull, c. 1770; Faith of Our Fathers Newsletter Fall 2003, vol 1 Issue 11
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
― Carl Sagan
What an elegant talk. Kudos!
As the old saying goes, teaching a child one religion is indoctrination, teaching a child all religions is inoculation.
It amazes me how well this applies not only to religion, but to politics as well. And here you were thinking politics are not about religious institutions ;-)
Nimuel: Good point! Thinkers on religion from Hitch to Alan W. Watts correctly pointed out the fundamentally theocratic nature of the Stalin & Mao regimes. The personal adoration of Hitler, Mussolini & Trump are covert examples of the same. More explicit were the cults of Hirohito, & of the Russian tsars.
Why do you think North Korea and China do not allow other religions? The state does not want any competition from them. The state is the only religion allowed and the leader is the prophet or god himself.
Region is Politics. They both manipulate people in a social and behavioural manner.
Politics: A way to direct or otherwise control a group of people.
Relgion: A way to direct or otherwise control a group of people.
The similarities far outweigh the differences, or so it seems to me. The main difference seems to be that one pushes the idea of the people, state or country. The other pushes the idea of a deity. One has slightly more existance than the other. That's about it.
I only just discovered D. Dennett in the last few months. Good stuff.
I was indoctrinated into the Irish version of Catholicism right after birth. It's a guilt-driven version -- the Irish method. Now at age 45, I have been agnostic for near 20 years. Yet, I still at times feel guilty for abandoning nonsense for reason. But if I were to return to any sort of religion, I would feel like a hypocrite, for subscribing to evident nonsense. How grand it would be, to have never been brainwashed (in very much a sense) from the get-go.
Try deism, pantheism, or any of the other varieties of non-atheism which are not based on any revealed scripture.
Shan Oakley reddit.com/r/catholicism
KingElrosTarMinyatur Thanks!
+Adrienne Gurge Why define any version of god into existence? Why would a god that you have invented for yourself be superior to any other? You don't have to be an atheist, but the alternative is to select a god that will give you what? Nothing.
*****
Yes, but why have any concept of God at all? What purpose does it serve to have a concept of something for which there is no evidence whatsoever?
Education opens the mind, while indoctrination closes it.
Peace!
Yet flat earthers and YEC believes claims they are open minded. I think they are so open minded that their brain fell out.
@@freddan6fly: The Sun rises and sets each day." This sounds like a statement about the Sun. But it is actually a statement about us, about our planet. It tells that we and our planet is moving, not the Sun.
@@freddan6fly Flat Earthers.. those things still exists? A 15th-century sailor would laugh if you said the Earth was flat.
@@SStupendous Check "SciManDan" the most famous debunker of flat earth on youtube.
@@freddan6fly All you need is someone older than 7 to debunk it.
Religions are important to study, idiotic to follow dogmatically.
I'm guessing you have birthdays celebrate new years Christmas Halloween! I'm also guessing you refer to the weeks months and even the planets in the sky all by their religious names as well as using religious names throughout your family. No one is free from religion the only difference is religious people are half concious of what they believe.
Its more idiotic to follow one and not even know it lol idiot
@@kennyjharland that is not following religion. I don't go to church. I don't believe in a deity. I don't feel guilty about not following the rules of a religious book. I don't feel guilty about natural desires and actions. Because we use common names and because we are influenced by a culture informed by religion did not mean we follow the dogma of a religion. What you said was really stupid.
@@HughMorristheJoker you certainly participate? granted it is unintentionally but none the less you engage in the traditional religious holidays and practices! And you will no doubt "believe" in the men that tell you there is a higher power a benefactor to how and why we are here! Yours Is a big bang chance and natural selection all blind and not conscious but none the less it's a unseen force you believe in and live you life according too! As for you celebrations and festival lol you haven't got any of your own so you still blindly follow all the ones traditionally practiced like birthday and new year!! If anything you're pagan! You might intentionally and verbally say you're atheist but your actions and philosophy are technically religious you just dont acknowledge it.
@@kennyjharland that's just a lot of assumptions with no validity
How many find this amusing ? The Ark Encounter is suing it's 5 insurers for refusing to cover damages a landslide, caused by heavy rains did to its access road.
Amusing if true. Source?
@@Amberscion Christian Post, Washington Post, Louisville Courier-Journal, Lexington Herrold, Cincinnati Enquirer, CBS, Christian News Network, USA Today, News.co.uk, BBC...
The irony.
@@undrcoverlouky It's really easy to rattle off a pile of news sources. That's not a source, however, any more than listing the continents is a source for the claim that continental drift occurs...
A link to an article would be a source.
@@Amberscion A.) I believe you are confused. A source is where you can obtain something. A source is not the product you're looking for specifically. B.) You're rude. Is Siri broken? You can verify it as I did.
I know he's a member of the infamous 4 horsemen but I've never really listened to him. Time to search all his videos. :D
Believers don't listen to anything.
same goes here ! Dennett is brilliant. I'm excited!
He's the least militant--and my favorite--of the four.
+Andrew Jebb same!
A classic talk - thanx for posting.
6:15 "Misinformed consent is worthless" Oooooh, what a painful statement, in light of Brexit.
Elizabeta Macovei Yep, misinformed consent is what took us into that shambles in the 70’s
@@illigitimus5020 👍
Could not agree more...the remainers definitely tried to lie to everyone. ..what a waste of there time..long live England. ..death to europe .
@@jameswyatt1227, you're the very definition of a cretin.
Dont believe
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
Buddha quotes (Hindu Prince Gautama Siddharta, the founder of Buddhism, 563-483 B.C.)
👍🤗BUDDHÀ
While it’s a nice quote, I just checked it and it’s not exactly what the Buddha said. The actual quote is as follows:
“Now, Kalamas, don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness’ - then you should enter & remain in them.”
This sounds like someone to quote to defend Hindu faith: “oh, you say I’m irrational? Well look at this one line! Clearly this proves I thought rationally about my faith.
@@johanfijnvandraat9339 Someone almost entirely altering a quote! Unlikely! Lol. Great quote though
@@stoopidapples1596 Someone got out of the wrong side of bed
Not only do I agree (and I am a priest in Christian faith) I would say we in religious community need to be in conversation with each other & expose ourselves to each other engaging each other’s tradition and broaden our spiritual landscape
Beautifully said!
@Glenn Heston Thanks for your response. I appreciate your point. I still hope we can play a positive role in the lives of people and be part of the continuing evolution of huamn thought.
@@johnanderson3700 So, y'ever learn yet why Satan was owed anything, post exile, or to keep any powers? And when any angel could ever impair other angels, like Eve did, unwittingly, ah, to humans?
@@chrissonofpear1384 Hey, y'ever figure out exactly how matter uses gravity to attract other matter? What's the mechanism there?
« Spiritual landscape »: I wonder what the heck that means Spiritual is a woo woo word, that near as I can figure out means nothing. The phrase « spiritual landscape »: reminds me of those awful Rod McKuen metaphors, like « Listen to the warm. »
I'm grateful I live in a country where I get to learn about the world religions in school.
***** One can't teach religion without teaching doctrinal issues, to some extent. Children should know about the noble eightfold path of buddhists, the five pillars of islam, the seven sacraments of catholicism, etc. I believe simply exposing children to this information is part of a good start, IAW _better than nothing_.
In addition to that the history of some religions should be taught in greater depth. A christian should know about christianity becoming the majority religion in Rome under Constantine, the crusades, Luther and the reformation, etc.
So that the next generation of teachers may not be as biased.
***** I agree completely
***** I agree with you guys... I'm even religious, and I have no qualms with educating the public about other religions. Information is power. You can't KNOW too much. You can INFER too much when you don't have all the information. However, when presented as just raw information, there's nothing wrong with teaching Facts.
Problem though is its very difficult for many people to really discern fact from opinion. Don't interpret religious texts. Teach what the text says (by virtue of quotation), and be very careful with summarizing and generalizing. One can factually quote the Bible, it is almost impossible to factually teach what "Christianity" believes because just look at all the different sects of Christianity. It's insane. Protestant, Catholic, Episcopalian, evangelical, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, unitarian, 7th day adventist, Presbyterian... There's all those different subsets, then you go into one church belonging to one of those subsets, and you will find division within that single church regarding various interpretations about what "Christianity" teaches. To answer "what do Christians believe" is difficult to say the least.
***** there are verses that speak of violence for sure. However reading through the new testament, I at know point felt like it was conveying a hate induced message, but that was my experience reading the text. That's why I advocate teaching what the text says and little more than that regarding religious doctrine. You can teach religious history, but it should be taught under that pretense (for instance, the crusades are part of religious history, they happened, that's a fact, and to ignore something like that is wrong). Teaching they happened "because of religion" is a different statement though. Not a fact. A theory. Not saying it's wrong, but it is absolutely not a "fact". Thise things trip people up a lot.
Also your last statement shows a fundamental difficulty with teaching religion through non religious teachers. Knowledge is not the original sin. Bible never states or implies that understanding the universe is wrong. In fact just the opposite. However an inaccurate interpretation of what the "tree of knowledge" was, and the act of eating from it was in direct defiance of God's command which is the definition of "sin", could falsely lead someone to believe that Christians believe knowledge is sinful which is completely baseless and untrue, and that's why we NEED accurate teaching of various world religions, to remove inaccuracies like that from public thought. Historically it was Christians who undertook the rise of Scientific thought, it was the political leaders of their day (who were also religious leaders as the church was a dominant political leader of the time) that sought to crush it. Another common example is that people say "scientists say the earth is millions if not billions of years old, but the Bible says it's only 6000 years old..." The Bible never says that anywhere, that's another interpretation based on a chronology of the family trees listed, and a view not Universally held (not even close). It's extremely difficult to teach people what Christians believe because you can get ten Christians reading the same passage from the Bible and get ten different interpretations. That's why I advocate for just teaching people what the Bible says, and treading very softly when teaching non religious people what it means, and if you do teach what it means, be sure not to present it as a fact, because it's not, it's an interpretation, or opinion.
***** definition of a theory: an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events. Arguing that religion caused the crusades (events) sounds a lot like an idea intending to explain an event. Chill out man.
Also, people did not follow the crusades because "they read the Bible and saw that it was in there". Crusades started in the late 11th century. At that time it was purported that the average individual wasn't capable of understanding the Bible and required the help of religious leaders such as priests and the Pope. The Pete going on crusades did what the Pope told them to, not what they read in the Bible. The Catholic Church at the time functioning as much as a political institution as it was a religious one. I would say the crusades were instigated by politics more than religion and the people controlled by the religious leader, not their own conviction. Protestant reformation (Martin Luther and his 95 theses) didn't happened until hundreds of years after (and the definitely had its own fair share of problems, to be sure).
Am I convinced that I'm 100 percent right? No, that's just my theory after trying to study the historical event and place it in context. You think it's an obvious explanation, but since when is history ever so obvious?
Also, I'm not trying to fight here, you seem to be getting a little aggressive. Just a healthy exchange of ideas, that's all I want, otherwise this is just another silly UA-cam argument.
I grew up Christian as did my wife. At age 30, I left the church officially and became Wiccan/Pagan and she followed me. We let out 3 sons go to church with my sisters and with my wife's sister and since I had studied the Bible as a historical source and as a religious text, not to mention had studied about a great many other faiths and read the sacred books involved with those faiths. We gave our sons their own choice. My oldest became Pagan as well though of a different sect than my wife and I. Our two youngest are both severely mentally handicapped. The middle son cannot seem to grasp anything about religion so he is not interested in any religion but does ask me a lot of questions about beliefs and faith of many religions that he sees online. Our youngest is severely autistic, cannot speak and has the mind of a 2 yr old so he is happy in his own world and we let him be happy.
As a history teacher in NC, I was discovered and fired for being a 'devil-worshipper' Legal in NC to do so. I fought it in court the 2nd time and the principal actually bragged to the judge that she was firing me for my beliefs, which btw no students had ever found out. I discussed religion in lessons where it affected the history we were studying. I won my case but it was a koral victory only- I was still fired and then black-balled from teaching because I fought the system in court and won. So my 2 Masters degrees are wasted (Education and Psychology) as my teaching awards.
I agree we should teach about all religions or at least the most influential ones. When I was forced to teach about creation - because I also taught science classes some especially when other teachers did not wanna teach evolution and genetics, I would find out what cultural backgrounds of my students were and I would teach the creation myths from each of those religions. The students enjoyed it as did many parents.
*Sapient Wisdom:* I ask the religious; what would you do if you weren’t afraid?
BeachsideHank
I am not afraid. Thus I will do as Jesus asks. Next question?
@@Gpacharlie "Next question?" *Sapient Wisdom:* Why accept as honorable a God who impregnates a married woman with himself as her child?
BeachsideHank Because He is God. Because He is perfection.
Next question?
@@Gpacharlie "Next question?" *Sapient Wisdom:* So deformed children are God's perfect plan?
BeachsideHank They are now that we disobeyed and he had to go to plan B. Besides what is your definition of deformed and do you see them as having less value?
It’s unfortunate that we may never have his proposal happen. We can’t even agree to teach our children basic historical events of our country.
I think it was hitchens who said, and I quote him very very loosely, "If god is the only reason you don't rape the women of your congregation that is truly evil." I'm trying to find the source now so please forgive me.
"Just claim you came up with the quote"- Albert Einstein
@@88mphDrBrown its true he said that in a debate
@@88mphDrBrown I knew I could depend on you once again Al, for the right quote at the right time.
Hitchens was a pervert .
Thank you, Mr. Dennett! As usual our reasoning is in complete alignment. Peace!
How can anyone think that keeping people ignorant of other
faiths will keep theirs pure? The very idea of a belief or faith is to believe
and/or have faith in your belief/faith. If your belief or faith in your
religion is so weak that you fear knowledge of another religion, just how much
faith or belief in your religion do you have? If you really want to convert
others to your religion, go out and live well, and others will follow.
Absolutely
Most serious religious people would not fear a proposal like this.
Gromlek follow you even to poisoned koolaid.
The faith of evolution and atheism is a perfect example of total ignorance!
Then why do Atheists keep fellow Atheists ignorant of Christianity?
At 12, I decided to be baptisted. Pretty much, just to make mom happy. It was my decision. At 13, I renounced it all. I tried it; it did not work. I never looked back. But. I was always interested in why people tend to believe in fuckshit insane things. Sure, the bedrock of a religion may be workable. The practice often is horribly not. But it is worth knowing what those bedrocks are. People tend to forget them, much to our detriment.
how is he so calm when pointing out the BS in warrens book?
Because religions are for ignorant people !
ItsOElA
Because he knows he's right. Wish i saw warren's face
He is "so calm" because one has to use drugs to counter the bullshit that Rick Warrren puts out. Bullshit that even he does not believe, if the truth were known.
@@HPGCHEMIST1 correct! Ignorant is not knowing so read the word and get educated and you won't be ignorant anymore
I felt there was an undercurrent of well controlled rage in his voice. And understandably so, Rick stands for everything Dan hates.
I like one of H L Mencken's takes on 'informed society' and democracy:
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
And here are a few more gems:
The truth is that Christian theology, like every other theology, is not only opposed to the scientific spirit; it is also opposed to all other attempts at rational thinking. Not by accident does Genesis 3 make the father of knowledge a serpent - slimy, sneaking and abominable. Since the earliest days the church, as an organization, has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions. It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was the apologist for the divine right of kings.
- H L Mencken, Treatise on the Gods
Men become civilized, not in proportion to their willingness to believe, but in proportion to their readiness to doubt.
- H L Mencken, from George Seldes, editor, The Great Quotations, quoted from James A Haught, editor, 2000 Years of Disbelief
Thanks Steeltrap. As a footnote to your HL Menchen quote - judging by the moron we now find in the White House, it looks like democracy has been perfected.
The white house remark has now actually happened !
I could listen to Dennett all day long. He's a rare voice of reason.
My parents thought they owned me, and it sux because I let them control me for far too long! Telling me what I can and can't do, after the age of 18. I finally got out of my mom's house last year, but I feel sooooo far behind in this life of mine😭It hurts so bad!!!!
Now you have the opportunity to live, learn and experience life yourself... Good luck!
Remember to thank your parents when you have lived a little and grown up!!!
Get counselling . You are not the first to go through this .There are people who can help
At first I thought this guy is actually making a few good points about one of the best books I've ever read. But then at 22:00, he used two sentences from very different contexts to prove his point. This disappointed me
"Surrendered people obey Cod's word even if it doesn't make sense". Pastor Rick says this in the chapter where he exhorts believers to surrender to God since it is the heart of worship. True, heartfelt worship will only come from a surrendered heart.
"Don't ever argue with the devil. He's better at arguing than you are, having had thousands of years to practice" Now Pastor Rick makes this quote in an entirely different context. He used this to say that it's better to run from temptations than to reason with it.
What you have missed is that you never surrender to God nor do you argue with the devil. What you do is you surrender to stories, in an old book. And you surrender to words of other human beings you interpret those stories in a way you like.. If you are honest with yourself, you know this is true. You have surrendered to Stories, mostly the stories of men dead for more than a thousand years. You cannot judge their honesty, their agenda nor their state of mental health. You are pretending that you know things about the world that you do not know. Others read other holy books and believe quite different things. Things you think are wrong. They too believe they have knowledge that they do not have.
@@dimbulb23 you missed the point of the comment 🤦♂️
I don’t think it unfair of Dennett to call out Warren.
Warren IS guilty of promoting Christianity as the only true religion.
Warren IS guilty of telling people not to think critically.
Warren IS guilty of denying evolution and promoting I. D.
Warren IS guilty of recommending that people submit their ethical sense to the arbitrary mores of an Iron Age culture.
When Dennett starts reading quotes from Rick Warren's book, you can literally feel the silence and disgust in the room.
I doubt it. Knowing Rich Warren, he probably found the whole discussion interesting and enlightening. Rick Warren is smarter than to take the bait. Atheists love to argue and debate.
Michael Murphy yea, because argument and debate are very good ways of coming to, at the very least, an understanding of the opposition of your beliefs; and, at the most, can totally change your opponents mind. The real benefit is public argument and debate, because, since your opponents are versed enough in the subject to consider themselves worthy to seriously discus it, it’s safe to assume that they are pretty firmly set in their beliefs; but, the audience is a totally different matter. A public argument or debate can, depending on the platform and persuasiveness of the debaters, change plenty of undecided minds, changes some people’s entire perspective, and bring new life to the arguments previously used for your position. They are both very important parts of rational, civilized, discourse.
@@murphy903 :
I'm going to have to agree with Jared Bridge.
Debates are important to bring forward the issues, they are a way to be made aware of issues, to be aware of the ideas.
"Rick Warren is smarter than to take the bait"
==There is no bait. I don't know who Rick Warren is but he should be able to discuss his ideas like a human being.
Michael Murphy n
Michael Murphy Atheists love to argue and debate? No, but in the domination, at least by passive acceptance, of religion, an atheist may believe there’s need to show another view. Argument and debate seem civilized ways to be honest and true to oneself amid the hostility of organized religions.
I am an agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac. I lay awake all night wondering if there is a dog.
This comment has not received the recognition it deserves. Very funny.
petmom ful You are what you say you are. If you’re a Christian, Jesus Christ lives in you. Is He sick, NO. So why are you? Command Satan to go, and take his lies with him.
@@suzanneyoung6273 do you know what a joke is?
Pikeandslippers I am an agnostic insomniac dyslexic dog trainer. I lay awake at night wondering wether or not dog will come when I call.
originality is NOT the purview of atheism.
Thanks for keeping his wisdom alive
I learned some things that sparked my curiosity, in my art history class...at the age of 53.
This is already in the UK education system. Kids learn about all the main religions as well as differing denominations of each religion. They are taught what Creationism is. All of this in Religious Education class. In science they are taught evolution because that, of course, is proven fact. Dennett is extremely wise to propose this and it perfectly fits the First Amendment. It teaches tolerance to young people and at the same time encourages them to think critically and independently about the world around them: allow them to make up their own minds as to what to believe. No wonder so many conservative Christians in America would be against this, it makes it harder to spread their poison!
In Sweden too, since the 60s. It's slightly odd to hear him talk about it as if it's such a radical idea (which I guess it is in religiously extreme countries like the USA or… Saudi Arabia?).
I went to school in Sweden in the 80s, and "religion" as a school subject was then still very much "Christianity, and some cursory stuff about 3-4 other world religions".
mytube001 In Hungary at the begining of the 21st century the same. We learnt about old religions like Greek mythology, ancient Egypts gods, etc. But when
we reached the point in history when Christianity was born we doesn't learned about another religions that are still exists.
Years ago, my college chemistry instructor taught me, that if your going to learn another religion, do so by someone of that faith.
It might be difficult to take guitar lessons from a flute player…. (Although in some cases, I’m sure this’d work.)
What a blessing it is to have fantastic teachers.
If you are going to take religious advise from a chemistry instructor .......
@@1lightheaded My professors name is Dr. Angel. (No joke) 😬
My Religious Education teacher was Christian. Personally, I think you should learn from someone NOT of a faith. My teacher was very disparaging of religions not his own.
He should have told you to learn from those who teach you how to think, not how to believe.
Max Planck (lived from 1858 - to October 1947) the originator of modern quantum theories and one of the most important German physicists ever. During 19th and early 20th centuries, won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918.
He said:
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter,
I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. . .We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.”
What an amazing, brilliant man. You just can't deny this kind logic. LOVE it! Cheers
Dan was one of my teachers at the LSE. Wonderful man.
increíble
There's one huge element missing in Dan's proposal about the teaching of Religion in schools.He doesn't even mention the fastest growing single group, and that's those without any Religious belief. Secular values and attitudes towards Religion will ultimately be the dominant force shaping society. That's because information is readily available on the internet, and information is the enemy of Religion.
He's remarkably generous towards Rick Warren, who by most people's standards is certainly a Creationist and the enemy of truth. Dan is clever in not turning off the Religious in the audience, who in the USA are bound to be largely Christian. Hopefully they made it to the end without turning off.
Information is not an enemy of faith in God but it is an enemy of hypocrisy and many traditions. Wisdom is the proper timing and application of information.
He talks about sheep. Have you read "Treasures in The Book of Job" that book has a very interesting take on animal domestication.
Information is the enemy of specific faith because amassed factual information provides reason and proof to either maintain the faith, shift it elsewhere or drop it entirely. Thus the reason why religious schools acknowledge the existence of other religions but they give very little information (if any at all) for learning about those other religions. Ties into Dan's general point.
It would certainly be important that Atheism, particularly militant Atheism, be included in the religions presented. It seems to me that the overall histories and factual outcomes of them (not accusing or defending) would be important to present as well so that the students have some idea of what they achieve, e.g., the religion's representation in the belief systems of world leaders, nations, groups, actions that have resulted, etc. For a student to best understand Islam, for example, It is much more instructive to understand the philosophy and average condition of life, freedoms, peace, standards of justice, etc., that have derived from the practice of its tenets in devout Islamic societies like Saudi Arabia than it is to have the tenets presented without any idea of their practical outcomes.
Reflected Miles Militant Atheism is not a Religion. It isn't organised along Religious grounds with Churches and congregations and it isn't founded on faith.
There's no reason why Secular viewpoints can't be included in the class discussion, but they most certainly should not be listed alongside the different faiths because those views are not a Religion.
I certainly agree that the outcomes of the various faiths ought to be taught, this is important. The way it distorts government policy throughout the world needs to be explored. For example, how it's all but impossible for an Atheist to be elected in the USA. The Middle Eastern countries, and groups such as ISIS and the Taliban should also be examined when it comes to how they have turned countries into rubble.
Another outcome is the catastrophic effect that Islam has had on the Muslim scientific community which, for all practical purposes, has collapsed.
“We don’t need a belief in god to be good”. Truer words have never been said. 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I love this guy.
You know, he really does kind of have a point. I feel like if we understood where other people are coming from, we could foster more understanding. I don't think there is a case for ignorance being bliss.
Looking foward to read the books of Daniel Dennett.
When somebody asks "Who" designed such and such an animal, it is a leading question and you have to know that their answer will always be God or Intelligent Design.
Paleontologists speaking to lay audiences make that mistake all the time. Such-and-so is "designed" for grasping, etc.
Good luck getting teachers to teach about religion objectively. If teachers could be perfectly objective about religion, we wouldn't have any religions to teach about.
Knowing Truth will "make" you free is the quote. NOT knowing Truth enslaves you. NOT knowing is the foundation of belief the foundation of imaginary gawds and religions.
Shawn Steuer
No one. Truth does not exist in universal reality. Learning what Truth IN Reality is the quest of each person. A perfect Truth is a perfect realization of Reality.
BELIEF and the BELIEF SYSTEM
My primary research is a study to elucidate: WHAT IS “belief” and the “belief system?” What is their duality? What “good or bad” has been and is connected to the belief system?
Most people believe that Truth and Reality are conceptual. This means most people invent in their brain what Truth and Reality is...and then “believe” what they invented is real.
My goal has been to deprogram and retrain my brain to function without: opinion, bias, preconceived ideas, indoctrinated education AND to eliminate beliefs and disbelief from my analogies. Obviously a daunting task.
I consider the evolution of “intellect” just as important as developing “intelligence.” Intellect is the thinking process that has all the tools of discernment that SHOULD be used when working to learn or realize anything as Truth IN Reality. And most certainly applied before belief or disbelief are invoked.
The danger I have experienced and see in our humanity...is that belief and disbelief are a form of “certainty” that closes the mind and brain to intellect discerment.
I try to steer away from any discussion of the “symptoms” of belief in this study because they always become to emotional and adversarial. However, I do also work to define what the “symptoms” of belief (cause and effect) are and what part does belief play in mankind’s history, personal life, society at large, the world population and governments?
So, because this is an ongoing study, I can NOT claim to have any definitive answers. So instead...I offer a few statements to open a dialogue and critical thinking, that hopefully I will use to help further my study. The question is...is there any truth, validity or interesting insight to the following statements?
1. People believe that Truth and Reality are conceptual. This is saying we invent in our heads what they are and then believe what we invent is Truth and Reality. Authoritarians spin pure fantasy as Truth and Reality and force with physical and mental stratagem...the fantasy “belief system” onto people. Believing that a fantasy is Reality creates huge cognitive dissidence because the brain knows better and is in a constant state of confusion when forced to believe fantasy is Reality. When a person stops believing...the universe of Reality becomes clear and the real work of developing my/our Truth of Reality begins. A brain free of beliefs begins to discovers/realizes what real Truth and Reality is.
2. Learning how to think and discover with a mind free of opinion, bias, preconceived ideas and beliefs...with a truly open mind, willing to do the task of intellect discernment, is daunting and truly impossible for most people because they simply have never been shown how and most are stuck in the indoctrinated world of choosing belief or disbelief as their only options.
3. The psychology of belief is that once a person invokes/commits their brain to the belief...it closes the mind to dialectic intellect discernment, logic and reason. Any attempt to change the belief is repelled with anger, rage even physical harm. Belief is a horrifically dangerous mental tool that is used without a full understanding of its dangerous potential. And it is not yet being recognized for the 5000 years of insanity it has wrought on mankind.
4. When belief and disbelief are taken out of the equation...the universe begins to reveal itself to you. Most people cannot fathom NOT having beliefs...even though it is obvious that beliefs are what has been and IS controlling us. We are protecting our “belief system” abuser...this is a form of Stockholm syndrome insanity.
5. My use of big T and R. I try to separate mans invented truth and reality from what I call “real” Truth IN Reality. Truth does not exist in the universe so a search for it is futile. Reality...IS...the universe and what we learn of it becomes our personal Truth. Truth exists inside each of us. A “perfect” Truth or knowing of Reality...would be a perfect realization of the universe Reality. I think we have a long way to go to get to a perfect Truth of Reality level. But it is a MOST admirable and desirable quest...which epitomizes my study and research.
Reality IS the universe. Truth exists in your head just as beliefs do. So do we consider thoughts and emotions part of the universe or Reality? Are Truth and beliefs actually real? This is up to each individual to decipher for themselves.
It's ironic how religious cultures are largely influenced and dominated by Right-wing politics. Politicians *say* they care about family values and morals, but they want to cut welfare programs like Social Security that help millions of Americans. How can one support moral principles and deny the welfare of the needy masses? Do religious people give money to their church and neglect worthy charities? Are people prioritizing conversion and the "afterlife" over human kindness and life as we know it? Do religious people live fully in the present moment, accepting others despite their differences, or do they live life distanced from reality waiting to get beamed up to the pearly gates? These are some of the biggest and subtlest problems with religion.
That's a lovely straw man you've constructed! l
Look how easily it falls down!
+Robert Weekes Did it occur to you that some politicians want to cut Social Security so that it doesn't go bankrupt?............Rather than assuming that they want to cut it because they want to deprive retirees, maybe they want to assure that benefits will always be available.........Isn't it better to have lower benefits than none at all?
Republicans say "love their enemies" but support wars when they want.
+Din.MF.D Pure gibberish. When have Repubs said love your enemies and when haven't Dems supported war?
aks1947 I'll refine my comment, I'm saying that historically more republicans have been behind the initiation of wars. See the last war, here's statistics on the Support for the Iraq war.Representatives voted for the resolution.
215 (96.4%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted for the resolution.
82 (39.2%) of 209 Democratic
I'm making the claim that Republicans are so called "the more christian party" where they uphold stronger values,
We miss you Daniel denned, thanks for you extraordinary consistency
Ironically, I learned more about other religions in Catholic school than most kids learn in public school.
5:53'Democracy depends on informed citizenship, informed consent.' Priceless.
This makes a lot of sense. This explains why bad things happen in democratic societies such as electing the wrong politician )
This is why democracy fails. Because the ruling class can just misinform it’s citizens and people won’t recognize it.
Exactly. It's why(well, one of the reasons why.., it's a little more complicated) Socrates himself was opposed to Democracy. How can you expect uninformed, or misinformed, commoners to Democratically decide who should rule while being completely ignorant?
First: brilliant!
Second: my friend has a severe form OCD and is currently crying in the bathroom because of her sharing almost every idea mr. Denne discussest, but his beard is off center...
I'd love to learn about other religions growing up. I think there would probably be less Christian's when they realize it's a faith built on other religious tales and practices lol
Not likely.
I am in complete agreement on Dennett's policy proposal.
I haven't met one minister that learned anything about comparitive theology after numerous conversations. That in itself is a key indicator that those who study the area the knowledge given is cut down and carefully purged to induct a person into only a very small p0rtion of a vast body of study. They will only ever know how to practice their brand without question, and that is a major indictment of religion as a whole.
I have - you must've encountered less well informed and intentioned preachers on your travels. I do agree, however, that yours are sadly probably more typical of the experiences of others.
@@erict.watson2460 I am a minister who reads widely. Sam Harris's podcast is one of my "don't miss" inputs every week. But many of my colleagues don't take any time to learn outside our denomination (with the exception of the one comparative religions of the world class that was required in my seminary).
@@JOLchurch sad isn't it?
Finally an honest Human being. 👏
If you are blind to his spin.
Atheism is the latest cultist fad
@@think-islam-channel No
I love to hear Dan speak.
I generally love Dan Dennett, but I wish he was a better public speaker. He wanders around his points like a group of Amish people in a Best Buy: enthusiastic but a little confused and fundamentally unable or unwilling to commit to anything in a definitive way.
I found him better in this than some of his other clips but I get the point. I find Hitchens tricky to understand too but mostly because of his references and quotes to cryptic stuff. Dawkins seems the easiest generally, with Sam Harris not far behind.
I actually think Dan is probably the second best. With Sam Harris being far at the top.
Poor fellow is clueless.
Dennett has a keen audience, the people who were invited to TED for years. He does a sketch. If you want cogent prose rather than just provocative thoughts, read Breaking the Spell.
Religious adherence is expression of the right amygdala in the limbic region of the brain: threat detection, fear, group loyalty, and submission to authority figures.
Whoa
I agree, religious history (all types) should be taught in school. It makes perfect sense in the US, being that we are the land of the free. Imagine our children learning about all the history of the world, including the many wars & finding out that many of the wars were fought due to religion. Only problem is that Christians would flip their lids if their children were informed about the facts of religion.
Nope I sure wouldn’t flip.
As long as the religion of evolution is fully exposed.
Also, if you actually believe your faith, what’s their to be afraid of?
However the actual issue of this is who is the fact checker?
One easy example is from a Christian Bible only perspective, catholicism isn’t the teachings of Christ. Or perhaps another way to say it is if you took the Bible and followed the teachings in there, you wouldn’t come up with catholicism.
Much easier way would to be focused the God or gods of that religion and it’s main character who represented that best in life and what those followers are going towards.
Rather than find all the times men misused the religion for their gain.
Example. On what the followers work towards. What would Jesus do slogan that you would hope you don’t see followers of Muhammad wearing around.
Pretty easy to make judgments there.
Buddha. Rich kid that starved himself to death until he hallucinated enough to find peace and then once was enough for him and you must do the same so your life can finally end from all this suffering.
Multiple god system never works, because they never get along and those repeated many times. Hindu is really the only last remaining one and they would rather their people starve than eat their 4 legged ancestors.
Then you have the religion of nothing or godless. Historically as old as any other. Evolution is just currently the biggest and newer form.
Blame Christians. Seems like a well thought out idea 🙄
This sums up my main issue with religion pretty well. It's the epistemological irresponsibility of the whole thing. "Dont think, just do what the magic book says" is dangerous and foolish.
Thanks for the new vocabulary word :) I will say, I am a Christian and I totally agree with you - any religion that says "don't think" is very dangerous. Unfortunately, in every faith (especially, it seems, in Christianity), there are charlatans that do exactly what you say - they misdirect, misquote, misrepresent, use psychological devices, 'thought-stopping' tactics, etc. to get their audience to think what they want them to think about, not what the Word of God (yes, I believe the Holy Bible) wants them to think about.
A true, open study of Christianity and what the Bible actually says and teaches, though, yields very interesting results. If someone were going to generate a fake religion, the Bible would have been the absolutely WORST way to do it -- the writers (especially of the New Testament) were portrayed as weak, ignorant, deceptive, petty, and afraid. Jesus, claiming to be God, picked an apostle that later betrayed him, and let Gentiles kill him (isn't he God? If so, why so weak?)
Matthew, a Jewish tax collector (they were quite literally the considered traitors by Jews) authored one of the Gospels and wrote it to Jews (couldn't they have used someone more noble?) .
Another primary writer, Paul, was a Pharisee and advocated the jailing / killing of Christians until he was converted AND apparently a bad speaker. Couldn't they have gotten someone more appealing to write this stuff down?
Christianity teaches you can't do ANYTHING of your own effort to save yourself from God's wrath (that's not very encouraging), that you should love even your enemies (wow that sounds weak), to not be showboating your obedience to God (wait, I do this stuff and don't even get CREDIT for it from other people?), and you may actually lose your family or even your life if you follow Christ.
Sorry, but if *I* were going to make a religion up -- Christianity is literally the worst way to do it. Yet here we are ;) I invite you do some honest research. I did the same when I was ~20 or so and it's fascinating. Thanks!
I also thought the proposition to be hilarious. Not ridiculous, just the oposite: I think the proposition is great. I find it hilarious to think about the likely outcome, if it could be installed: So many parents would be so disappointed that their children turn out to be atheists after having heard of all the different fantasy tales.
Imagine if they did that for evolution too.
Imagine if they actually had to be honest about what they actually know and what they believe to be based on faith.
It’s the biggest cult in modern history by a long shot.
@@benjamingilley9629 I know, you live in America. But still: Information is not so hard to come by. You shouldn't brag about you utter lack of education, it makes you look like an idiot.
Religion Poisons Everything. Always has. PERIOD.
He looks a little like David Letterman's older brother both of them were smart but in different ways
Sweden has many years of religious studies for (almost) all elementary & high school students since the 60s.
In 1997 they became mandatory for all children (previously one could get an exception).
It is ridiculous to think that schools can factually teach "facts" about religion.
But there's plenty of facts about religion times and dates and documents
...then you must really also process the same about SCIENCE..."very subjective" no??! even processing to have 'facts' and research as the fundamental basis of Science's faacts and knowledge (see Rubert Sheldrake)...also read the foundation beliefs of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin...NOW accepted as an enligthen Sesuit theologican...originally not allowed to be published via gthe Roman Cathlic Church!!
@@michaelbianca6726 Afraid not mate.
@@michaelbianca6726 None of those ‘facts’ can be proved.
In Quebec, that is what they do.
We have a course called "Morals" and they teach us about various religions. It is given in Secondary 4 and 5. That's at age 15 and 16.
@@alanparedes387 Actually the US isn't that bad, it really depends on the state you live in and what school system you go. I got a great education in Massachusetts (I'm also getting amazing financial aid for college here), we were taught "The bible as literature" in senior year, basically the class was reading the bible from a NON religious view and actually studying it objectively. It made lots of religious kids upset, I was just bored. I saw no value in the book for myself because I already knew it was bs, but reading the bible from a non-religious view is a great way to get people to lose their faith.
@@danmarie6907 ok when was this a 10000yrs ago oops thats not possible nowadays we learn the earth is only about 6000yrs old.Not that bad?????
. Its the saudi arabia of the west,WITH NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON CAPABILITIES..............dont you know? sigh if its not "that bad" its at least extremely worrying
@@danmarie6907 Yay!
it takes it time to get somewhere, but he has completely BRILLIANT analogies.
It's a pity he puts analogies forward as truths eg the cow and religion
Dan Dennett's really smart, and I think smarter than people appreciate.
This isn't just about religion. How many times have we come across people who will simply not listen to contrary opinions because "the devil" is so wily and cunning?
Dennett made a great proposal in his book that will unfortunately not work, to be realistic. Religion is too reliant upon the lack of reason for its fuel to ever allow for objective teaching of other religions.
I don't think so. If I understood him correctly, this class wouldn't be about teaching these religions in the sense as to make people believe in (any of) them. It is rather teaching knowledge about these religions, educating about them. Similar to (one could even argue identical to) teaching Greek, Norse or Babylonian mythology. After taking the class you will know about the tenets of the various faiths, you will know what adherents of these faiths believe.
This doesn't require belief in any of these religions from the students.
In fact, it would most likely have the opposite effect for most students (no doubt the reason why Dennett is a proponent of such a class, and believers opposed to it): by seeing all these religions side by side, students would see parallels, would see that many or all of them propose ideas that seem ridiculous to those who are not raised in these faiths, would see that the faith they're most familiar with is not essentially different from these other faiths, would understand that their faith is just as ridiculous if looked at objectively than the others.
That's just not true. Reason can be used both ways. Reason and rational are tools for human beings. Who's to say there isn't a Creator? Do you, Vincent B, understand the underlying laws and fundamentals of the universe? Do you know how the constructs of space and time came to be? Were you there? If the answer is yes, you are arrogant and utterly wrong. If the answer is no, you cannot claim that reason works against religion.
@@judahdarwin4871 I'm not Vincent B but let me throw in my 5 cents, if you please. I do agree with some of what you say but in order for there to be a case for religion there needs to be more than a "Were you there?" (which I cannot help but hear in my head with a thick Australian accent! 😛).
If you point to gaps in our knowledge of the universe then you are literally promoting a god of the gaps. Do you really want to do that? Because, historically, this God of the Gaps has proved to be a nomad who has to relocate into the ever-receding dark corners of the universe while the light of science has been illuminating more and more areas of this our universe.
I'm an atheist but nonetheless I will not rule out the existence of a god categorically. But I'm not inclined to believe in one (or several) until and unless a credible case it made *for* one, not a case against the completeness of science.
Even if we "were not there" science allows us to gain lots of knowledge about the universe we live in, including its past (remember that because of the relatively slow* speed of light we literally look into the past when we observe distant stars or galaxies; in a sense, we *are there* when we watch these objects through our telescopes).
Science has a proven track record of explaining the mysteries that surround us (hardly any of the questions that our ancestors ascribed to the gods are *not* explained by science: thunder & lightning, rainbows, the origin of diseases, solar eclipses, the reason why goats' furs is speckled or spotted, etc.); the existence of a god is yet to be demonstrated.
I will therefore say that, yes, reason works against religion because even though gods cannot be ruled out 100% it is unreasonable to put an explanation that relies on their existence on par with an explanation that draws from science.
* slow in comparison with the vastness of space
@@jensraab2902 Sorry for the late response. And I doubt this will be a productive conversation since most youtube conversations are productive. Perhaps to have a productive conversation, we should take this elsewhere. Regardless of the future of our discourse, however, I'll offer a short rebuttal. It will probably be unsatisfactory.
It seems you are having a problem with the historical clash between religion and science. I do agree that if an institution or organization, people group, whatever, preaches a message that is deliberately against science, they shouldn't be listened to. However, I could make an argument that science and Biblical teachings go hand and hand. I think we look at things the wrong way. We look at science as a way to contrast biblical teaching with. I believe it is the other way around, instead of explaining the Bible through science, we should be explaining science through historical teachings. and this doesn't even have to be the bible. I believe there is truth in almost any religion, that Christianity and Islam are essentially the same fundamentally, but are warped, misinterpreted, or otherwise misunderstood. I have a problem with the idea of humanity raising itself up to proclaim our superiority when we don't even correctly understand ourselves. Early human individuals understood things much better than we do as we developed. Much progression in science came from genuine scientists looking for answers from other people, people from our past. Standing on the shoulders of giants as it's said. Isaac Newton, Galileo, even Albert Einstein tried to understand the universe through the eyes of God. I think that's significant. I see God in science and I think most people would too if they discarded confirmation bias and understood science as an everchanging, unimaginable frontier to explore.
Biblical teaching suggests that God has not revealed everything so that we can find it ourselves. Im sure there are other explanations but Im satisfied with this. Mostly because I find the most joy, tremendous satisfaction, in finding new discoveries.
@@jensraab2902 Also, I am kinda high rn so like i hope that made sense lol
I love this talk so much.
in his essay "A Winter Walk" Thoreau states that the bible is incomplete because not a single prophet spent a winter in Maine!
😹
One must understand life to live it purposefully, in other words, only truth can us free
Thank you soo much for your speech
it was wonderful