3 ms·
This is basically the argument that Raymond Tallis[1] makes in his books. Whilst starting from an atheist/humanist origin, he posits that whilst science (in par
by darkr 12y ago
This is basically the argument that Raymond Tallis[1] makes in his books. Whilst starting from an atheist/humanist origin, he posits that whilst science (in particular neuroscience) has brought humanity so far, the stockpile of knowledge gathered thus far is not enough to satisfactorily describe and understand the human experience, conciousness etc, and certainly not enough to justify the smug, dismissive and combative sects of atheism practised by Dawkins, Hitchens et al.
He's also has a wonderful playful style of writing, well worth a read.
1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Tallis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Tallis
- markc 12y agoWho's smug and dismissive? “Tallis indulges in refutation by caricature,” says Dennett, a professor of philosophy and co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University. “He’s not taking his opponents seriously. He’s sneering instead of arguing. He’s ignoring the complexities of the arguments. So he’s not really doing philosophy. He’s doing propaganda.”