Tomas Hribek 2008-11-11

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:

This is a superb book about religion from Dennett, who has attained a renown as a philosopher of mind and cognitive science. He brings the tools from those disciplines to the subject of religion; in particular, he makes use of the concept of the "intentional stance" that we naturally take towards objects, both animate and inanimate. Dennett's book is a part of the very recent trend to scrutinize religion by conceptual tools taken from cognitive psychology, anthropology and evolutionary biology -- as a natural phenomnon like any other. This is in keeping with an argument from Dennett's earlier book, DARWIN'S DANGEROUS IDEA, to the effect that Darwin's idea of natural selection is a "universal acid". That is to say, the idea of natural selection is no narrow scientific concept, but a general scientific approach that is applicable "all the way up" as well as "all the way down". There is no area of research that could be immune to it. Hence, this approach must be applicable to the putatively "sacred" subject of religion as well.

A note on Dennett's target audience: Dennett hopes his books will be read, among others, by non-fanatical Christians, whom he would like to convince that a naturalistic study of religion need not necessarily rob religion of its charm. In other words, the spell need not necessarily be broken, or rather, we will not know until we will have done our homework. Two remarks. First, I believe Dennett is actually pretty sure that the spell will be broken. Second, I think he hopes in vain that many of his Christian co-patriots are going to bother with his book. BREAKING THE SPELL is going to be read primarily by secular academics like me, so Dennett is preaching to the converted.

T1818 2008-09-06

0 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

Dennett talks up science here but there is little evidence that cognitive psychology provides a basis for a scientific investigation of religion. Cognitive psychology (as opposed to cognitive neuroscience) has no stable results as of yet but the program Dennett advocates depends upon cognitive psychology providing a basis for theologically orientated research. Questioning the obscure via the obscure is hardly enlightening. Science here is used as an incantation rather than as providing a basis for a viable research program.

John E. D. Malin 2008-08-15

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

Professor Daniel C. Dennett is an international philosopher worthy of His Holiness, Benedict XVI dictum, "the philosopher was someone who knew how to teach the essential art: the art of being authentically human---the art of living and dying." [Encyclical Letter, SPE SALVI facti sumus ("In Hope we were saved", St. Paul, Romans 8:24)]

Previous reviewers have drawn attention to Professor Dennett's intentions, scope and achievements, what I want to do is start the process of treating 'religion' as an ideational or notional idea (forgive the impregnated tautology as rhetorical-psychological emphasis). It has a written history!

Since I am an ancient language scholar of Oriental (mainly Semitic) and Indo-European languages, I have a secure foundation in the development of religious sacred learning or 'scientific theology.' Here competence in Babylonian cuneiform, Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Old and Middle Persian, Classical Hebrew and Classical Greek are required. What does one learn when (s)he puts the dry philological details of these various grammatical systems, with their supporting legal, administrative and religious textual documents, in his head?

He learns religious learning is self-deception and communal hypocrisy! It is a cover for those human maniacs who inflict the gravest of wrongs upon their fellow man. It was a retreat by human monsters to the inner sanctuaries and temples of learning and instruction to find solace for their moral-legal crimes. Its by-product was useful information about calendars, planting seasons, growth of husbandry and crops, and physical & mental hygiene. But it also producted pernicious by-products such as divination, theurgy, mircle-mongering, begging priests, book-burning, etc.

The books of religion as a natural phenomenon have been written; they merely must be read! Start with Sir James Frazer, "The Golden Bough" (12 volumes)! Mankind evoluted in 'science' or knowledge [What the Latin term 'scientia' means] from animism > magic > religion > science > cosmic self-consciousness (modern cosmology-astronomy). This should serve as the great paradigm or archetype model.

You will discover along this path that there is much 'word magic' in religious writings. An example is modern authors using learned technical Babylonian terms, or Egyptian terms, or Graeco-Latin terms with no 'real' understanding of what these terms delimited or concretely meant. There is a great spiritual dryness and aridity to religious learning. Metaphor and Analogy add an appropriate amount of eager 'wetness' to these mundane discussions (no pun intended).

Presently, Oxford University, Oxford, England just received a $13 Million Dollar grant to study the origin of deity in global human ancient, historical culture. I have just laid out what must be its preamble or harenga. The Oxonian Senior Researchers will learn that any and all religions oscillate between repressive tolerance or intolerance & aggressiveness. Its purpose is to keep the majority mentally ignorant, so they live miserable lives---while teaching them there is a wonderful 'abode of bliss' waiting for them on the otherside of the curtain of Death!

See my Review on Dr. Sam Harris' book, "End of Faith" about the role of "cabbage heads" to maintain the absurdities of religion under the dupery of revelations, creeds and doctrinal nonsense.

It should be remembered that the French people were the first city-state, the Parisian community, to throw religion out of their society, and declare an Atheistical State in A.D. 1789-1792. It was the military butcher, the monster Napoleon, who brought the mental sickness of religion back into French society.

Lastly, having seen Professor Dennett several times on C-Span, I intensely like this humane, philosophical mind!


Respectfully,


John E.D.P. Malin,
Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer
Informatica Corporation
Executive Division
P.O. Drawer 460
Cecilia, Louisiana 70521-0460

Contact Information: InformaticaMalin@gmail.com

--

Amazonbombshell 2008-07-22

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

You don't have to be an atheist, an agnostic, or any type of believer to engage this book. That's the whole point, in fact. No matter what your belief (and they are all related to belief), subjecting it to scientific scrutiny can be fascinating and revealing, and especially so with this type of academic yet extremely accessible writing.

A beautiful combination of serious purpose and playful joy in the arguments comes through here, and it's infectious. What does NOT come through is any kind of anti-religious agenda, which is easy enough to come by elsewhere and does nothing to advance anyone's cause.

I read most books once or twice, and so I get them from the library instead of purchasing them, but this is a book to own. Dennett provides plenty of food for further thought here, and you will come back to his ideas again and again for just that purpose.

Christopher Raissi 2008-07-02

5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

In the God Delusion, Dawkins makes an argument against religion and articulates what he believes to be scientific theories that prove god does not exist. In God Isn't Great, Hitchens gives what reads more like an indictment of organized religion throughout history and spends less time trying to disprove the existence of god (at least as scientifically as Dawkins).

In Breaking the Spell, Dennett spends most of his time articulating arguments that would explain the existence of religion. He does not really attempt to prove or disprove anything, including the existence of god. Rather he states repeatedly that his purpose is to "break the spell" of holding religion on a different level and keeping it immune from rational, scientific inquiry. As Mr. Woolard states before me, Mr. Dennett's central idea is that religion is a very important topic in the world today and is arguably the topic most in need of a rational, open, scientific discussion. This book is an attempt to make some of those rational arguments and foster discussion. Mr. Dennett concedes quite early in the book that that is his intent--to raise important questions and give possible answers that need research, not to provide definitive answers.

Regardless of the fact that definitive answers aren't going to be found in this book, it is worth the read by anyone interested in the subject. Mr. Dennett does a great job of "breaking the spell" and bringing some illuminating arguments regarding the existence of religion and its continued ability to thrive in human society. I would also recommend doing a search of "Daniel Dennett" on youtube for an introduction to some of the arguments he makes in this book.