Dennett vs. Papineau on Consciousness
Eliane Mitchell

16 August 2017

Both David Papineau and Dan Dennett are famed materialists (the doctrine that consciousness can be fully explained by material and neuronal functions), so why did Papineau give Dennett's book,From Bacteria to Bach and Back批判性的评论?

正如蒂姆·克兰对这场辩论的描述所解释的那样，帕皮诺在丹尼特的书中提出了两个主要问题。首先，他认为丹尼特未能充分区分人类和动物的理解能力;其次，帕皮诺反对丹尼特的主张，即意识是一种错觉(“错觉主义”)。

While Dennett maintains that consciousness arises from language—that is, "our use of language demands that we keep track of our own thoughts" in Papineau's words—Papineau still insists that Dennett, in neglecting to address the question of animal consciousness, fails to arguewhywe mistake our conscious thoughts as having a "reality beyond the material realm" sufficiently. In turn, Papineau invites Dennett to abandon his idiosyncratic beliefs as expressed in his book, and join the materialist mainstream.

The correspondence between these two pundits is long but engaging, offering interesting insight into how philosophers think about consciousness today. Check out the debate here:

https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/dennett-papineau-debate/

Comments(1)

Harold G. Neuman's picture

Harold G. Neuman

Friday, August 18, 2017 -- 8:14 AM

我爱这些家伙!When one

我爱这些家伙!当他们中的一个写了一些很有道理、显然是经过充分研究的东西时，其他人就会加入进来，玩起“水桶里的螃蟹”的游戏。是的，我知道批评总是伴随着出版——尤其是在学术界。然而，有人想知道:我们什么时候才能明白，并非所有人都有挑毛病的情感需求。我喜欢这本书，但见鬼，这么多年来我甚至喜欢上了斯蒂芬·杰伊·古尔德(Stephen Jay Gould);理查德·道金斯;史蒂芬·霍金;罗杰·彭罗斯;萨姆。哈里斯;克里斯托弗·希钦斯，等等。 It is all great fun. Isn't it?

Tags