I enjoyed that. The part about Lipset's [ sp?] experiments being misrepresented was informative. As an additional reference he didn't mention I would include E. Anscombe's book " Intention". The one problem I see is that you don't get to an overall governing mind, that is God, from teleology alone. Further arguments are needed. I also don't like the term dualist as it suggests Descartes
But his position can be easily proved and you can do this at home all by yourself. Imagine any sensation or thought you might have. Now I'll concede the point for arguments sake that these sensations correspond to or are even caused by measurable activities in the brain. Still the sensation or thought you experience is something very different from the brain activity. No? Qualia the eggheads call them. This is obvious to me.
Now this doesn't get us to the Christian idea of the soul. Further arguments are needed. But the kind of crazy stuff Dennett is peddling is just incoherent.
But his position can be easily proved and you can do this at home all by yourself. Imagine any sensation or thought you might have. Now I'll concede the point for arguments sake that these sensations correspond to or are even caused by measurable activities in the brain. Still the sensation or thought you experience is something very different from the brain activity. No? Qualia the eggheads call them. This is obvious to me.
Now this doesn't get us to the Christian idea of the soul. Further arguments are needed. But the kind of crazy stuff Dennett is peddling is just incoherent.
