Harris Demolishes Dennett

I have not read Sam Harris's book Free Will, largely since I can tell I already largely agree with what is in it. But I was appalled at Dennett's review published on SH's blog. It contained such sloppy thinking, I was tempted to post about it with a quip I invented twenty years ago: a philosophical debate consists of two people trying to change the subject to be whatever makes their argument right. I didn't make it far into the only Dennett book I attempted to read, and I can see why. He's obviously entrenched in the industry of academic philosophy, and has lost sight of Russell's early 20th century observation on its role:

...as soon as definite knowledge concerning any subject becomes possible, this subject ceases to be called philosophy, and becomes a separate science... Philosophy, though unable to tell us with certainty what is the true answer to the doubts which it raises, is able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom.

In his review Dennett actually references "the newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or X-phi)." That phrase is worthy of a spit-take. Having spent time in academe I'm familiar with the marketing schlock one builds around marginally useful (or utterly useless) work. There are far more faculty members than relevant problems to research. Harris takes down both his sloppy reading and contemptuous attitude:

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

The newly emerging field of experimental philosophy (or “X-phi”) - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.ez8T6tzH.dpuf

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-marionettes-lament

My brief take on free will is that it's not a coherent concept. It makes no sense to debate whether or not it is compatible with determinism when you can't even describe what it is. In his review Dennett claims there is a great compatabilist conception, distinct from the folk-conception, and rails on Harris at great length for discussing the wrong thing (ignoring what his target audience might be...see quip above) but never, of course, presents said concept. I can only guess it is too technical and subtle to fit even within a nearly book length tirade. Dennett says:

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow...

I would hope that Harris would pause at this point to wonder—just wonder—whether maybe his philosophical colleagues had seen some points that had somehow escaped him in his canvassing of compatibilism. - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

I would hope that Harris would pause at this point to wonder—just wonder—whether maybe his philosophical colleagues had seen some points that had somehow escaped him in his canvassing of compatibilism. - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

and yet fails to share any of his sacred wisdom with us. I'm no Harris fan-boy, in fact I haven't read any of his books, but I've found his blog intriguing, and that is a well-deserved smack-down. Now, I'm reminded I haven't picked up my book on Epicurus for a while...

I would hope that Harris would pause at this point to wonder—just wonder—whether maybe his philosophical colleagues had seen some points that had somehow escaped him in his canvassing of compatibilism. - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dp

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf

After acknowledging that it is the prevailing view among philosophers (including his friend Daniel Dennett), he asserts that “More than in any other area of academic philosophy, the result resembles theology.”  This is a low blow - See more at: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/reflections-on-free-will#sthash.NBjapQt0.dpuf