Thursday, February 9, 2006

I'll admit I haven't read the book, but I still think Adam Kirsch's review of Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell is brilliant.

Mr. Dennett believes that explaining religion in evolutionary terms will make it less real; that is the whole purpose of his book. But this is like saying that because water is made of two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, it is not really wet; or because the color red represents a certain frequency of light, it is not really red.

Another excerpt:

Because Mr. Dennett ignores it, treating religion instead as at best a pastime for dimwits, at worst a holding cell for fanatics, he never really encounters the thing he believes he is writing about.

I've commented about Dennett and his book before.

No comments: