meme

I read one of his books and thought it was just meaningless words. But he seems respected, so guess I'm wrong.
Time will tell, if textbooks mention him in the future, I suppose I was wrong.

Memetics is not thought highly of in anthropology and linguistics, but who knows maybe they are wrong and memes will be useful. I doubt it.

>>9170101
Anon, I won't say anything about Dennett but...

>Time will tell, if textbooks mention him in the future

This kind of thinking is shit. Time doesn't tell anything. If jews run the world today, nazis are evil. If neo-nazi got into power, the jews will seem to be forever evil. If science take a turn towards this or that, the textbooks that we will read will be completely different. The future doesn't know better than what we have today. Each given time chooses its own precendents, its own influencers. Today, christianity is on the low and science is on the top, so we look at the middle ages as some dark age of painful plagues, superstition and shit. Except anyone into history knows there is plenty of color and interesting thoughts to that time. If the roles reverse, I don't know, 200 years from now, you'll see the atheist forces of enlightenment age as a huge mistake that hindered our christianity. HIstory is rewritten everytime it is remembered. Bach whad to be rediscovered by Mendelhson, Renaissance rediscovered Greek thought, etc. Don't leave for the future to tell if you are wrong or not. Perhaps in 50 years Dennett will be considered a fantastic hugely influential philosopher and in 100 he can be totally forgotten. Then someone might "misread" him as some wise guru of centuries ago.

Time doesn't tell shit.

Is this a people whose deaths you will celebrate thread?

Count me in!

>>9170140
You are right of course. But if done right wrong ideas get weeded out.
Though of course that hasn't stopped people from hanging on to wrong ideas.

And as you point out what is considered wrong is cultural. Though accumulating evidence or falsification should root those out.

>>9170088
How did you just call me?

>>9170154
what is considered wrong may be cultural, but that doesn't stop you trying to work out what actually is wrong. maybe that doesn't change

>>9170201
I don't mean to say all wrongs are cultural by the way

look at the beard, he must be really smart!

>>9170154
I used to believe in that anon, but wrong ideas really depend on where you come from. It's not only in terms of how it relates to new evidence, sometimes it's a lack of comprehension on the language of another.

For instance, some people say university is taken by communists, sjws and shit, but who is to say? What if they don't read Shakespeare or whatever. Then Shakespeare won't be read or talked about. It's that simple. Would you say then that Shakespeare was weeded out because he is actually bad and it's just that we don't get it that he is bad yet? Most likely you'd disagree, stick to Shakespeare and disregard future university. Does that mean you are right over them? Also not. I know that I think Shakespeare is good, but I don't think he will be read forever, because who is to say what is the mentality of the children of the children of the children of our generation? And what other things will they value? More importantly, what will be the standards through which they will measure it? Science is also part of that.

On top of it all, to put your chips in the future seems very strange. You said "he seems respected, so guess I'm wrong". In my opinion, your impression that he uses meaningless words is much more sincere and true than some collective and abstract image people make of him. Perhaps one day you'll read meaning in him, perhaps that will never happen. But either way, your call is much more real than an expectation that some supposedly more true version of him will emerge with time.