Reply to comment

i think the way dennett starts his book is actually much more arrogant than anything mayr wrote. take this: "in due course, the darwinian revolution will coem to occupy a similarly secure and untroubled place in the minds -- and hearts -- of every educated person on the globe, but today, more than a century after darwin's death, we still have not come to terms with its mind-boggling implications" (19). basically he believes that evolution is RIGHT and that if you don't believe it, you're incredibly ignorant, in denial, or both. now, that's not really a bad theory, but that's awfully bossy for a book like this. aren't people entitled to disagree with it? i'm not convinced this disagreement will end simply because other once-controversial scientific beliefs are now accepted. here's some sarcasm: "...but those philosophical prejudices that had to be overthrown were too deeply entrenched to be dislodged by mere philosophical brilliance" (21). ouch! so the human race is on a mission, and the telos of that mission is for everyone to understand and fully believe in darwinian evolution.

i had trouble getting through the assignment because i dislike dennett's writing style. i want to scream out, "i'm not five!!!" i feel that he's condescending to his readers, he really doesn't think they know anything. honestly, he *translates* raison d'etre on page 23. now that's just offensive. his use of italics to make distinctions is exasperating. you'd think a "philosopher" wouldn't need to rely on font to make his points...