Reply to comment

In Dennett’s writing it has come to my attention that within the text itself lays philosophy.  It was toyed with in an earlier set of posts, “A Life of Sleep” and “RE: sleep”, but I believe it may be found throughout the book, despite the response to the original post.  An interesting example I found was on page 201 when Dennett states, “Nothing complicated enough to be really interesting could have an essence” (a phrase deemed by Dennett to be the “fighting words of some philosophers”).  Additionally, Aristotle himself was a philosopher and is frequently mentioned in Dennett’s text.  When I looked up the definition of philosophy, I was given this answer, that it is the “pursuit of wisdom, a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means” (Merriam-Webster).  The definition makes me question the fundamental differences between science, as we in this class are being taught to understand it, and philosophy.  In evolution, as I have said numerous times, I have not witness personally the process by which anything has evolved, nor has Dennett, nor Darwin.  Though it is true that Darwin made some highly important observations, when all is said and done they seem to be no more than speculation into the theory of evolution.  I may be totally off here, but I am wondering how Darwin’s observations can be divided from speculation, and then in turn how science is not one and the same as philosophy (if we come to understand that there are no truths in science).  Maybe what I should be asking is what the difference between science (the one with no truths) and philosophy are...