Reply to comment

Through the reading in Dennett and class discussion, the story of and details about biological evolution can give us headway into understanding cultural traits. I cannot help but stick to the topic of evolution being a random and spontaneous chain of events, leading up to our random existence (and making us, as some will argue, less important since we were not placed on the earth with an ultimate intent). Yet, from an anthropological perspective, our species has given rise to language, art, and other aspects of culture. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that despite the randomness, meaning can still emerge. Not just meaning, but this great scheme of organization, of a code of morality, of purpose and structure all came about from such an arbitrary process.

I was struck by Dennett's coinage of proper and greedy reductionism. A greedy reductionist explains events without foundation or concrete facts. A proper reductionist does not use miracles to prove anything. I immediately came to the conclusion that I am in fact a proper reductionist, taking phenomena for what they are rather than looking to miracles as the only truth. I base what I know on the least miraculous explanations; perhaps it is my human nature to do this, since I have not had a firsthand experience with a miracle. I could not use something with which I have had no experience to account for  what I cannot explain.