The Gospel Of Scientific Materialism

First Things ^ | R.R. Reno

[Pride_of_the_Bluegrass]

The scientific popularizers—Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Steven Pinker, and others—don’t go in for nuance, as David Hart has pointed out again and again in our pages. They cheerfully champion the most reductive sort of materialism, including the idea that free will does not exist because our minds are just neural networks that function according to physical laws.

Why are they so enthusiastic about this idea that our minds are just neural networks? It’s not at first sight a very attractive belief. After all, free will provides a sense of self-possession, and it’s the source of the drama in life.

We should never underestimate the satisfaction that comes from finding what one imagines to be the Magic Key that unlocks all the doors, but I think our Happy Warriors of Science get so excited for another reason. The basic thrust of a reductive science of the mind involves a move from cultural categories—“I have an obligation to care for my children”—to biological ones—“I only feel an obligation because human DNA has evolved to promote species survival.”

[freespirited]

They cheerfully champion the most reductive sort of materialism, including the idea that free will does not exist because our minds are just neural networks that function according to physical laws.

I find it difficult to believe that someone like Steven Pinker believes that his mind is merely a neural network functioning according to physical laws. Someone in his position has to be aware of the impact that political correctness--which I would not call a physical law--has on what he is willing to say.

[mjp]

Why are they so enthusiastic about this idea that our minds are just neural networks?

No free will means the acceptance of the psychology of behaviorism to be consistent with a mentality of materialism and reductionism.If a man is a product of conditioning by the environment, then society and culture is the cause of evil. Then, it is up to big government to make society perfect by controlling the environment and people.

[exDemMom]

I read something interesting yesterday.

It said that it is somewhat paradoxical that as we have learned more about genes and genetics, people have shifted more and more to the belief that our actions are predetermined by genetics and not by nurture. The study of genetics itself doesn’t lead to such a conclusion. That is only the popular interpretation of what genetics is all about.

[John Locke]

I find it difficult to believe that someone like Steven Pinker believes that his mind is merely a neural network functioning according to physical laws.

He certainly doesn't leave one with that impression after reading his books. On the contrary, he is emphatic that much human behavior is the product of culture and personal self-growth,

But having read a lot of that wretched journal, I do not find it difficult to believe that First Things promotes a sneering, self-righteous and largely pig ignorant bigotry.