In a recent, marvelous paper, Dan Dennett quotes Lee Siegel:<\/p>\n
“\u0093I\u0092m writing a\u00a0book on magic\u0094, I explain, and I\u0092m asked, \u0093Real magic?\u0094 By real magic people mean miracles,\u00a0thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers. \u0093No\u0094, I answer: \u0093Conjuring tricks, not real magic\u0094. \u00a0Real magic, in other words, refers to the magic that is not real, while the magic that is real, that can\u00a0actually be done, is not real magic.”<\/span><\/p>\n Dennett continues:<\/p>\n “It seems to many people that consciousness is a mystery, the most wonderful magic\u00a0show imaginable, an unending series of special effects that defy explanation. I think\u00a0that they are mistaken, that consciousness is a physical, biological phenomenon \u0096like metabolism or reproduction or self-repair \u0096 that is exquisitely ingenious in its\u00a0operation, but not miraculous or even, in the end, mysterious. Part of the problem of\u00a0explaining consciousness is that there are powerful forces acting to make us think it\u00a0is more marvelous than it actually is. In this it is like stage magic, a set of phenomena that exploit our gullibility, and even our desire to be fooled, bamboozled, awe-struck. The task of explaining stage magic is in some regards a thankless task; the\u00a0<\/span>person who tells people how an effect is achieved is often resented, considered a\u00a0<\/span>spoilsport, a party-pooper. I often get the impression that my attempts to explain\u00a0<\/span>consciousness provoke similar resistance. Is it not nicer if we all are allowed to wal<\/span>low in the magical mysteriousness of it all? Or even this: If you actually manage to\u00a0<\/span>explain consciousness, they say, you will diminish us all, turn us into mere protein\u00a0<\/span>robots, mere things<\/em>.”<\/p>\n I get the same resistance from religious believers. \u00a0Part of their objection to naturalism is that it demotes them or something they revere, like free will or consciousness, or it leaves something out, like eternal life. \u00a0Or it just generally causes the pixie dust to fall to the floor.<\/p>\n And I’m ready. \u00a0When I hear this, I earnestly reassure them that Humanism has wonderful all-natural\u00a0<\/em>replacements for all these things. \u00a0But these gluten-free items have no appeal. \u00a0They’re like those biodegradable sandwich bags you can buy at the health food store. \u00a0(They’re so crinkly<\/em>.) \u00a0People look at me like I’m a vegetarian at a barbecue. \u00a0Sure there are\u00a0substitutes<\/em>. \u00a0They don’t want natural<\/em>. \u00a0They want\u00a0the real thing<\/em>, the manufactured artificial thing. \u00a0The thing that doesn’t really exist. \u00a0Why settle for\u00a0real\u00a0<\/em>when you can have what you really want?<\/span><\/p>\n http:\/\/ase.tufts.edu\/cogstud\/papers\/explainingmagic.pdf<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In a recent, marvelous paper, Dan Dennett quotes Lee Siegel: “\u0093I\u0092m writing a\u00a0book on magic\u0094, I explain, and I\u0092m asked, \u0093Real magic?\u0094 By real magic people mean miracles,\u00a0thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers. \u0093No\u0094, I answer: \u0093Conjuring tricks, not real magic\u0094. \u00a0Real magic, in other words, refers to the magic that is not real, while the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":32,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-82","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/82","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/32"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=82"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/82\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=82"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=82"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/enoughsenough\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=82"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}