>>18281726
>consciousness explained
>doesn't explain consciousness
No.

>>18281728
Have you read the whole thing cover to cover? Every time I talk to someone who shits on Dennett, it seems like they haven't read his crap.

>>18281731
>Have you read the whole thing cover to cover
No. I just know he didn't explain consciousness, so I'm not going to bother reading his book.

is it possible for a real consciousness not to be free?

>>18281741
Kek that's literally every critic of Dennett.

>>18281731
Unlike philosophers like Kant, Kripke and so on, Dennett never wrote a book about his ideas. The rather published thousend sides of papers in different journals. I'm suppose to pay for all of them? To put them together?
And, in addition, I'm more interested in other domains of philosophy than in the philosophy of mind, of which I, by the way, believe that neuroscience and physics will provide a more trustworthy explanation anyway.

His philosophy lacks historical and logical deeps, in my opinion. I like thinkers who develop a logical argument on base of most likely empirical claims.