Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon

3.9 of 5 stars 3.90 · rating details · 4,049 ratings · 248 reviews

An innovative thinker tackles the controversial question of why we believe in God and how religion shapes our lives and our future

For a growing number of people, there is nothing more important than religion. It is an integral part of their marriage, child rearing, and community. In this daring new book, distinguished philosopher Daniel C. Dennett takes a hard look at th...more

Hardcover, 464 pages

Published February 2nd 2006 by Viking Adult

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens

Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris

Notable Atheist Books

11th out of 235 books — 541 voters

A Short History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson

A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking

Best Science Books - Non-Fiction Only

163rd out of 594 books — 1,312 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Feb 15, 2008 Marina Keenan rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: People who want to change beliefs that resist their scrutiny

To preface my remarks here, I think it is important that I note Dennett's definition of religion and its implications. He defines religion as social systems whose participants avow belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought. Two elements of the definition almost cause me panic as I read them. The first, the fact that any religion is a social system, suggests to me that since one cannot worship a supernatural agent alone, God, a "he" most everywhere you look, is reall...more To preface my remarks here, I think it is important that I note Dennett's definition of religion and its implications. He defines religion as social systems whose participants avow belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought. Two elements of the definition almost cause me panic as I read them. The first, the fact that any religion is a social system, suggests to me that since one cannot worship a supernatural agent alone, God, a "he" most everywhere you look, is really the collective concept of a group of people who are similarly connected socially and religiously. In a recent Good Reads forum based on Dawkins' The God Delusion, most of the faithful who participated suggested that because so many others believed in God throughout history, their study of "scripture" should not be questioned by me or other participants. Alas, none were willing to address the reasons why their church hung pictures of a Jesus who looked more like a white musician from Seattle than someone from Jesus' home town. This scares me because the faithful have confirmed that their minds are not their own and they have lost the ability to think critically about their beliefs. The other part of the definition that almost leads me to panic, that the participants seek approval from a supernatural agent or agents, means that not only is some vaguely defined and socially reinforced God concept granted greater-than-self status in the minds of the faithful, but the agents' "prophets," to whom enough has been revealed to write a bestseller, are granted God's special favor, and their approval must be sought as well. This scenario is made possible by the aforementioned sacrifice of mind, and enables leaders of any religion you'd care to name to compromise its believers in practically any way.

In Breaking the Spell, Dennett demonstrates faith in people's ability to make clear decisions by suggesting that if school children were to study all of the world's religions, they would learn to think critically and be unwilling to sacrifice this ability for the sake of any supernatural agent or prophet. Should students begin to have thoughts that transcend social/religious paradigms and pressures, no current religious system could survive it, and I think that would be a good thing.(less)

16 likes · like · see review

Oct 06, 2007 Tucker rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: finished

An admirable intellectual, Dennett spends the first several chapters carefully establishing the parameters of his discussion. His book addresses the adherents of organized religion: more specifically, those who believe that God is a "who" rather than a "what", and who hold certain sets of beliefs without making them available for rational critique. The title of Dennett's book, "Breaking the Spell," refers his insistence that religious beliefs should be examined logically and scientifically to in...more An admirable intellectual, Dennett spends the first several chapters carefully establishing the parameters of his discussion. His book addresses the adherents of organized religion: more specifically, those who believe that God is a "who" rather than a "what", and who hold certain sets of beliefs without making them available for rational critique. The title of Dennett's book, "Breaking the Spell," refers his insistence that religious beliefs should be examined logically and scientifically to investigate whether they are true. Beliefs should not be eligible for a cloak of mystery simply because they are religious in nature; furthermore, such a cloak does not enhance the real value of these beliefs.

This is a slow read that requires a good background in philosophy, but it is worth the time and effort. It is full of fascinating ideas, many of them old philosophical standbys with a modern scientific twist. For example, when Dennett compares love for God with romantic love, he looks at the evolutionary basis of romantic feelings and behaviors. He asks how religion benefits our fitness for survival, given that it requires so much of our energy. He notes that some neurologists have postulated a "god center" in the brain, and he clarifies that we may have culturally perpetuated the idea of God only because the idea happens to stimulate the pre-existing "whatsis center," and furthermore, that not every individual may even have such a center.

Dennett's tone is one of cheerful optimism. He thinks religious people often mean well, and he believes that they succeed in living good, moral lives just as often as non-believers do. But he insists that religion is not necessary for moral behavior, and he demands that religious people desist from harming atheists and skeptics. He wants a healthy climate for honest debate and a world where people do not injure each other over such topics. It is a fair and diplomatic book that makes an apparently sound argument. Of the various books I've read by atheists, this is the one of which I'd be most surprised to see a successful refutation.(less)

12 likes · like · see review

Nov 04, 2007 Jamey rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: religion-culture-criticism

If I understood it, the basic thesis of Dennett's arrogantly titled Consciousness Explained was that consciousness is a phenomenon that emerges from the harmonious orchestration of many smaller, dumber subsystems in the brain. Among the good ideas in Breaking the Spell is the claim that one of these little modules is an "agent detector," and that it's "over-active," so that people experience the wind as the breath of a God; the rain as the God's gift, disease as the presence of exorcisable uncle...more

5 likes · like · see review

Dec 06, 2007 Paul rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I really wanted to like this book, because I'd just finished reading The End of Faith and God is Not Great, but this book suffers from lack of conviction. Where The End of Faith is the absolute model of conviction, and God is Not Great lays out convincing arguments (but takes some of their momentum away with dryly humorous asides), Breaking the Spell has neither conviction nor cleverness.

I confess I only read the first couple of chapters, because I lost interest in an author who wasn't willing t...more

6 likes · like · see review

Apr 08, 2007 Kat rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Everyone

Dennett is a proud atheist, and he does not back away from his convictions. He is able to singlehandedly defeat many Christian conventions that have become acceptable to our modern American society through the use of pure, philosophic logic that works well to break us all out of the spell in which we have been living all of our lives as members of a "Christian Nation" (to quote Sam Harris). He use of example and parable makes the book invaluable to anyone who wants a new way of loking at the con...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jan 08, 2009 Paul Fidalgo rated it 5 of 5 stars

I can't recommend this highly enough. This is not an anti-religion screed at all, but comes at the topic of religion as a naturally emerging aspect of humanity in a thoughtful, funny, accessible way. It is "New Atheist" only in that it calls for open questioning and research of religion and its utility (and it's written by an atheist).

4 likes · like · see review

Apr 25, 2013 Vlad Popescu rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: spiritual-path

Breaking the Spell, cartea manifest a ateismului contemporan scrisă de filozoful Daniel C. Dennett poate fi utilizată de oricine pentru verificarea credinței sale.
Adresată publicului american, deci nu foarte sofisticată, are totuși nivelul intelectual necesar pentru a stârni dialogul. Și pentru ca dialogul interior al cititorului cu autorul să fie și mai consistent, e bine ca înainte de lectură să vizionați câteva filme cu Dennett (Dennett la TED) pentru a avea confirmarea că este un om mai mult...more

like · see review

Apr 14, 2013 John Alt rated it 3 of 5 stars

In Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Daniel Dennett hopes to break the spell--not of religious belief, but of the conviction that it is not a fit subject for scientific inquiry. Never the twain shall meet--this is a bad idea according to Dennett. Stephen Jay Gould wrote of "non-overlapping magisteria," of both science and religion as worthy of respect in their own rights, but unbridgeable, the one to the other.

Dennett takes exception to this, maintaining that religion is a fi...more In Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Daniel Dennett hopes to break the spell--not of religious belief, but of the conviction that it is not a fit subject for scientific inquiry. Never the twain shall meet--this is a bad idea according to Dennett. Stephen Jay Gould wrote of "non-overlapping magisteria," of both science and religion as worthy of respect in their own rights, but unbridgeable, the one to the other.

Dennett takes exception to this, maintaining that religion is a fit subject for scientific scrutiny, and in doing so he draws upon evolutionary, anthropological and psychological research on the origin and spread of religion. He speculates as to how a primitive belief in ghosts later became a belief in wind spirits, rain gods, wood nymphs, and leprechauns. According to Dennett, as hunter-gatherers became farmers, as they aggregated into prehistoric villages, a need to protect one's own arose--property, spouse, children, crops, livestock. Richard Dawkins' selfish gene no longer served the common weal. That is, genetic kinship among tribe members was not enough in itself to insure Darwinian cooperation. Shared beliefs rather than DNA enforced proper behavior. People became commanded by an authoritarian but vengeful god to do their duty to others not genetic kin.

This is a tidy explanation, tying all up in a neat bundle, but there are the Neanderthals who were not fit inside. At digs of Neanderthal burial sites, something extraordinary was found, something which provides evidence of Neanderthal practices long before ours became the dominantly successful species. Around the burial site and bones of a beloved individual flowers and trinkets were carefully placed. They are extinct now, the Neanderthals, but could this mean that even they had a sense of the spiritual, a regard for an after life? I can see no other way to understand the findings. So much for Dennett's religion as emergent from the need for duty in communities. Something there is that cannot be packaged as well as he would have it. As Yeats put it, "An aging man is but a paltry thing, a tattered coat upon a stick unless soul clap hands, sing, and louder sing for every tatter in his mortal dress." Religion was informed by spiritual as well as moral needs.

Dennett draws upon the concept of memes--scientifically unverifiable and another Dawkins concept--to explain how primitive beliefs evolved into modern religions. "Every minister in every faith is like a jazz musician keeping traditions alive by playing the beloved standards . . . but mixing familiarity and novelty in just the right proportions to grab the minds and hearts of their hosts." Hosts here is meant to mean the same as an unsuspecting, sometimes insentient host for a virus, a parasite. According to Dennett, people are dumb, unwitting hosts for memes, in this case religious beliefs. I will add, they are also hosts for the vaunted faith in the scientific model as the only true way of understanding the universe.

Sorry, Daniel, but I cannot get there from here. Nor can you. Dennett is playing in a mind-field, one that eventually will explain nothing and sets off duds.

Although I do not have interest or belief in the dogma or doctrine of any religion, I do see all religions as serving a deep, human need. (I think Dennett would agree with me on this while he holds that humankind would be better off without the need.) The need is not served by a flawed scientific paradigm in which the objects of scientific investigation somehow are supposed to provide meaning. (Else, why are they pursued?) I am reminded of Nobel Prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg, who famously remarked, “the more we find out about the universe, the more meaningless it all seems.” Meaningless, because science ignores the other magisterium, which at its core--though not always in tenets--points to what we all are, and teaches that fulfillment-meaning cannot be found in the objects of scientific research. John Gray continues for me.

"One cannot make a sharp distinction between natural processes and supernatural agents unless one presupposes a view of the world something like that presented in the biblical creation story, and the distinction is not found in most of the world's religions. For example, in animism - which must rank as the oldest and most universal religion - spirits are seen as part of the natural world.

More fundamentally, it is a mistake to assume that belief is the core of religion. This may seem self-evident to many philosophers, but in fact belief is not very important in most religions. Even within Christianity there are traditions, such as Eastern Orthodoxy, in which it has never been central. For the majority of humankind, religion has always been about practice rather than belief. In fixating on the belief-content of religion, Dennett emulates Christianity at its most rationalistic and dogmatic. Pascal knew better, and understood that faith is not so much the basis of the religious life as a derivative from it. Dennett mocks those who say that life without faith has no meaning as "believers in belief". Yet he displays a zealous faith in unbelief that is far more inimical to doubt, and there is more scepticism in a single line of the Pensees than in the whole of Dennett's leaden tome.

Breaking the Spell approaches its subject with a relentless, simple-minded cleverness that precludes anything like profundity, and much of it seems designed to demonstrate the author's intellectual ingenuity rather than to advance the reader's understanding." (less)

like · see review

Mar 10, 2013 Joe Iacovino rated it 3 of 5 stars

Dennett seems like he'd be one of the nicest people you would ever meet. He is not polarizing like, say Dawkins, but that also gives him the ability to reach a broader audience. That, unfortunately, may be where he lost some steam with me in this book. I felt like his detailing his argument parameters left me often saying, "I know, let's get to it." Therein lies the problem I had with this book, I wasn't the target audience. The book really seemed to be geared to those who have not really examin...more

like · see review

Jul 07, 2012 Adam rated it 4 of 5 stars

Pros: Dennett's clear and light-hearted (self-effacing even) style of writing has the ability to bring readers from all walks of life into his theories and examples. He weaves evolutionary theory into several disciplines, and isn't as pedantic as some philosophers writing in the same area(s). In Breaking the Spell, he approaches religion from his standard naturalist worldview and posits the question "Cui bono?" (who benefits?) throughout the work as he attempts to explain the origin and survival...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 08, 2012 Ron rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: nonfiction

Dennett's underlying concern in this book is the growth of fanaticism among the adherents of religions - especially Islamist terrorism, but also extremists within Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism. He believes that a major obstacle in addressing fanaticism is the general reluctance to submit religion and religious belief to scientific inquiry - to understand it, in other words, as a naturally occurring phenomenon. Religions, which regard themselves as grounded in the supernatural, are well def...more Dennett's underlying concern in this book is the growth of fanaticism among the adherents of religions - especially Islamist terrorism, but also extremists within Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism. He believes that a major obstacle in addressing fanaticism is the general reluctance to submit religion and religious belief to scientific inquiry - to understand it, in other words, as a naturally occurring phenomenon. Religions, which regard themselves as grounded in the supernatural, are well defended against this method of inquiry, and Dennett devotes much of his book to an analysis of these defenses.

For readers who are neither philosophers nor biologists, this book will be a challenge. While Dennett uses a conversational, sometimes slyly humorous lecture style to introduce and discuss the many aspects of his subject, it's often difficult to understand how all the pieces fit together. Ironically, you may end up following him "in faith" that it all adds up somehow to a seamless argument.

While the book's title suggests that it will show the way to break religion's spell, it delivers something rather different from that. Maybe most discouraging (depending on the reader's expectations) is Dennett's admission that there are few answers currently to the questions he is raising and insufficient evidence to support the hypotheses he is posing. Instead, a lay reader will learn engaging new concepts like free-floating rationales, intentional objects, and hyperactive agent detection devices - and learn them in memorable ways (with the help at one point of Elizabeth II and Cameron Diaz), as well as how meme theory relates to the spread and tenacity of religious doctrines, plus an exploration of the difference between belief and belief in belief.

Finally, the book is a call to action to researchers to bring the illuminating light of scientific investigation to bear on religion and to test its claims instead of continuing to regard it as a sacred cow. Among potentially useful results, we may be able to deflect the worst excesses of fanaticism before its toxic effects destroy those secular values many also believe in - democracy, justice, freedom, and free inquiry itself. (less)

1 like · like · see review

May 31, 2011 Mike rated it 2 of 5 stars

It was certainly interesting, and its chief thesis is worth contemplating. I think that were it less philosophical (i.e. speculative b.s.) and more empirical, I would have found it more persuasive--or at least a more enjoyable read. I sound like my students now in saying that I think it could have been written with the same (or greater) effectiveness in about a third of the pages, but in this case it's true. He elaborates in a way that seems more self-indulgent than illuminating. I don't know, I...more

3 likes · like · see review

Jul 31, 2010 Anthony rated it 1 of 5 stars

I honestly couldn't stand this book. I read a good 50 pages while the wife was visiting a friend (mainly a play date for our daughter and their's), so I had the house to myself. I got some comfort food from the fridge, turned off the stereo (which is usually on, and distracting when reading non-fiction) and I settled in for the evening.

Sadly, I read 50 pages and simply didn't care. It's not that he wasn't addressing topics for which I had no concern, I just couldn't stand the writing. It wasn't...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jul 27, 2010 Rowland Bismark rated it 3 of 5 stars

Whoever would have guessed the pineapple had such an interesting history. It's early association with the explorations of new worlds and the wonder of new new tastes and the marvels of an expanding concept of geography made it tremendously appealing to the royalty and the rich of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. No costs were spared to possess, and indeed to cultivate this amazing and delicate treasure. Although a bit over informed by the end of the book I was, never-the-less entertained...more Whoever would have guessed the pineapple had such an interesting history. It's early association with the explorations of new worlds and the wonder of new new tastes and the marvels of an expanding concept of geography made it tremendously appealing to the royalty and the rich of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. No costs were spared to possess, and indeed to cultivate this amazing and delicate treasure. Although a bit over informed by the end of the book I was, never-the-less entertained by the stories of this fruit's conquest of the west.

Breaking The Spell by Daniel C. Dennett 2006 Penguin Group

Ok some people are just smart. And sometimes it is so gratifying to find that a smart person has put into words the way you have felt all along. And done it to rigorous academic standards. Thank you Daniel Dennett for writing this book.

"Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" examines religion from a dispassionate, biological, evolutionary perspective. It asks readers to put aside all emotional filters and look at the subject objectively, from the vantage of the present going back to the beginnings of religion once humans began developing speech. In the beginning was the word", he explains. But actually Dennet brings us much further back to the origins of life itself and the forces that allowed and encouraged it's survival. Religion must be viewed as a choice life made to carry for some kind of advantage it provided for survival. From these elementary beginnings Dennet follows the evolution of religion, of faith and of spirituality through the ages. Throughout Dennett challenges the reader to examine what is belief and what is belief in belief.

I found this book exhilarating. It is very well written and only occasionally did I find myself having to reread a page or two to keep up with him. But that's my problem. What I mean to say is that the book is accessible to the lay reader. It is full of compelling stories, illumination, compassion and surprise. I feel smarter for having read it. I want everyone to read it.

"...modern theists might acknowledge that, when it comes to Baal and the Golden Calf, Thor and Wotan, Poseidon and Apollo, Mithras and Ammon Ra, they are actually atheists. We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further." Dawkins

"What these people have realized is one of the best secrets of life: Let your self go. If you can approach the world's complexities, both it's glories and it's horrors, with an attitude of humble curiosity, acknowledging that however deeply you have seen, you have only just scratched the surface, you will find worlds within worlds, beauties you could not heretofore imagine, and your own mundane preoccupations will shrink to proper size, not all that important in the greater scheme of things. That, I propose, is the secret to spirituality, and it has nothing at all to do with believing in an immortal soul, or in anything supernatural."
(less)

like · see review

Oct 19, 2009 Becky rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Although he is a member of the group of freethinkers and "new atheists" who are now speaking out in print against religion, Dennet takes a somewhat different approach. He lays out a case for subjecting religious tenets to scientific scrutiny, treating religion as a natural phenomenon that should be investigated with as much detachment and scientific curiosity as the fundamental forces, elementary particles, or chemical/biological processes. Occasionally I wasn't sure if he was arguing for invest...more

1 like · like · see review

Jul 21, 2009 Jon Edward rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: theology

I considered for the first time that teaching a child religion might be a form of child abuse. I learned that there might be bio-evolutionary reasons why religions develop and that when we come to see that religion is invented, we need to remember to be gentle with others who might not have seen that. Nonetheless, we owe it to ourselves to consider the costs of religion. It might be that it harms our world more than helps it. If religions were based in fact, we would have to accept that. Since t...more

3 likes · like · see review

Apr 24, 2009 Tyler rated it 5 of 5 stars

Of all the books out there that take on the subject of religion head on, this one definitely has the softest touch. Daniel Dennett doesn't set out to mock people for believing the unbelievable; rather, he makes a very interesting case for religion being a "natural phenomenon," as the subtitle suggests. And Breaking the Spell is much more than a polemic. I can't begin to say how much I learned from this book, about the coevolution of human society and the world surrounding it. Dennett expands on...more

1 like · like · see review

Sep 27, 2011 Jean Tessier rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: leisure

The author takes a critical look at religion as a human, natural
phenomenon, subject to forces from the natural world. In the
opening chapters, he goes to great lengths to appear
non-threatening to religious people, trying to convince them that
their religion is deserving of a critical look. It's a very
different style from other stuff I have read where the author is
usually much more straight-forward (e.g., Noam Chomsky or Milan
Kundera).

On the same day I started reading this book, which proposes to
ap...more

like · see review

Apr 27, 2009 Mark rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I found this book to be a very easily digested and fascinating proposal for how the principles of evolution (the survival of human attributes that “pay for themselves”, that work for the benefit and survivability of the organism) can be used to understand how today’s organized religions could grow out of primitive folk religions and ultimately out of earliest man’s first attempts at using language to understand his environment. It gives a new twist to the concept of “in the beginning was the wor...more

like · see review

Mar 31, 2011 Andy rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Andy by: PAMG Book Club

An excellent hypothesis concerning the advent of religion as an evolutionary by product. Very well put together and laid out, flows very nicely from the earliest stages of man (development of language and ritual) to present day. Dennett uses the concept of the meme to characterize not only the origins of superstition and religion, but suggest possible reasons for some of the changes these experienced over the course of history and for the current state of the world's religions today.

Definitely r...more

like · see review

Jan 15, 2009 Mark rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, religion, non-fiction

Out of all the "new athiests" - which include Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett - I prefer Daniel Dennett's "Breaking The Spell." This is a more academically flavored inquirey into the nature of claims made by religious thought and how those claims may be examined in light of social and biological science today. His is an intelligent and thorough examination of the question of the origins of religious thought. He doesn't go in for the disparaging of religious...more

like · see review

Apr 14, 2013 Christine rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction

As a former evangelical,now a new atheist this is one of my three new favorite nonfiction books December 11, 2012
Along with Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary and The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You to Read
Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C.Dennett are the top three books that I feel every skeptic/new atheist needs to have in their personal library.

I read my library's copy of this book,but I just ordered my own copy as I know that I will want to r...more

like · see review

May 12, 2012 Adam Kranz rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Adam by: Andrew

Shelves: anthropology, evolution, non-fiction, philosophy

Dennett is among the nicest scholars I've encountered. He is just eminently reasonable, kind-hearted, and eloquent throughout. The argument he makes in "Breaking the Spell" is almost tamely reasonable: "my central policy recommendation is that we gently, firmly educate the people of the world, so that they can make truly informed choices about their lives." OK, of course, no arguments there, from nearly any quarter.

The bulk of the book is occupied with a much different argument, perhaps an exam...more Dennett is among the nicest scholars I've encountered. He is just eminently reasonable, kind-hearted, and eloquent throughout. The argument he makes in "Breaking the Spell" is almost tamely reasonable: "my central policy recommendation is that we gently, firmly educate the people of the world, so that they can make truly informed choices about their lives." OK, of course, no arguments there, from nearly any quarter.

The bulk of the book is occupied with a much different argument, perhaps an example of this broader philosophy. Dennett wants scientists to embark upon a massive project to understand religions - their origins, their impacts (good and bad), their psychology, sociology, economics, etc - in short, everything about them that can be addressed scientifically. He makes the argument for two reasons: science on religion has been hampered by a sort of veil of politeness, in which it might be considered offensive to take the often overly forward tools of science to something so dear to so many people; and because religion will play such a large role in large-scale future societal issues that we can't afford to not understand it. These arguments are straightforward and compelling and it's hard to imagine anyone even half-way reasonable objecting to them.

Dennett, I'd like to think correctly, goes on to assume that the reservations of his audience have melted away in the face of his overwhelmingly reasonableness. He spend the bulk of the book fleshing out a popularly-oriented review of theories on the evolution and social impacts of religion, making liberal use of the meme concept he finds so useful. While it is primarily a summary of prior research and an identification of the key open questions in the debate, Dennett doesn't hesitate to flesh the picture out with a starting hypothesis: the one he considers the most persuasive.

This is interesting, but not the sort of thing I'd normally go out of my way to read. Yet it was a true joy to read, for many reasons. Dennett is just a really clear thinker, a wonderful writer who has many nice turns of phrase (half the pages I dog-eared are just for some clever way of articulating a thought I've had or might use). His thoughts on science - what it is, why it is, and how it can be used in social and cultural contexts, are particularly clear and exciting. (less)

like · see review

May 13, 2010 Rebecca rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: anyone

There are lots of different kinds of atheist books out there, and contrary to popular (mis)conception, they are not all angry, nor are all they all written by scientists with an axe to grind against the creationists. I have read some of the angry books, and while I enjoyed them, I certainly wouldn't recommend them to a religious believer, because they would only succeed in raising the believer's hackles and putting them in such a defensive position that all debate would be stonewalled. It's not...more There are lots of different kinds of atheist books out there, and contrary to popular (mis)conception, they are not all angry, nor are all they all written by scientists with an axe to grind against the creationists. I have read some of the angry books, and while I enjoyed them, I certainly wouldn't recommend them to a religious believer, because they would only succeed in raising the believer's hackles and putting them in such a defensive position that all debate would be stonewalled. It's not an issue of "respect" (because the primary point of being an atheist is that religious beliefs don't deserve respect) but rather one of intention and the tone that goes along with that intention. If your intention – like Christopher Hitchens' – is to rock the boat and make complacent atheists or noncommital agnostics realize all the work that needs to be done, then your tone should rightfully be impassioned and indignant. Dennett's intention in Breaking the Spell is different. His goal is to assuage believers' fears about conversing with an atheist, put them at their ease, and talk about a few specific issues calmly and rationally with the goal of getting people to think more clearly about several unspoken and traditionally taboo subjects. No histrionics, no hyperbole, no accusations – just letting the facts speak for themselves. Needless to say, there are atheists (like me) who find this approach refreshing and more approachable than the writings of people like Hitchens, which, while still important and necessary, are not the kinds of books you can necessarily give to a religious person unless you are intending to piss them off.

Dennett's book is so well-reasoned, well-argued, and well-written that you could give it to your doddering old grandmother, who has followed Jesus her entire life, and chances are she would not feel unduly scandalized by what the book says (especially if she already accepts evolution as a fact of life, which Dennett chooses not to convince people of in this book, since he has an entire other book devoted to that topic). Dennett is not ambiguous about his stance as an atheist or his belief that religion is not a prerequisite for moral behavior, but he is open-minded about so many issues and trusts so much in the scientific method and reasoned debate to resolve problems that you can't help but respect and like him and his common sense approach. True, if you are a real dyed-in-the-wool Bible-beater, you will find the entire premise of this book – that religion has evolved naturally (as opposed to supernaturally) over the course of recent human history under specific circumstances and its evolution and appeal through the ages can be explained through understanding human psychology and sociology – offensive and disrespectful. But finding something disrespectful is not the same as proving something wrong, and it also doesn't do away with your ability (obligation, even) to confront the evidence that the other side has assembled. The surest way to support your point of view and convince people of its validity, after all, is to allow it to stand on its own in the full light of inquiry. And even if you are afraid of the results, you cannot deny more courageous minds the right to discover them. Dennett does an excellent job of not setting up a straw-man argument – he lets the religious point of view shine through in each chapter and even goes to some length to show how these viewpoints could be right, while ultimately showing that they are not all that persuasive when examined more carefully from a wider perspective on human history.
(less)

1 like · like · see review

Oct 15, 2009 Dave Winter rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is one of the more poignant books in "The New Atheism" movement.

Dennett's tone isn't mean, as some people say his more widely read counterpart, Richard Dawkins, is. Dennett actually shows a little compassion for believers, reminding the reader that much of the time the believer has no clue that he or she is "addicted" to their religion, or that they are imbued with its influence because it was among the first things he/she was taught about how the world works. I appreciated Dennett's tone.

T...more

like · see review

Jan 03, 2013 J.P. rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

It's a very well written, thoughtful & thought provoking book. It's a call for, believers & people who may have doubts, to examine & understand religion, faith & belief. It's a call to find out whether religion is actually good for people? Whether the more liberal variants of any particular sect should step in & criticize their more extreme counterparts? What is the proper way to understand religion? Whether this social taboo of examining religion should be broken & if so...more

like · see review

Jun 24, 2011 Jorge rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: atheism-religion

Dr. Dennett's book left a little to be desired. Can science study religion? Interesting topic indeed but Dr. Dennett in many instances took the scenic route to get to his points. Here are the strengths and weaknesses of the book:

Strengths:
1. Interesting topics
2. Introduction of new ideas
3. Well informed and intelligent author
4. Good overall organization of book
5. Makes good overall points
6. The third of three sections was the best part of the book

Weaknesses
1. It wasn't a fun, smooth rea...more

like · see review

Jan 12, 2009 Charles rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Open minded people who care about the state of our world.

Shelves: favorites

Daniel C. Dennett is a professor of philosophy so, as might be expected, he doesn't offer many answers in this book. He does however present more than a few questions and interesting ideas. Many of which I feel should be given more than just a casual glance.
The book is divided into three parts:
Part 1 Opening Pandora's Box
- What is the definition of religion?
- Can science study religion? Should science study religion?
- Cui bono? Who benefits from religion as a whole? Individuals? Society? Or...more

1 like · like · see review

Jan 17, 2012 Daniel rated it 2 of 5 stars

First off, this might be obvious, but if you're not fairly interessted in the subject, this is likely to be a pretty dull experince.

Now for the actual book. I think Dennett did a very fine job discecting all his reasoning, and then come to his final verdicts, pehaps, too good a job. While reading I felt a bit bored for the first 250 or so pages, which is quite a chunk of the book, and only then, do the more interesting stuff start. I could use a little more conclusions and opinions in the first...more

1 like · like · see review

Dec 16, 2010 Laurel rated it 5 of 5 stars

Philosopher,Daniel Dennett sets out to raise our consciousness about what we believe by traditional and cultural transmission about religion and to examine by rational analysis how religion can be valued as a Natural Phenomenon. I found this book to be a seminal work in this field. It is written in a language that is easily understood and the questions lead to wonderfully engaging discussions. Since when has a book on religion been this gripping? I quickly bought copies of "Darwin's Dangerous Id...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Is Dennett being reasonable?	4	29	Feb 08, 2013 08:02pm
Open minds lead to peace?	5	44	Sep 16, 2008 10:41am

combine
Other Editions

More editions...

Genres

Religion

244 users

Philosophy

209 users

Non Fiction

165 users

Religion > Atheism

116 users

Science

110 users

Psychology

22 users

Biology > Evolution

16 users

Philosophy > Skepticism

15 users

Religion > Theology

11 users

Sociology

10 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Daniel C. Dennett

"Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philoso...more "Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.

Dennett spent part of his childhood in Beirut, where, during World War II, his father, a covert counter-intelligence agent with the Office of Strategic Services posing as a cultural attaché to the American Embassy in Beirut. The young Dennett and family returned to Massachusetts in 1947 after his father died in an unexplained plane crash.
He attended Phillips Exeter Academy, and received his B.A. in philosophy from Harvard University in 1963, where he was a student of W.V. Quine. In 1965, he received his D.Phil. in philosophy from Christ Church, Oxford, where he studied under the ordinary language philosopher Gilbert Ryle. Dennett is currently (May 2007) the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, University Professor, and Co-Director of the Center for Cognitive Studies (with Ray Jackendoff) at Tufts University.
Dennett describes himself as "an autodidact — or, more properly, the beneficiary of hundreds of hours of informal tutorials on all the fields that interest me, from some of the world's leading scientists."

Dennett gave the John Locke lectures at the University of Oxford in 1983, the Gavin David Young Lectures at Adelaide, Australia, in 1985, and the Tanner Lecture at Michigan in 1986, among many others. In 2001 he was awarded the Jean Nicod Prize and gave the Jean Nicod Lectures in Paris. He has received two Guggenheim Fellowships, a Fulbright Fellowship, and a Fellowship at the Center for Advanced Studies in Behavioral Science. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1987. He was the co-founder (1985) and co-director of the Curricular Software Studio at Tufts University, and has helped to design museum exhibits on computers for the Smithsonian Institution, the Museum of Science in Boston, and the Computer Museum in Boston. He is a Humanist Laureate of the International Academy of Humanism and a Fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. He is also an avid sailor.
In October 2006, Dennett was hospitalized due to an aortic dissection. After a nine-hour surgery, he was given a new aorta. In an essay posted on the Edge website, Dennett gives his firsthand account of his health problems, his consequent feelings of gratitude towards the scientists and doctors whose hard work made his recovery possible, and his complete lack of a "deathbed conversion".

He lives with his wife in North Andover, Massachusetts, and has a daughter, a son, and two grandsons."

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_...(less)

More about Daniel C. Dennett...

Books by Daniel C. Dennett

Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanins of Life

Kinds of Minds Towards an Understanding of Consciousness

Elbow Room: The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About Breaking the Spel...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Breaking the Spell: Re...

“If you can approach the world's complexities, both its glories and its horrors, with an attitude of humble curiosity, acknowledging that however deeply you have seen, you have only scratched the surface, you will find worlds within worlds, beauties you could not heretofore imagine, and your own mundane preoccupations will shrink to proper size, not all that important in the greater scheme of things.” — 99 people liked it

“f you can approach the world’s complexities, both its glories and its horrors, with an attitude of humble curiosity, acknowledging that however deeply you have seen, you have only just scratched the surface, you will find worlds within worlds, beauties you could not heretofore imagine, and your own mundane preoccupations will shrink to proper size, not all that important in the greater scheme of things.” — 13 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon
avg rating	preview: Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon Goodreads rating: 3.90 (4049 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2067.Breaking_the_Spell?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1309285117l/2067.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2067.Breaking_the_Spell?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel C. Dennett[/url]

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website