Maybe this was addressed already, but are these videos available for download like the Beyond Belief series?

Yes you can download them at http://tedblog.typepad.com/tedblog/

This is the treatment of religion missing in Richard Dawkins talks. I do respect Richard Dawkins. Dennett takes into account the importance, and function of religion. Dennett has a strong sense of the Spiritual nature of man.

John,

I agree that Dennett is much more respectful of religion in public, and I prefer that over Dawkins' public approach.

However, I ask you: Who's getting more airtime? I think we can agree that Dawkins' name and views are much more well known than Dennett's.

This of course is not an argument in favour of Dawkins' because he can get his message accross to more people. Rather, I think both Dawkins and Dennett are quite aware of how their approaches fit into the grander goal of protecting science and advance human kind.

Dawkins, for his part, uses his brash presentation and "celebrity status," to spark meaningful debate among large groups of people. He encourages complete and open discussion.

For the people who are comfortable with their own sense of religion, but see Dawkins' points on its negative negative side, there is Dennett who appeals to the moderate sense of embracing alternate views.

Either way, I think at the end of the day both men are very well-intentioned and intelligent people with the same goal in mind.

Do you prefer your Ecto Symbiant rare, medium or well-done?

"Dennett has a strong sense of the Spiritual nature of man."

Well yes, but he also suggests that it has an evolutionary origin in our brains hard wiring, he speculates that it could be an "exaption" from some other purpose, and he suggests that it is not good us.

I think that as well as both Dennett and Dawkins being intelligent well meaning people, they both play an important role.

Each is different and each approaches the material in a different way but each has a different role to play and each is important.

Dawkins does spark and inspire debate that goes far beyond the speaking platform he stands on at any given time.

I have a stylistic preference for Dawkins but also recognize the importance of the role played by speakers and researchers like Dennett.

I really believe the debate, about which style is somehow better or more appropriate, is a waste of time and energy.

If you are trying to create a change in mass consciousness you have to use a great variety of approaches. I don't believe there is a perfect get them all style.

I think that as well as both Dennett and Dawkins being intelligent well meaning people, they both play an important role.

Each is different and each approaches the material in a different way but each has a different role to play and each is important.

Dawkins does spark and inspire debate that goes far beyond the speaking platform he stands on at any given time.

I have a stylistic preference for Dawkins but also recognize the importance of the role played by speakers and researchers like Dennett.

I really believe the debate, about which style is somehow better or more appropriate, is a waste of time and energy.

If you are trying to create a change in mass consciousness you have to use a great variety of approaches. I don't believe there is a perfect get them all style.

NPR had a piece on Friday afternoon called "the Atheist Brigade" featuring Sam Harris:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6632129

Wonderful. I think there's room for both Dennett and Dawkins. After all, there's both Gandhi and Pat Robertson out there to contend with.

I agree that there is room for both Dennett and Dawkins. I like them both. (I'd rather have a drink with Dawkins though. )

Great site, by the way. Thanks for posting this video clip.