I always had problems with Daniel Dennett: As I read others writing about him (i. e. his texts), I always find his contributions relevant, even insightful. when reading him myself, though, I always get the feeling he is just gibbering away. and I do not think that I am just to dumb to understand him. cause I do not even see him make a point when I know what his point is supposed to be beforehand. after some time, I consequently formed the hypothesis that maybe all the smart things that people ascribe to Dennett are just that: ascribed, interpreted into texts where they previously where not.

And it really took me until two hours ago to realize how ironic it is to think such a thing about Daniel Dennett, of all people.