Daniel Dennett

Record year1969–1987

summaryMade a predictive mode of explanation from beliefs and desires explicit as a comparable interpretive stance, and systematized it across articles.

M rationaleThe method provides a cross-object and contestable explanatory framework, broader in scope than a single philosophical argument; it does not directly resolve empirical mechanisms and therefore ranks below anchors in basic scientific theory.

attribution rationaleDaniel Dennett .55; prehistory of intentionality and philosophy of mind .20; cognitive-science debaters .10; original editorial-publication chain .07; unresolved share .08. The shares are revisable research judgments, and sources do not endorse proportions.

overlap boundaryCounts only the explanatory strategy formed by the 1969 book, the 1971 paper, and the 1987 collection; it is not treated as an empirical law of every psychological or AI system.

Evidence gapsA non-authoritative mirror hosts the introduction, and the page numbers of the official edition still require replacement; the inputs of specific critics have not yet been reconstructed article by article.

Record year1991–2005

summaryProposed a decentralized, parallel, revisionary account of consciousness and treated heterophenomenology as an interpretive discipline for research reports.

M rationaleThis is a systematic model addressing core problems, but it remains highly contested and is not a unified theory established by evidence; it is therefore valued as a high-impact philosophical model rather than as a law.

attribution rationaleDaniel Dennett .52; the prehistory of consciousness research 0.15; the consciousness-research and critical community .13; the original editorial and publishing chain .07; unresolved share .08; related conceptual inputs already counted .05. The shares are revisable research judgments; sources do not endorse the proportions.

overlap boundaryTreats Consciousness Explained and subsequent clarifications as one family of theoretical works; does not claim that the problem of consciousness has been solved, and does not separately count methodological chapters in the same book.

Evidence gapsKey chapters of the full books and representative rebuttals have not been read in full; the specific scope of later revisions in Sweet Dreams remains to be checked

Record year1995–2017

summaryUses algorithmic selection and design spaces to organize problems of mind, meaning, and culture, and presents this as a contestable naturalistic synthesis.

M rationaleIts scope spans several theoretical questions but it is principally synthesis and explanation rather than a new biological law; contested inferences reduce its net value.

attribution rationaleDaniel Dennett .47; Darwin and the prehistory of evolutionary biology 0.22; advocates and debaters of cultural evolution .10; the original editorial and publishing chain .07; unresolved share .09; related conceptual inputs already counted .05. The shares are revisable research judgments; sources do not endorse the proportions.

overlap boundaryCombines the evolutionary-philosophy line from Darwin’s Dangerous Idea to From Bacteria to Bach and Back; counts only the philosophical organization and inferences, without claiming evolutionary biology or cultural products themselves.

Evidence gapsThe texts of the later works have not been checked chapter by chapter; the boundary of independent sources for memetics and cultural evolution remains coarse

Record year1984–2003

summaryUnderstands freedom as capacities for avoidance and control formed in evolutionary and social environments, rather than as metaphysically uncaused choice.

M rationaleIt is a clear and sustained philosophical model, but controversy over its application and truth limits its civilizational scale.

attribution rationaleDaniel Dennett .52; the prehistory of free will and determinism 0.2; philosophical debaters .09; the original editorial and publishing chain .07; unresolved share .07; related conceptual inputs already counted .05. The shares are revisable research judgments; sources do not endorse the proportions.

overlap boundaryTreats Elbow Room and Freedom Evolves as an evolving family of the same model, counting arguments about capacities such as avoidance, foresight, and self-control; does not count legal or ethical institutional consequences.

Evidence gapsExisting sources are mainly bibliographical; page citations for the core arguments remain to be added; representative criticisms have not been checked one by one

Record year2006

summaryIntegrates naturalistic questions for a general audience and calls for empirical research into the formation and maintenance of religion.

M rationaleThe independent delivery is an agenda and synthesis rather than an original empirical mechanism; scope and controversy place it below the theoretical families above.

attribution rationaleDaniel Dennett .45; the prehistory of the anthropology and psychology of religion 0.2; the religion-studies and critical community .12; the original editorial and publishing chain .08; unresolved share .10; related conceptual inputs already counted .05. The shares are revisable research judgments; sources do not endorse the proportions.

overlap boundaryCounts only the public agenda established by Breaking the Spell in making religious beliefs and institutions researchable objects; does not attribute the truth or falsity of any belief, religious history, or policy consequences to him.

Evidence gapsThis candidate has only bibliographic-level and CV-level support; the content judgment is provisional in scale; authoritative original-book chapters or publisher text are needed to confirm the specific claims