Questions similar to:
● Do robots have a mind?
● Are robots self-aware?
● Does a robot truly understand the data they are presented with?
Paragraph 1: Functionalism
● The mind is a functional concept instead of a stuff concept (it is defined by its functional
role)
● We can say something is mind if it functions as one
● Robots/aliens can have minds
● Like a software program - can run on different hardware so long as it is sophisticated
enough to account for complexity of program
● Chemical composition does not matter
● A physical system complex enough to recreate functional interactions among neurons in
our brain can have mind
● Turing test
○ Someone placed in front of screen and can ask any questions
○ Human/computer on other side answers
○ Job of tester to determine if it is human or computer
○ If tester cannot tell it is computer, then it has passed Turing test, said to have
mind
Critique 1: The Chinese Room Experiment
● John Searle’s Chinese Room Experiment
○ Someone is sat in room with basketfuls of Chinese characters and a rule book in
English on how to match symbols, person does not speak a word of Chinese
○ The rules based entirely on shape of symbols instead of meaning
○ Native Chinese speakers pass messages under door and person uses rule book
to reply
○ Native Chinese speakers would believe that the person in room is also Chinese
speaker, but the person in room only knows how to process Chinese as dats
instead of understanding it
, ● Do computers truly understand what they are putting forth? Minds understand what they
are putting forth.
● Qualia: subjectivity of human experience
● Mental states have characteristic phenomenal feeling
● Hence, it is possible that there are beings that act like us in every respect and who
process information as we do, but lack subjective consciousness - Chalmers calls these
beings zombies
● Functionally equivalent to us but lack qualia and therefore are not same as us
Paragraph 2:
● In order to replicate human experience, it can be said that one needs subjective
consciousness
● What gives rise to this subjective consciousness? If it was all stimulus-reaction-
response, it would be easier to determine the actions of humans
● Implies that there is something else other than the physical mind
● Descartes states that there is a metaphysical mind, and that there is a dualistic
interaction between our physical bodies and our minds
● The mind has thoughts (affirmations, denials, volitions, etc)
● The body has modes (size, shape, location, etc)
● The mind is greater than body, unaffected by external factors, autonomous, indivisible,
private matter, conscious
● The brain is NOT conscious
● Meaning that robot with something that functions as a brain NOT conscious because
they lack the mind
Critique 2:
● Pineal gland theory defunct, he does not explain how this interaction occurs
● It approaches the investigation of mental processes as if they could be isolated from
physical processes
● knowing how to perform an act skillfully may not only be a matter of being able to reason
practically but may also be a matter of being able to put practical reasoning into action
● Practical actions may not necessarily be produced by highly theoretical reasoning or by
complex sequences of intellectual operations
● Mental processes are merely intelligent acts? No proof of metaphysical mind.
Conclusion:
● Perhaps our subjectivity is something we have yet to understand
● But no evidence to assume that it is based in something outside of the brain as we do not
understand the full functions of brain yet
● Computers coming close to cracking Turing Test
● Robots no brain now but perhaps one day there will be a software that allows the person in
the Chinese room to understand Chinese by giving them a dictionary instead of a rulebook,
so to speak
● Completely likely - what is so unfeasible about it?
● Do robots have a mind?
● Are robots self-aware?
● Does a robot truly understand the data they are presented with?
Paragraph 1: Functionalism
● The mind is a functional concept instead of a stuff concept (it is defined by its functional
role)
● We can say something is mind if it functions as one
● Robots/aliens can have minds
● Like a software program - can run on different hardware so long as it is sophisticated
enough to account for complexity of program
● Chemical composition does not matter
● A physical system complex enough to recreate functional interactions among neurons in
our brain can have mind
● Turing test
○ Someone placed in front of screen and can ask any questions
○ Human/computer on other side answers
○ Job of tester to determine if it is human or computer
○ If tester cannot tell it is computer, then it has passed Turing test, said to have
mind
Critique 1: The Chinese Room Experiment
● John Searle’s Chinese Room Experiment
○ Someone is sat in room with basketfuls of Chinese characters and a rule book in
English on how to match symbols, person does not speak a word of Chinese
○ The rules based entirely on shape of symbols instead of meaning
○ Native Chinese speakers pass messages under door and person uses rule book
to reply
○ Native Chinese speakers would believe that the person in room is also Chinese
speaker, but the person in room only knows how to process Chinese as dats
instead of understanding it
, ● Do computers truly understand what they are putting forth? Minds understand what they
are putting forth.
● Qualia: subjectivity of human experience
● Mental states have characteristic phenomenal feeling
● Hence, it is possible that there are beings that act like us in every respect and who
process information as we do, but lack subjective consciousness - Chalmers calls these
beings zombies
● Functionally equivalent to us but lack qualia and therefore are not same as us
Paragraph 2:
● In order to replicate human experience, it can be said that one needs subjective
consciousness
● What gives rise to this subjective consciousness? If it was all stimulus-reaction-
response, it would be easier to determine the actions of humans
● Implies that there is something else other than the physical mind
● Descartes states that there is a metaphysical mind, and that there is a dualistic
interaction between our physical bodies and our minds
● The mind has thoughts (affirmations, denials, volitions, etc)
● The body has modes (size, shape, location, etc)
● The mind is greater than body, unaffected by external factors, autonomous, indivisible,
private matter, conscious
● The brain is NOT conscious
● Meaning that robot with something that functions as a brain NOT conscious because
they lack the mind
Critique 2:
● Pineal gland theory defunct, he does not explain how this interaction occurs
● It approaches the investigation of mental processes as if they could be isolated from
physical processes
● knowing how to perform an act skillfully may not only be a matter of being able to reason
practically but may also be a matter of being able to put practical reasoning into action
● Practical actions may not necessarily be produced by highly theoretical reasoning or by
complex sequences of intellectual operations
● Mental processes are merely intelligent acts? No proof of metaphysical mind.
Conclusion:
● Perhaps our subjectivity is something we have yet to understand
● But no evidence to assume that it is based in something outside of the brain as we do not
understand the full functions of brain yet
● Computers coming close to cracking Turing Test
● Robots no brain now but perhaps one day there will be a software that allows the person in
the Chinese room to understand Chinese by giving them a dictionary instead of a rulebook,
so to speak
● Completely likely - what is so unfeasible about it?
