What are the types of functionalist theories for functionalism?  by Sim

Before explaining the theories, let’s introduce what functionalism is. Functionalism in philosophy of mind is the belief that what makes the mental state of a particular type does not depend on its internal constitution, but on the way it functions in the system of which it is a part. Functionalism is developed as an alternative to the identity theory of mind and behaviorism. Because of that, functionalism is different from Cartesian dualism and Skinnerian behaviorism. 

 

These are the main functionalist theories with three major strains of this doctrine: 

(a) Machine State Functionalism 

• The early functionalist theories of Putnam (1960, 1967) ==> any creature with a mind can be considered as a Turing machine (an idealized finite digital computer) & their operation can be fully specified by a set of instructions (machine table// program) 

• Consider the mind to be that of a probabilistic automaton (program is specified, a particular output is produced when some subsequent state is entered) 

• These machine table states are not behavioral dispositions 

Example: 

Machine state = believe it will rain 

Disposition = take an umbrella after looking at the weather report & have the desire to be dry 

                    ≠ take an umbrella after looking at the weather report      

• Machines of this sort provide at least a simple model of how internal states can affect output 

• Machine table states are not tied to any physical vessel as the same program can work on different computer hardware 

 

(b) Psycho-Functionalism 

• Cognitive psychologists argue that theories of behavior is the result of a complex of mental states and processes, differentiated in terms of the roles they play in producing the behavior mentioned 

• Scientific explanations are included in explanation of mental states and processes 

• Information used in functional characterization of mental states and processes do not need to be restricted to common knowledge/ common sense, but can include results obtained from careful laboratory observation and experimentation 

 

(c) Analytic Functionalism 

• Goal: provide “topic-neutral” analyses of mental state terms/ concepts 

• Permits reference to the casual relations that a mental state has to stimulations, behavior & other mental states 

• Sometimes terms like “pain”, “desire” and “thought” are not equivalent to any descriptions expressed in language of physics, chemistry, or neurophysiology 

• However, if there are functional descriptions about the terms that preserve the meaning of these terms, then one’s mental states can be identified by determining the internal states and processes which play that relevant functional role (Lewis, 1966) 

 

(d) Role-functionalism and Realizer-functionalism 

• Role functionalists identify something with a higher-level relational property 

• Advocate role functionalism to avoid chauvinism (exaggerated/ aggressive patriotism), permits mental state terms to be rigid designators (Krioke, 1972) & denote the same items in all possible worlds 

• Realizer functionalists take a functional theory just to provide definite descriptions of whichever lower-level properties can satisfy the functional characterizations 

• Considered realizer functionalism to be better in explaining the casual efficacy of the mental state 

​

Is mind subjective, objective or something else? by Law

One of the major issues in mental philosophy is that of knowledge. To put it another way, how can we learn about our minds if knowledge is a function of the mind? To put it another way, how can we have objective knowledge about brains if comprehending and knowing involve subjective experiences with our own minds?

​

This is a dilemma that demonstrates the classical understanding of science's limitations once again. According to the classical view, the cosmos and all of its manifestations exist 'outside' of the mind and can thus be evaluated and studied as independent entities in an objective reality.

​

Hence this creates a problem when dealing with the mind because we cannot see it in the same way as molecules or electrons. The very act of understanding will put our subjective experiences in the equation.

This shows ever more clearly that we have to change the way we look at reality. We must change our scientific models and paradigms to accommodate the fact that mind, consciousness, and matter are inseparable and somehow part and parcel of the same fabric of reality.

​

We cannot assume that mind (and consciousness) derives from matter, but that matter is imbued with different degrees of mind and consciousness. This is what mind-boggling observations in quantum physics have repeatedly shown: that our mind and consciousness are not separate from the physical reality of electrons and photons. They are part of the same continuum.

​

How does mindblindness affect moral reasoning in autistic people? by Rachel

Theory of mind is the ability of an individual to infer the thoughts, beliefs and intentions of others. Mindblindness is a theory where people with autism are unaware of other people’s thoughts and feelings. According to Rudacille (2011), individuals with autism do not tend to consider the intentions of a situation during moral reasoning; instead, they judge an event based on the outcome. Fadda et al. (2016) discussed that autistic people could adapt and learn moral rules that people generally develop through personal experiences. Autistic individuals learn moral rules when they reach the heteronomous stage in moral development; however, due to these individuals' lack of theory of mind, they fail to develop to the autonomous stage where moral reasoning develops. Rudacille also reports that impaired moral judgment in autistic people is linked with the neural systems in the right temporal-parietal junction (2011). Fadda et al.’s research observed that philosophers agree that autistic individuals should not be recognized as mature moral agents (2016). Both Fadda et al. (2016) and Rudacille (2011) concluded that moral reasoning in autistic individuals need to be researched more to see if moral reasoning can be developed by training their theory of mind abilities.

​

Can a machine be conscious? by Kelly

American philosopher John Searle theorized two types of AI which are strong AI and Weak AI. Strong AI is a physical system that can have a state of mind and spirit while weak AI can operate intelligently. His purpose was to distinguish between the two to focus on a "more interesting" topic, a topic called a difficult problem of consciousness. However, AI researchers today have strong and weak AI, as general intelligence only needs to "act" that way, unless it proves that "consciousness" requires a secret additional element, but they are not concerned about the difference. If software can model the brain, it has all the functions of the human brain (in theory). In summary, these discussions must assume that thinking, learning, and generally intelligent machines are as conscious as we are until we find a quantifiable and objective mechanism that causes consciousness. Indicates that it must be done. (Jagtap, 2019)