PHIL wk2 reading Slors et al (2015) Chapter 1 (1.4-1.7)

Water Analogy: Water's identity as H2O is compared to mind-brain identification.
Limitations of Comparison: While water can be defined by its properties (freezing point, boiling point, transparency), the same clarity is lacking in the identification of mental states with brain states.

Shift in Theory: Functionalism supplanted identity theory, offering better solutions to key problems.
Key Problems Addressed:
- Multiple Realization: How can different brain states correspond to the same mental state?
- Explanation of Mental States: Why are some brain states classified as mental states?
Behaviorism and Definitions: Emphasizes defining mental states based on their functional roles instead of their material composition.

David Armstrong's Idea: Logical behaviorism and identity theory can coexist.
Dispositions as Properties: Dispositions exist as abstract properties rather than concrete realities, tied to specific conditions.
Comparison with Glass Fragility: The fragility of glass illustrates how behaviors can be produced by specific physical structures.

Sellars' Contribution: Introduced the concept of folk-psychology, a theoretical framework for understanding mental states and behaviors.
Inner Aspect of Mind: Acknowledges a hidden inner aspect to mental states that behaviorism fails to address.
Comparison to Scientific Postulation: Similar to scientists hypothesizing about unseen elements to explain observations.

Lewis' Analytical Functionalism: Mental states defined by their causal roles.
Inputs, Outputs, Consequences Model:
- Inputs: What causes a mental state?
- Outputs: The behavioral effects of mental states.
- Consequences: Internal consequences affecting susceptibility to stimuli.
Example of Pain: Characterized by its causes and effects, linking mental states to physical realizations in the brain.

Functionalism's Advantage: Provides a clear explanation of why certain brain states correspond to mental states through causal roles.
Analogy with Genes: Drawing parallels between the relationships of mental states to brain states with the relationship of genes to DNA.

Causal Role Distinction: Different brain states can fulfill the same causal role, allowing for multiple realizations of mental states.

Historical Background: Concept of machines thinking dates back to the 19th century; Turing's pivotal role in artificial intelligence.
Functionalism and Thinking Machines: Thinking defined in terms of functional properties, not limited to biological systems.

Symbols: Representational elements that can take various physical forms.
Syntactical Properties: Physical characteristics enabling symbol recognition.
Semantical Properties: Meanings derived from symbols’ relationships to the world.

AI and Intelligence Debate: Discusses conditions under which AI can be considered intelligent.
Crucial Distinctions: Understanding how symbols acquire meaning remains a primary challenge.

Biological Computer Theory: Brains function as biological computers programmed by evolution.
Chomsky's Influence: Universal grammar and the innate structure concept.

Searle's Experiment: A thought experiment challenging computationalism by illustrating the difference between understanding and manipulation of symbols.
Responses to the Argument: Debate surrounding whether understanding resides in the clerk or the system as a whole.

Emergence of Connectionism: A response to limitations of classical AI, employing bottom-up approaches to learning and flexibility.
Neural Networks: Mimics brain functions, allowing for self-learning and creativity.

Paul Churchland's Critique: Folk-psychology is a remnant of outdated thinking; neuroscience offers a superior explanatory framework.
Criteria for Theories:
1. Ability to explain phenomena.
2. Capacity for development with new findings.
3. Compatibility with broader scientific theories.
Future of Folk-Psychology: As scientific understanding advances, folk-psychological explanations will diminish.

Dennett's Perspective: Distinguishes between personal and sub-personal descriptions of the mind, supporting the existence of mental states but not in a traditional physical sense.
The Intentional Stance: Proposes that understanding behavior can be achieved through ascribing mental states, akin to viewing stock indices as real entities.
Reality of Mind: Mental states, while not tangible, uncover patterns that aid in predicting behavior, similar to abstract concepts in science.