Substance Dualism (Part 1 of 2) [HD]

Examining the view that mind and body are separate substances.

Note at 7:08 A reductio ad absurdum argument (one which attributes a machine with thought purely for the sake of argument, to demonstrate that genuinely absurd / contradictory consequences follow) would be valid. We can see immediately that Plantinga's thought experiment doesn't achieve this: failure to discern how a thinking machine is thinking indicates only lack of comprehension, not a genuine absurdity / contradiction.

But his use of Leibniz' scenario isn't valid. Leibniz doesn't just propose a thinking machine, but one we can enter and inspect. If physical thinking things are impossible - as Plantinga claims - then whatever machine we conjure up in our imagination to enter and inspect, it can't be a genuine physical thinking thing, just as it would be impossible to inspect a machine that prints square circles. (Besides, if there's truly nothing we could be faced with inside the machine that would signal thought, it makes no sense to ask us to inspect it, since no inspection could help us discern thinking machines from non-thinking ones anyway.) It is this sense in which Plantinga cannot use thinking machines to show machines can't think. His argument is incoherent. It is certainly not a valid reductio ad absurdum.

----------------------------------------­--------------

Selected Resources:

Humanoid robot Asimo demonstration:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yND4k4...

Descartes, R - Discourse on the Method (1637)

Eccles, J C - The Human Psyche (1980)
Eccles, J C - Evolution of the brain (1989)
Eccles, J C - How the Self Controls Its Brain (1994)

Leibniz, G W - Monadology (1714)

Lock, A - Action, gesture and symbol (1978)

MacNamara, J "Nurseries, streets and classrooms", Modern Language Journal, 57(5-6) 1973

Pinker, S - How the mind works (1999)

Swinburne, R - Evolution of the soul (1986)
Swinburne, R - Interview with Science and Religion News (2006)

Velmans, M - Understanding Consciousness (2000)

Video reference:

Plantinga - Against Materialism (Talk at CA Poly State Uni, 2004)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLzZv5...

• Category

  Education

[Ellie Bellie]

I am doing philosophy as an A Level and have just taken an exam on philosophy of mind. I found this video extremely useful. It's very informative and engaging at the same time. Really happy I found this, thank you very much! :)

[Sam Butler]

Why are they different? They *seem* different to us, sure, but do you know that they're different? I don't think they're different at all. And that's nothing to feel depressed or ashamed about, from my view.

I don't doubt that we'll be able to create intelligence capable of experiencing fear, eventually. Many might say 'well that's not *real* fear', but what's the difference? How can you discern between 'real' fear and 'artificial' fear?

[Crowbar27AB]

Assuming we stick with classical computation. Unlikely. However, if a significantly advanced computer, such as being made to replicate neurons in the human brain, came to exist; then it'd be fairly likely.

Note, I say this in the realm of probability. I am not a scientist and my word should be taken with a pinch of salt, but it'd be impossible to say for certain one way or the other.

[Yaqub Ali]

is neural networks a field in CS or in neroscience?

I know computers can and will get more smarter into the future but at the basis of it they can't be called intelligent because they follow a series of instructions one after another...human emotions are different.

do you think we will ever make computers feel fear, hate, love using a series of instructions: 1,2,3, and so on?

can the feeling of fear into a series of instructions?

[frank serpico]

part 2:Although it is not easy to comprehend that a computer can compute thought or even consciousness i really dont know why we shouldnt conclude that?There is no reason to think that consciousness is a static entity embodied in the structure of the brain.The emergence of coscniousness from neural activity provides a much more logical and simpler expanation.

Yaqub,our brain IS a data processing machine.You have to research more about neural networks, its a fascinating field of computer science

[frank serpico]

im not familiar enough with Penrose arguments to have an opinion on his work, i need to read his book first.

I cannot claim to know how consciousness arise, but from the observation scientists have done, it is obvious that consciousness arises with neural activity. If you feel acute pain, hunger or fear your brain does not change its structure. In the moment you feel pain, only the pattern of neural activity changes. In short, only the constellation of information in our brain changes.