Elizarraraz1

Elizarraraz,Michael
Mr.GaryOrtega
Philosophy
Sep6,2015
TheMindBodyProblem
Forthepast600yearsphilosophersintheold,andmodernerahaveattemptedtodecipher
thequestionisourmindconnectedtoourphysicalbody?Togomoreindepth,howdoesour
mentalstates,thoughtprocesses,andactionsrelatetothephysicalworld,whenthebodyisa
materialsubstancewhilethemindisimmaterial.Countlesstheoriesonthisphenomenonhave
beenproposedtowhatseemstobeanalmostendlessamountofdebatesregardingifthebody
andmindareseparate,ifthebodyinfluencesthemind,andviseversa.Manyofthesetheorists
havebeenabletopokeholesintothesebeliefsofhowthebodyandsoulinfluenceeachother,
thuscausingevenmoreconfusiontoensueamongstphilosophers.Agreatexampleofthetopic
ofmindandbodyclashingtogetherwouldbetheinsettingofreligion.JudeoChristiansbelieve
thattheirfreethinkingsoulsormentalstatesdetachfromtheirphysicalformandascendupinto
heaven.Itsimpossibletotestifanonmaterialobjectcanreallybeconnectedtoamaterial
objectafter,andbeforedeath.HoweverintheMindBodyproblembyJerryA.Fodor,theauthor
givesevidenceonhowfunctionalismoffersthebestexplanationonhowthemindandbody,
whileunderminingcontrastingcriticalprincipleswhichconfutehiswaysofthinking.
InFodors1981writings,hedescribesfunctionalismasatheoryofthemindthatis
neitherdualistnormaterialist,byrecognizingthatallsortsofsystems,fromhumanstomachines
tospiritshavementalstates.ThisphilosophicalinterpretationreflectscurrentworkinAI,

Elizarraraz2

psychology,linguisticsbyhavingallofthesedisciplinesareconcernedwithinformation
processingatanabstractlevel.Functionalismisthephilosophyofmindthatdefinestypesof
mentalstatesintermsofcausalroles.Tofurtherexplainthisconcepttheremustbeamental
causationthatmustbepredeterminedinorderforaphysicalcausationtotakeplace.Aperfect
exampleofhowpsychologicalandlanguageaffectstheconditionsofthemindandbody,is
illustratedbyaheadacheinFodorsarticle:
Aheadacheforexampleisidentifiedwiththetypeofmentalstatethatamongother
thingscausesadispositionfortakingaspirininpeoplewhobelieveaspirinrelievesa
headache,causesadesiretoridoneselfofthepainoneisfeeling,oftencausessomeone
whospeaksEnglishtosaysuchthingsasIhaveaheadacheandisbroughtonby
overwork,eyestrainandtension.Morewillbeknownaboutthenatureofaheadacheas
psychologicalandphysiologicalresearchdiscoversmoreaboutthiscausalrole(Foder).
Underthosecircumstances,mentalstatesandothertypesofbodilybehaviorsuchasheadaches
andthepredispositiontotakeamedicationtosubsidethepain,istheconnectionbetweenthe
bodyandthemindthatmustbefulfilledwithpredeterminedboundarieswhichhavebeen
programedintoourminds.Ifwesatisfyaprerequisiteforanaction,thenFodorbelievesthe
actionwilloccuronanautomatedbasis.
Fodorwrotethathebelievedfunctionalismwasbyfarthemostsuperiorexplanationof
thebridgebetweenthemindandthebody.Fodorsargumentstatesthatfunctionalismcombines
theadvantagesoflogicalbehaviorismandtheidentitytheory,byallowingforamaterialist
solutiontotheproblemofthemindbodyinteraction,andthatitiscompatiblewiththeideathat
mentalcausationisakindofphysicalcausation.Itispossibleforthefunctionalisttoassertboth

Elizarraraz3

thatmentalpropertiesaretypicallydefinedintermsoftheirrelationandbypsychological
explanation.Thelogicalbehavioristcanendorseonlythefirstassertionandthetypephysicalist
onlythesecond.Functionalismrunsonacauseandeffecttenet,thusbecomingthemain
argumentthatartificialintelligenceispossible.Asaresultfunctionalistseemstocapturethe
bestfeaturesofthematerialistalternativestodualism.Thiscouldbedebatedwhengiventhe
exampleofthecokemachinewouldonlydispensingasoftdrinkifitscreditreached10cents.
Sincefunctionalistorganismsarenotlimitedtomentalstatesandprocess,couldtheybedebated
asmentallyindependentwhenitseemsthattheyarejustrepeatingapatterninsteadofthinking
independently?Thecokemachinewouldneversaymaybeillgiveittoyouinahour,or
simplysaynoontheinputscreen.Itwouldhavetofollowtheframeworkoffunctionalism
whichishavingabehavioraldispositionthatmustbemeetinorderforaphysicalactiontotake
place.ExtendingthisargumenttoApple'svirtualpersonalassistantSiri,itisdeterminedthat
thisprogramisnonfreethinking,andonlyknowledgeablebecauseofthepeoplewhomhave
programedher.Sirimayappeartoberespondingtoherquestionsindependentlybutinall
actualityitsnot.IfyouweretoaskSirihowtallistheempirestatebuildingshewould
respond1,250feet.Wheninfact,sheonlyknewtheinformationbecauseaphysicalhuman
inputtedthatspecificmaterialontotheinternetfortheoperatingsystemtolookup.Eventhe
speechsynthesissoftwarerunningSiri,wouldconnectthephoneticsofHowtallistheempire
statebuildingfrompreexistingcodestorunasearchdependingonthepreexistingphonetics.If
thecoding,orthewebpagewiththebuildingsinformationhadneverbeencreated,Siriwould
haveneverknownhowtocomprehendthequestionandjustremainsilent.Functionalismis
muchlikeSiri,shesimplysimulatestheknowledgethatithasbeenprogramedtothink,anddoes

Elizarraraz4

notthinkindependently.ThisisoneoftheargumentsFodorleavesout,inordertomislead
readersintothinkingfunctionalismistheanswertothemindbodyquestion.
WhileFodorsmaingoalwastoprovethatFunctionalismwasthetrueanswertohowthe
brainandthemindcanbeconnectedifoneisaphysicalobject,andoneisnot.However,after
examiningthearticleitseemsthatFodordoesnotaddressthetopicofParallelism.Andthiswas
notasimplemistake,butastrategicactiontowhitewashtheconflictingviewsofparallelismin
ordertoseemasthoughfunctionalismwastheoneandonlytruth.Parallelismisatheoryrelated
to
dualism
whichsuggeststhatalthoughthereisacorrelationbetweenmentalandphysical
eventsthereisnocausalconnection.Thebodyandminddonotinteractwitheachotherbut
simplyrunalongsideoneanother,in
parallel
,andtherehappenstobeacorrespondencebetween
thetwobutneithercauseeachother.Thatistosaythatthephysicaleventofyourfingerburning
andthementaleventofyoufeelingpainjusthappentooccursimultaneouslyonedoesnot
causetheother.Torestatethisconceptmoreclearlyparallelismintheabsenceofadirect
causeeffectrelationbetweenmindandbody,thusunderminingthecoretenetsoffunctionalism.
OneargumentthatdiscreditsfunctionalismistheChineseRoomParadox,whichJohnSearle
proposedthequestion,canamachine,likeacomputertrulybecalledintelligent?Tochallenge
theconceptofstrongartificialintelligence,heimagineshimselfinaroomwithboxesofChinese
charactersthathedoesnotunderstand,andabookofinstructionswhichhecanunderstand.Ifa
Chinesespeakeroutsidetheroom,startstopasshimmessagesalongthedoor,Searlecanfollow
instructionsfromthebooktoselectanappropriateresponse.Therefore,theChinesespeakeron
theothersidewouldthinkthattheyarecommunicatingwithaChinesenative,butinrealityits
justSearlewhohonestlydoesnotknowawordofChinese.TheChineseroomsuggeststhat

Elizarraraz5

howeverwellyouprogramacomputer(orhaveamanwithinstructionsondecodingChinese)it
onlysimulatesknowledge.Whichreallyintheendistrulynotintelligence.
Fodorsattemptstoprovethatfunctionalismdominatedviewsofdualismbyconcealing
topicsofparallelism,andtheChineseroom,hadadverseeffectsonhisstancebecauseitreveals
thathedidnotanticipateallofthepossiblescenariosforhisargument.ThedebatethatDescartes
started600yearsagoontherelationshipofthemindandbody,stillcontinuestoconfuseeven
thebrightestphilosophersofthiscentury.AsaresultofFodernotincludingparallelisminhis
counterargumentaboutfunctionalism,thereaderwasdeceivedintothinkingfunctionalism
answeredthemindbodyproblemwheninrealityparallelismprovedFodorswordstobe
untrue.Fodorsarticledemonstratesthepossibilityofareaderprovingtheirworktobe
inaccuratebytheauthorsmistakeofnotconductingenoughbackgroundresearch.