4 ms·

> Anything else feels like mind-body dualism to me. It seems you misunderstand what "mind-body dualism" means then. Mind-body dualism is basically a supernatur

> Anything else feels like mind-body dualism to me. It seems you misunderstand what "mind-body dualism" means then. Mind-body dualism is basically a supernatural belief that the mind exists independent of physical reality. For example, dualists believe that an AI, which is based on physical computing systems, can never possess a mind. Believing that intelligence can arise from a physical process (e.g. a computer chip) is the opposite of that. It's unclear to me whether you actually subscribe to the dualist view but someone who believes that intelligence can arise from a computer chip does not.

goatlover 4y ago
Not necessarily, because functionalism where the substrate doesn’t matter can be viewed as a form of dualism. Particularly if we’re talking about animal intelligence and mind uploads. You can see the more extreme forms of this sort of dualism in sci-fi when minds are swapped between bodies, or someone’s mind is transferred to a computer or robot. Also, dualism doesn’t require supernaturalism. It just requires there be more than one kind of fundamental stuff. There’s no logical principle saying nature has to be only one kind of substance or process. Many modern philosophers who are dualists are also naturalists. Chalmers for example, is a property dualist regarding conscious states (qualia). Also, one can be a neutral monist, believing that mind and matter emerge for a neutral substance that is neither. Maybe a Kantian would defend something like that? Anyway, philosophy has many options regarding dualism, mind and matter which aren't supernatural. You can even be an idealist and a naturalist. You just think the physical world is material ideas in minds.
- olalonde 4y ago
  It seems you are using "dualism" to mean something else than what it means in the "mind-body dualism" context. The "dualism" in mind-body dualism is supernatural by definition. It's a claim that there exists something beyond nature ("supernatural") that exists and explains the mind. It's essentially a religious belief with no scientific basis. Dualists do not generally believe that AI is possible because they claim it would be missing this "supernatural" property which human minds possess.
  - goatlover 4y ago
    That's religious dualism, but you're not taking into account the full range of philosophical debate. There certainly are dualists who do not invoke the supernatural, particularly with regards to consciousness. But in this case, the claim is that functionalism can serve as dualism, when it treats the body as irrelevant to the functioning of the mind. I gave you examples from science fiction. Even the idea of mind-uploading could be considered functional dualism, as it assumes there is something mental which can be copied from the neural/biological, implying the mind is separate.
  - jerednel 4y ago
    Science consists of predictions based on measurements of our perception as mediated by our senses or tools that augment them. Dualism (or idealism for that matter) doesn't require religious beliefs. You can arrive at them analytically. Science is great for explaining the conventional reality of things as they appear though. But until I read a convincing explanation for consciousness and subjective experience that doesn't reduce to "neural correlates" I can't get on board with physicalism. The fact that we're not all unconscious automatons that just evolved from one long cause-effect chain stemming from the big bang to now continues to bewilder me. "Mind" may play an "of the gaps" game here but it's the only reasonable explanation that currently makes some semblance of sense to me. So currently I agree with the religious on your last point. Machines or AI cannot be conscious. Maybe if they were infused with some sort of biological material though I would say maybe. If our subjective experience is a localization of a thing called "consciousness" and certain forms (humans, animals) localize it to produce a sense of self then why not.

goatlover 4y ago

Not necessarily, because functionalism where the substrate doesn’t matter can be viewed as a form of dualism. Particularly if we’re talking about animal intelligence and mind uploads. You can see the more extreme forms of this sort of dualism in sci-fi when minds are swapped between bodies, or someone’s mind is transferred to a computer or robot. Also, dualism doesn’t require supernaturalism. It just requires there be more than one kind of fundamental stuff. There’s no logical principle saying nature has to be only one kind of substance or process. Many modern philosophers who are dualists are also naturalists. Chalmers for example, is a property dualist regarding conscious states (qualia). Also, one can be a neutral monist, believing that mind and matter emerge for a neutral substance that is neither. Maybe a Kantian would defend something like that? Anyway, philosophy has many options regarding dualism, mind and matter which aren't supernatural. You can even be an idealist and a naturalist. You just think the physical world is material ideas in minds.

olalonde 4y ago
It seems you are using "dualism" to mean something else than what it means in the "mind-body dualism" context. The "dualism" in mind-body dualism is supernatural by definition. It's a claim that there exists something beyond nature ("supernatural") that exists and explains the mind. It's essentially a religious belief with no scientific basis. Dualists do not generally believe that AI is possible because they claim it would be missing this "supernatural" property which human minds possess.
- goatlover 4y ago
  That's religious dualism, but you're not taking into account the full range of philosophical debate. There certainly are dualists who do not invoke the supernatural, particularly with regards to consciousness. But in this case, the claim is that functionalism can serve as dualism, when it treats the body as irrelevant to the functioning of the mind. I gave you examples from science fiction. Even the idea of mind-uploading could be considered functional dualism, as it assumes there is something mental which can be copied from the neural/biological, implying the mind is separate.
- jerednel 4y ago
  Science consists of predictions based on measurements of our perception as mediated by our senses or tools that augment them. Dualism (or idealism for that matter) doesn't require religious beliefs. You can arrive at them analytically. Science is great for explaining the conventional reality of things as they appear though. But until I read a convincing explanation for consciousness and subjective experience that doesn't reduce to "neural correlates" I can't get on board with physicalism. The fact that we're not all unconscious automatons that just evolved from one long cause-effect chain stemming from the big bang to now continues to bewilder me. "Mind" may play an "of the gaps" game here but it's the only reasonable explanation that currently makes some semblance of sense to me. So currently I agree with the religious on your last point. Machines or AI cannot be conscious. Maybe if they were infused with some sort of biological material though I would say maybe. If our subjective experience is a localization of a thing called "consciousness" and certain forms (humans, animals) localize it to produce a sense of self then why not.