Baron itself: You can doubt everything. But there is one thing that you can know for sure: you have thoughts now.
This idea contributed to the characterization of philosophical thinking from the 17th -century philosopher Rene Descartes. For Descartes that we have thoughts, it may be the only thing we can be about.
But what exactly are thoughts? This is a secret that has long worried philosophers, such as Descartes – and which have received a fresh life through the creation of artificial intelligence, because experts are trying to find out if the machines can really think.
Two schools of thinking
There are two main answers to the philosophical question, what thoughts are.
First, thoughts can be essential things. Thoughts are such as atoms, molecules, cats, clouds and rain drops: part and plot of the physical universe. This position is known as physicalism or materialism.
The second view is that thoughts can distinguish the physical world. They are not like atoms, but they are a completely clear type
This view is called dualism, because the world requires a double nature: mental and physical.
To better understand the difference between these views, consider a thought experiment.
Suppose God is building the world from scratch. If physism is true, then all God must do to create thoughts, then build basic physical elements of reality – basic particles – and introduce the laws of nature. Thoughts should occur.
However, if dualism is true, the implementation of basic laws and physical elements of reality will not cause thoughts. Some non -physical aspects of reality should be added, because thoughts are more than all physical elements.
Why be a materialist?
If thoughts are physical, what are physical things? One likely answer is that it is a brain states. This answer is at the core of a vast part of up-to-date neuronauk and psychology. Indeed, this apparent relationship between the brain and thoughts makes materialism like.
There are many correlations between our brain states and our thoughts. Some parts of the brain will “light up” predictably when someone feels pain, or if they think about the past or future.
The hippocampus, located near the brain trunk, seems to be related to imagination and innovative, while the Broca area in the left hemisphere seems to be associated with speech and language.
What explains these correlations? One answer is that our thoughts are simply different states of the brain
This answer, if correct, says in favor of materialism.
Why be a dualist?
Having said that, correlations between brain states and thoughts are simply: correlations. We do not explain how the brain states – or any physical states in this matter – cause conscious thought.
There is a well -known correlation between hitting the match and match lighting. But in addition to correlation, we also have an explanation why the match is illuminated after hitting. Friction causes a chemical reaction in the match, which leads to the release of energy.
We do not have a comparable explanation of the relationship between thoughts and brain states. In the end, there seems to be many physical things that have no thoughts. We have no idea why the brain states cause thoughts and the chairs are not.
Colorful scientist
What we are most sure – that we have thoughts – is still completely unexplained in physical terms. This is not because of the lack of effort. Neuronauka, philosophy, cognitive science and psychology worked demanding, trying to break this secret.
But it gets worse: we can never be able to explain how thoughts arise from neural states. To understand why, consider this eminent thought experiment by the Australian philosopher Frank Jackson.
Mary lives all his life in a black and white room. She never experienced color. However, it also has access to a computer that contains a full description of any physical aspect of the universe, including all physical and neurological details of color experience. He learns it all.
One day Mary leaves the room for the first time and experiences color. Does he learn something fresh?
Thinking is very tempting: he learns how it is to experience color. Remember, however, that Mary already knew every physical fact about the universe. So if he learns something fresh, it must be a non -physical fact. What's more, the fact that he is learning comes from experience, which means that there must be some non -physical aspect for experience.
If you think Mary learns something fresh, leaving the room, you must accept dualism to be true in some form. And if this is the case, we cannot give the explanation of thoughts in terms of brain function, or at least philosophers.
Minds and machines
The decision of what thoughts are, will not determine the question of whether the machines may think, but would assist.
If thoughts are physical, then there is basically no reason why the machines could not think.
However, if your thoughts are not physical, it is less clear if the machines could think. Would it be possible to “connect” to non -physical in the right way? It depends on how non -physical thoughts relate to the physical world.
Either way, asking the question what thoughts are, will probably have significant implications for how we are thinking about machine intelligence and our place in nature.
Baron itself, associate professor, Philosophy of Science, University of Melbourne
This article is published from Conversation under the Creative Commons license. Read Original article.
Image Source: Pixabay.com
