Good Functionalism

Good Functionalism

According to Searle, (1990), the working of the human brain is a determinant of different factors that work together to build it. These factors include the conscious and the mind. The author of ‘Is the Brain’s Mind a Computer Program?’ argues that the practical characteristic of a human being’s mind indicates the capability of the brain to detect and respond to mental phenomena like perceptions, beliefs and desires in light of their functions and how they relate with each other as well as the external world. In this regard, the brain is portrayed as a machine that can effectively use the mind to perform various internal and external functions. In other words, it is well acquitted with the different courses of action and can apply them during the performance of particular functions. The relative functions are usually computational in nature because they are based on a critical evaluation of a wide range of related factors in order to ultimately develop an informed decision (Searle, 1990). This is made possible by the mind that stores important mental contents that are employed in performing different functions. This paper is aimed at discussing the contradicting arguments by the author regarding the mind functionality and the Chinese room argument.

The author’s argument wishes to elaborate the reasons behind the different outcomes in the thinking of people with age, yet the mind set up is similar in all humans. In his Chinese room argument, Searle however indicates that the computer cannot be likened or equated to the brain, regardless of the fact that it is also a machine that performs computational functions (Searle, 1990). The basis of this argument is the perception that just as a human in a Chinese room can be able to employ English instructions to effectively manipulate Chinese symbols, the computer can also be able to use a program to manipulate the symbols accordingly. This means that a human can interpret the meanings of symbols with the use of the brain where they do not actually understand the language and the symbol meanings. Likewise, the machine uses the syntax, which is the sentence structure and a suitable program to manipulate the Chinese symbols.

At this point, Searle argues that the main difference between the machine and the brain is the ability of the brain to think and that exposure to a particular environment will influence the thinking. The argument is however not convincing since the author is unclear of the actual similarity. This is because he maintains that the two, brain and computer functionality cannot be likened. This is not the case in the argument. Most of the text pertaining to the statement contradicts the argument as the evidence is in support of the opposite. A reader is more convinced of the similarity in their functioning than the disparity.

It is worth appreciating that brains use minds and machines use programs. These are two different aspects with varied capabilities, attributes as well as inherent processes. For instance, a mind has consciousness while a program is an abstract feature that lacks this. Though the author brings this argument forth, he likens them more by implying the functionality due to exposure. Just like computers perform what is fed into them, human beings think in relation to the environment (Searle, 1990). Further, it is worth noting that in the functionality discussion, the concept is fairly different from the argument in the Chinese room. Here, the author also insists on the similarity of the two due to the ability to detect foreign material, in the respective cases, perceptions and new installations. Despite the argument by the author which does not clearly support the difference, research has proved that the manner in which the brain triggers the mind to think is completely differently from the way the machine makes the program to work. From this point of view, it can be ascertained that the brain is more powerful than the machine. This is because it can be able to perform more complicated tasks due to the ability to think that is absent in computers. However, Searle succeeds in ascertaining the fact that while the brain is able to perform functions of a machine like a machine, a machine can neither perform the functions of the brain nor function as the brain.

Work Cited:

Searle, Rogers, J. “Is the Brain’s Mind a Computer Program?” Scientific American. 31 Jan, 1990. Web. 2 August, 2010.