The Philosophical Divide: Dualism vs. Materialism

Philosophers have long grappled with fundamental questions about consciousness: “What is consciousness?” “How do we quantify subjective experiences?” and “How does consciousness emerge from physical matter?”

These inquiries are complex and have generated various viewpoints regarding the “hard problem” of consciousness. I will briefly summarize two key perspectives, focusing more on the one I find most relevant, albeit still flawed.

The first is dualism, which posits that mental events (the incorporeal mind) exist independently of the brain, often linked to the notion of a soul inhabiting the body. While I won't delve deeply into why I consider dualism incorrect, it's evident that it conflicts with scientific principles. For instance, the idea of panpsychism—where everything possesses some form of consciousness—seems implausible.

Moreover, proponents of dualism must address the challenges it faces in aligning with a naturalistic worldview, such as explaining why an immaterial soul needs a physical body and how consciousness translates into tangible experiences. To date, I have not encountered a convincing argument that resolves these issues.

The alternative perspective is materialism, which rejects the division between “mind” and “body,” asserting instead that mental states (like pain and fear) correspond directly to brain states (the firing of neurons). This leads to the Psychophysical Identity Theory, which suggests that mental states are fundamentally identical to brain states. While this relationship raises its own set of questions, it is clear that our neurophysiology influences mental states. However, claiming that mental states are merely brain states oversimplifies the matter.

Comparing Mental States and Brain States

To better understand the relationship between mental states and brain states, consider temperature sensations. Experiencing “cold” is a sensation that arises from the physical phenomenon of particle movement slowing down, which alters temperature. Identity theorists argue that mental states do not require intermediaries; they are directly linked to brain activity.

To illustrate why I find this argument problematic, let's examine water. Scientifically, water is a compound of hydrogen and oxygen (H2O). If we erroneously assume that H2O could exist as something other than water, it would create a contradiction. Thus, the relationship between H2O and water is an a posteriori necessity, not a contingent one.

Returning to our earlier example, it could be conceivable that the slowing of particles might not be felt as “cold.” For instance, if I only experienced cold during illness, this raises questions about the direct link between amygdala activity and the feeling of fear. Leading neuroscientist Joseph E. LeDoux emphasizes that while the amygdala processes threats, its activation does not necessarily equate to experiencing fear.

The Complexity of Mental Causation

Another intriguing aspect is mental causation, which refers to our ability to act based on reasoning. If we adhere to Identity Theory, it undermines our understanding of agency. Mental causation allows us to act on reasons stemming from cognitive and motivational states.

Recent research in mice has shown that activating specific neurons can alter behavior, suggesting that perceived threats or prey are influenced by brain activity. However, this doesn’t negate mental causation; it merely highlights the distinction between instinctual reactions and reasoned actions based on desires and beliefs.

Regardless of one’s position on mental causation, it underscores the unique nature of conscious experience, revealing significant hurdles for AI development.

The Future of AI and Consciousness

At this juncture, you might wonder how this relates to Artificial Intelligence. Some approaches in AI aim to replicate neural networks in machines, assuming that this could lead to a form of consciousness. However, achieving this is far from straightforward.

While there is a material basis for consciousness, I argue that it is also uniquely biological. This is a multifaceted and intricate subject, leaving the question open-ended. We must gather comprehensive insights before making bold claims about computers attaining “superintelligence.”

Exploring Big Questions in Philosophy

Philosophy can be intricate, but we strive to simplify complex topics. Our platform compiles insightful articles, news, reading lists, and free resources to aid your exploration of these profound questions. Join us on Medium and subscribe to our mailing list for continued insights.

This video discusses the ethical implications of artificial intelligence as portrayed in HBO's Westworld, exploring the boundaries of consciousness.

This video delves into the philosophical questions raised by HBO's Westworld regarding the nature of artificial intelligence and its ethical considerations.