The Animatrix: The Second Renaissance focuses on the war between humans and machines. Throughout the two videos we see a constant battle between the humans and the machines they’ve created. After years of war between the two groups, we finally see the machines taking control, overpowering the humans, and using them as their energy source. By observing the behavior of the humans in the videos, we can compare them to the various approaches to the mind/body problem and determine which theory they seem to believe in.
The mind brain identity theory states that there isn’t any difference between the mind and the brain; they are essentially the same thing. This theory also says that all psychological properties have identical physical properties. I think that the humans in this video could be classified as mind brain identity theorists. Because mind brain identity theorists believe that each psychological property has an identical physical property, they would have a hard time accepting that robots and humans are the same psychologically, yet physically made up of completely different elements. This could explain why they were so against the robots becoming equal members of society; because they genuinely didn’t believe that robots could have the same mental process as humans.
Functionalism is a theory on the relationship between the mind and the brain. Functionalists argue that all psychological properties are multiple realizable. This means that not every psychological property has an identical physical property. For example, most functionalists agree that in the future, robots could potentially be functioning members of society. Although humans and robots are different physically, they could have a mental or psychological process tha...
... middle of paper ...
...s that regardless of these physical differences, there’s a possibility that we all feel the same kind of pain. Multiple realizability is the main reason why I agree with the functionalists instead of the identity theory. While watching these two videos, I became even more convinced that functionalism is the most rational theory. It was obvious to me that the machines had become similar to the humans in a psychological sense even though they still looked physically different. In the beginning, I actually felt bad for the machines because they weren’t even given the chance to prove that they were equal to the humans in terms of mental state. As the second video played through I didn’t exactly feel bad for the machines anymore, but I thought they proved their mental ability even further because they were able to study the humans and take advantage of their weaknesses.
In the magic of the mind author Dr. Elizabeth loftus explains how a witness’s perception of an accident or crime is not always correct because people's memories are often imperfect. “Are we aware of our minds distortions of our past experiences? In most cases, the answer is no.” our minds can change the way we remember what we have seen or heard without realizing it uncertain witnesses “often identify the person who best matches recollection
Functionalism is a theory in which various social institutions and processes in society serve a significant function in order for society to continue
This thought suggests that humans are, by nature and without political intervention, peaceable, cooperative, and selfless (2002, p. 6). Pinker explains that this belief underlies much of politics, the hope for cultural improvement, and a peaceable vision of future society (2002, p. 26). However, this belief effects not just proactive policy, but also inspires fear by invoking the slippery-slope argument of innatist theories, arguing that they are grounds for all the social ills we fear (racism, socio-economic prejudice) (Pinker, 2002, p. 28). The Ghost in the Machine provides the last piece in Pinker’s framework: the theory that the body and mind are distinct from one another, the mind acting independently from the body and providing an indivisible meta awareness and guidance to the human being (2002, p. 9). This thought seems to be supported by a creationist viewpoint, as it alludes to a being similar to a puppeteer that forms and initially animates the mind of living beings in their beginning (Pinker, 2002, p. 29). Pinker points out early on that one key inconsistency is individuals’ efforts to improve society (2002, p. 28). Improvements made to society by products of that society seems to be a circular logic and ineffective approach to the perfecting process (Pinker, 2002, p. 28). Indeed, how do we know what would ameliorate society? But according to this way of thinking the ghost, the mind as a separate entity, guides this process (Pinker, 2002, p.
The number “one” is not a thing. Math has no definitive reality. Numbers are a social construct, a system of symbols designed to express the abstractions through which properly developed societies explain aspects of reality. It follows that, as humanity seeks to understand more of what it is to exist, bigger numbers are needed. Soon, we need machines to understand the numbers. Society plants a base on information technology, efficiency, and a mechanical precision that is startling. What is desirable in a product is distilled to a formulaic essence and packaged neatly. Humans, too, are boiled down to science. Glossy shots, red lipstick, concrete biceps, and an ever-decreasing waistline set the standard. People are reduced to little more than the sum of their parts, a pair of matchstick legs, a rippled midsection, the right shoes and right make-up. Information technology makes the dissimilation of these trends mercilessly easy: In response to the Atkins Diet, tens of thousands of Americans strike carbohydrates from their diets. A cell phone that simply calls someone is archaic at best; people need infinite text messaging and a built-in digital camera (with no roaming charges) so that they can e-mail pictures of their new car to their friends in California, New York, or Antarctica. Jessica Simpson mistakes canned tuna for chicken and millions of viewers laugh at her in unison. Still, “one” is not a thing. These societal constructs chip away at the very humanity of the people who live amidst them. In William Gibson’s Neuromancer, a motley cast of characters face this cold steel reality, that their humanity is being systematically stripped, and that even attempts to take advantage...
I believed that a human could not build a machine that is able to be conscious just like a human being. A machine was built for following orders and complete tasks, I would never thought that a machine could be built to be conscious. It never came to me that a machine can be able to show emotion, for something or someone. Or to be be aware of not only its external environment, but could be aware of its internal self as well. Although, after watching the film my perspective has changed to a certain limit. My definition of consciousness is when someone is fully aware of their surroundings and aware of the information that is presented. Once they are aware, they are cognitively able to gather that information and process it and if they are able to process that information successfully they are capable of taking decisions. A human is conscious because they make everyday decisions based on their cognitive process. Now when it comes to a machine, after watching the film it convinced me that it may be possible for a machine to be conscious as well. If a machine was built like Data it will be very intelligent and will be able to understand what is happening in his surrounding and also will be able to make decisions that will determine what the machine will do next. Therefore, I do believe a machine can be conscious, but to a certain limit. A machine can be built exactly like a human brain, to be able to be conscious and will gain more consciousness through experience. I think in order for a machine to be conscious not only it needs self-awareness and intelligence, but it also needs experience to be able to grow feelings. Like in the episode, Data as he began to gain more experience in Star Trek he began to get attached with the people he frequently encountered, began to determine what is right and what is wrong based on how he felt in what he thought was best in taking
Functionalism is basically a theory that describes the mental state of human beings through the combination of both behaviorism theory and the identity theory of the human mind. According to this theory, mental states of people are majorly identified or rather defined by what they frequently do and
Functionalism views society as the stability and assimilation of a range of forces that function within it. While society is a separate entity with a life of its own, there are individual elements contributing to that stability. Functionalism as a sociological theory emphasizes assimilation rather than the dissociation of society. Therefore, the society is seen as a whole that is compromised of parts which give one another their identity and their function. The part, whether that is education, such as a school, or sports, such as a football team, operates in relation to the other parts, and cannot be entirely understood in isolation from the other parts. All the parts are interrelated, and when there is a disturbance in any one of the parts, is when you can see the interdependence. But what is important about this theory is that “there will always be some reorganization and tendency to restore equilibrium” (Wallace and Wolf 17). Functionalist do not believe it’s crucial that the people involved in the society to be aware of this interconnectedness anymore than the brain and heart consciously realize that they work together as an organism.
To commence, functionalists are preoccupied with making mental states distinct, partly on the basis of causal relations to other mental states. Functionalism involves the conviction that psychological or mental terms can be done away to a certain extent. Functionalists treat terms related to mental states as functional characterizations which differ from input and output terms. Therefore, when the theory is broken down, mental states are associated with the states of the Turing-machine, which on its own is defined as a machine table that mentions inputs and outputs that are not explored in the mind (Block, pg. 212). Additionally, functionalism empathizes that characterization of mental states ought to include descriptions of inputs and outputs in both it...
The mind body problem is the controversial idea of the connection between the mind and the body. Physicalism is a solution to the mind body problem, providing the idea that there is nothing above the world and accepts the mind to be a physical essence, nothing above the body. Physicalism provides different approaches in search of the mind and its constituents. By approaching the mind as a physical entity, behaviorist, a type of physicalism, view the mind as a category containing emotions, sensations and feelings. Another approach within physicalism is functionalism, the idea that the mind is a series of input and output of mental states. These and other approaches to physicalism, display the mind as something not out of the physical world and an entity that is not separated from the body. Physicalist believe the mind could be explained by physical sciences in the future. Some physicalist portray the mind through all the sciences while others reduced the
...ught experimental essay, “Where Am I?” Each approach he touches on has viability but also is subject to criticism depending on the lens the audience can interpret the approach under. Functionalism is an approach through physicalism that would glaze over the more mental priorities of identity, since the body functions are what is relevant to this lens. The body view falls under the functionalist and physicalist argument. There is a touch of soul view in interpretation of the mind-body relationship, but it held little evidence for foundation and under scrutiny the soul view does not hold up as strongly as the mind-body pair view does for interpretation of Dennett’s essay. It is not easy to decipher the meaning of identity and mind-body relationships, but using this thought experiment one could iron through some creases to clear up an argument for either position.
Physicalism, or the idea that everything, including the mind, is physical is one of the major groups of theories about how the nature of the mind, alongside dualism and monism. This viewpoint strongly influences many ways in which we interact with our surrounding world, but it is not universally supported. Many objections have been raised to various aspects of the physicalist viewpoint with regards to the mind, due to apparent gaps in its explanatory power. One of these objections is Frank Jackson’s Knowledge Argument. This argument claims to show that even if one has all of the physical information about a situation, they can still lack knowledge about what it’s like to be in that situation. This is a problem for physicalism because physicalism claims that if a person knows everything physical about a situation they should know everything about a situation. There are, however, responses to the Knowledge Argument that patch up physicalism to where the Knowledge Argument no longer holds.
Multiple realizability is the thesis that states that different physical properties can produce the same mental property. The theory was originally constructed by Hilary Putnam to combat the type-identity theorist who asserted that “pain is identical to c-fibers firing.”(Wikipedia) Putnam looked to explain how it might be that humans with their distinct neuroanatomy seem to experience the same pain as a dog or a cat may experience. How is it that a dog can experience t...
Functionalism is the oldest and most commonly used theoretical approach used to understand social issues. Functionalism is a macrosociological perspective that presents the idea that society consists of different components working together to help a society function as one. Sociolog...
There are many criticisms of functionalism and their theories: Ø Functionalist ideas almost portray humans as being autonomous and that only socialisation determines our lives. They do not really see humans as the unpredictable creatures they are, not possible to stray away from the predictable ideas that functionalists have of people. Too much stress is placed on harmony and the potential for conflict and its affects are generally ignored. Ø There is no recognition of difference by class, region or ethnic group. The functionalist picture is simply reflective of happy middle-class American families.
It recognizes that there are “higher level” properties that cannot be explained in physical terms, but they are caused by a physical event. Within dualism and physicalism lie sub-theories that make specific the philosophies behind these fundamental beliefs. Spielberg’s film expresses the ideas of emergent physicalism through David, his journey to becoming a “real” boy, and his remaining eternally hopeful that he will receive the love of the one whom not only created his ability to love, but also the one whom he loves the most. Mechas are a new class of robots designed during the 22nd century in response to detrimental environmental occurrences.... ... middle of paper ...