Computational Theory Of Mind Analysis

The Computational theory of mind is the assumption that the mind is what the brain does. It is the idea of how we process information and this fundamental activity of the mind is what makes us intelligent. This theory claims that the way the brain processes information and the way it thinks is computation. The theory assumes that the mind is a system of organs of computation, designed by natural selection to love the kinds of problems our ancestors faced in their foraging way of life, if particular, understanding and outmaneuvering objects, animals, plants, and other people (pg. 21). The mind takes information and turns it into relevant information. The brain organizes this information into different modules, each with a different functions …show more content…
Reverse engineering is important because it is used to figure out how something works after it has already been build. The concept of reverse engineering is using reasoning to figure out how something was made along with trying to figure out what module in our mind can be used to fix a problem. Pinker explains the process of reverse engineering by being able to trace the process of natural selection and being able to determine what nature intended the mind to do as it evolved through time. Pinker also claims that common sense is a human trait that only human can acquire. An individual that is intelligent has to be able to figure out what is relevant to him or her regardless of what is believed to be known. As humans, we have the natural ability to learn and according to Pinker, the mind, is what allowed our ancestors to survive by giving them the ability to outsmart other species by using the different modules we have to process information and being successful in obtaining goals such as surviving over time. Pinker also believed that being intelligent also meant that we reach goals regardless of obstacles by using rational rules. Intelligence, then, is the ability to attain goals in the face of obstacles by means of decisions based on rational (truth-obeying) rules (pg. 62). Part of being human is having desires and perusing them using what we …show more content…
Searle claimed that understanding¬-and, by extension, any aspect of intelligence-is not the same as symbols manipulation or computation (pg. 93). He argued this by conducting an experiment known as the Chinese room. The experiment involved putting a man that did not know Chinese and giving him a piece of paper with Chinese symbols that he believed to be simply scribbles. He was instructed to place a certain symbol every time he saw the corresponding symbol. The result of this was that the non speaking individual scribbling symbols was actually writing in Chinese. Searle’s argument was if the man inside the room really understanding what he was writing. He argued that the computational theory simply decodes a symbol which is not considered to be learning. A second critic of the computational theory of mind is Roger Penrose. Penrose believed in mathematicians because we can see statements to be true. He argued that the aspect of consciousness cannot be explained by computation. Pinker responded to Searle’s critic by stating that the explanation of what makes understanding work is the same (pg. 95). Pinker argued that what makes understanding work is the same (pg. 95). Pinker’s response to Penrose critic by stating that Penrose’s argument has no insight in how the mind really works and makes fun of Penrose because he had to reject any argument because computational theory is a great explanation of how the