Theory Of Physicality Vs. Armstrong's Argument For Physicalism

1021 Words 4 Pages
(a) Physicalism is defined as being able to describe everything in our world through physical processes. This means that all facts are the result of physical facts, including brain states. Also, because everything results from physical facts there are only physical facts. Everything is able to be broken down through any means whether through chemistry or biology or any other way to its smallest parts and still be explained by its physical parts.

(b) Armstrong’s argument for physicalism is that science is the best way to explain the mind problem. He believes that we have not yet been able to explain every conscious state through physical brain states, but some day we might. He would say that physicalism is true at a possible world w iff any world that is physically identical to w is identical to w unconditionally. This means that is we mapped out every physical fact possible in world one, the exact same mapping of physical facts would be the same in world two. He believes this because he thinks the world is made only of physical facts, and facts about a world are necessary to all other possible worlds.

(c) Armstrong’s analysis of mental states is that a mental state is identical to the causal processes of a brain state. He believes that you can define a term by its processes. He also believes that we can look at a brain
…show more content…
This means that all technology has a consciousness. If we build pieces of technology that have the ability to think as we do and go through similar experiences, then artificial intelligence is a very likely thing. The level of intelligence or consciousness that they would have would vary. We would have to change our behavior and mind set if we agree with Chalmers on the idea that technology can have artificial intelligence because some machines that we have built or will build in the future can function very similar to

Related Documents