Mindfulness or Mindlessness?

[Angrboda]

Why do you think functionalism is true compared to biological naturalism, Angrboda?

I don't know that I do think functionalism is true. I don't understand it well enough to say that. But I think functionalism is very misunderstood by its opponents, particularly Searle. As a person with a mathematics and computer background, I'm more sympathetic to it. Perhaps through familiarity, or perhaps due to a better understanding of its power. I think Searle's biological naturalism is just silly. It's fundamentally anti-reductionist. If a biological structure has a reducible physical structure, then that structure can be simulated. It comes down to Searle's assertion that simulations can't duplicate reality, which undercuts all his arguments, as imagining any scenario is simulating it. If simulation can't duplicate the relevant features of biological consciosness, then imagining a Chinese Room can't foresee all the properties that the Chinese Room would have if it were actual. He wants to have his cake and eat it, too. In the case of his simulation of the Chinese Room, he doesn't need an actual Chinese Room, just a simulation. In the case of the brain, he does need an actual biological brain, as a simulation is unsatisfactory. He can't have it both ways.