functionalism

Given a choice between the fun of 8-bit programming and the stodgy functionalism of a mere OS?

It likely requires rejection of functionalism, or the acceptance that quantum states are required for certain functions.

It's maybe some or other kind of functionalism[1], or something else, or whatever; but not dualism.

He's stuck in a paradigm of modernist functionalism that works well for physical objects but doesn't translate well to the screen.

It is an act in which the symbolism and the functionalism are inseparable.

Shit, give them a persistent self-narrative tracking loop, and Functionalism and Identity of Indiscernables already tells you you should be treating them as proto-sophonts.

Well you might say Wundt was the father of structuralism and James the father of functionalism - a deep divide which is still felt today.

It is an approach to functionalism which is not task based but instead based upon consideration of universal social and emotional needs of each individual.

Someone hasn't discovered Functionalism or the identity of indiscernables.

Just computational functionalism disguised under more complex analysis/definition.

I don't think Lewis was confused about how he used words when he developed functionalism, or modal realism in On the Plurality of Worlds.

His position is called non-reductive functionalism.

To quote Jeff Halwkings "This kind of ends-justify-the-means interpretation of functionalism leads AI researchers astray.

Searle's attacks may stand against a naive form of functionalism but no one cares that "Watson doesn't know it won".

I feel like you’re operating under the assumption that functionalism is the “correct” philosophical framework without considering alternative views.

LLMs don't have "psychology." Functionalism, and Identity of Indiscernables says "Hi".

Functionalism, emergentism, materialism, and all other leading serious philosophies of mind that implicate the brain were first formalized and studied by philosophers, not neuroscientists.