Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A criterion that licenses mental state attribution to sys... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It is appropriate to attribute mental states in the explanation of behavior when doing so supports successful predictions of behavior

    A criterion that licenses mental state attribution to systems without intentionality conflates the intentional stance with genuine mental state possession.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The intentional stance is a predictive tool, not an ontological claim about actual mental states or consciousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Systems without intrinsic intentionality (no aboutness independent of interpretation) lack the necessary conditions for genuine mentality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating useful explanatory frameworks with real phenomena undermines meaningful distinctions in philosophy of mind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Mental states may supervene on functional properties that don't require intrinsic intentionality; the distinction may be incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without independent access to consciousness, any criterion distinguishing 'genuine' from 'attributed' mentality is epistemically circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Systems meeting functional/behavioral criteria for mental states may possess real intentionality; attributing it isn't necessarily stance-confusion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedConsciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    Conflating useful explanatory frameworks with real phenomena undermines meaningf...It is appropriate to attribute mental states in the explanation of behavior when...Mental states may supervene on functional properties that don't require intrinsi...Systems meeting functional/behavioral criteria for mental states may possess rea...
    +3 moreShow less
    Systems without intrinsic intentionality (no aboutness independent of interpreta...The intentional stance is a predictive tool, not an ontological claim about actu...Without independent access to consciousness, any criterion distinguishing 'genui...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit