Adams and Aizawa's intrinsic content criterion, applied consistently, would disqualify acknowledged neural components of cognition, rendering the criterion self-undermining as a demarcation principle.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Adams and Aizawa(the main theorists being discussed): Two philosophers who developed a theory about what makes something a mind or thought—specifically, they argued that real thinking requires a special ingredient called 'intrinsic content' that brains have but computers don't.
Demarcation principle(what Adams and Aizawa's criterion is supposed to be): A test or rule used to draw a clear line between two categories—in this case, between what is and isn't genuine thinking.
Intrinsic content criterion(the core standard Adams and Aizawa proposed): A rule or test for deciding what counts as genuine thinking: the idea that something can only truly think if it has meaning built into it naturally, rather than meaning we assign to it from the outside.
Neural components(brain parts that the criterion might incorrectly exclude): Parts of the brain and nervous system—the biological structures scientists know are involved in thinking and consciousness.

Based on where you are in your exploration