Functionalism

Functionalism — A theory in philosophy of mind according to which mental states are defined by their functional role: the set of causal relations they bear to sensory stimuli (inputs), behaviours (outputs), and other mental states. What makes something a pain is not the fact that it is realised by particular neurons, but the fact that it is caused by tissue damage and causes avoidance behaviour, expressions of distress, and a search for relief. It is, therefore, a relational and functional characterisation of the mental, in contrast to intrinsic or substantial characterisations.

Origins: Putnam and the Turing Machine

Philosophical functionalism was formulated with precision by Hilary Putnam (1926–2016) in articles of the 1960s, especially “Minds and Machines” (1960) and “Psychological Predicates” (1967, republished as “The Nature of Mental States”). Putnam observed that the notion of the state of a Turing machine — defined by the transitions it performs, not by the physical structure that implements it — offered a powerful analogy for mental states. The mind is to the brain as software is to hardware: the programme can run on completely different physical substrates without losing its functional identity.

This analogy led to the argument of multiple realisability: the same mental function — for example, pain — can be realised by very different physical states in different creatures. In humans, pain may correspond to C-fibre activation; in octopuses or hypothetical robots, the substrates would be entirely different. But in all cases, what unites them is the functional role. Multiple realisability constitutes a powerful argument against type-type identity theory (which identifies pain specifically with C-fibre activation): that theory is excessively chauvinistic in privileging the human substrate.

Functionalism and Cognitive Science

From the 1970s, functionalism became the background framework for cognitive science and artificial intelligence: if mental processes are functional or computational processes, then studying them independently of substrate is methodologically legitimate. Jerry Fodor’s language of thought hypothesis (The Language of Thought, 1975) develops functionalism in this direction: mental states are representations in a formal internal system (mentalese), and cognitive processes are computations over these representations, defined in purely formal (syntactic) terms.

Ned Block’s Distinction: Access and Phenomenal Consciousness

The most influential objection to functionalism was presented by Ned Block in “Troubles with Functionalism” (1978). Block distinguishes two concepts of consciousness:

• Access consciousness: information that is available to be used in reasoning, decision-making, and verbal behavioural control. This is clearly a functional notion.
• Phenomenal consciousness: the intrinsic and subjective quality of experience — the “redness of red”, the “painfulness of pain”, what Thomas Nagel called “what it is like to be” something.

Block argues that functionalism can account for access consciousness, but not for phenomenal consciousness. His thought experiment of the Chinese Nation (China Brain) illustrates the point: imagine that each inhabitant of China simulates the functional role of a human neuron, communicating with each other in exactly the same causal relations that occur in the brain. The whole system performs the same functions as a human brain — but it intuitively seems to have no conscious experience whatsoever. This suggests that phenomenal experience is not capturable purely in functional terms.

Putnam’s Rejection of Functionalism

Remarkably, Putnam himself abandoned the functionalism he had founded. In Representation and Reality (1988), he argued that functionalism fails on several counts: (1) it does not individuate mental states satisfactorily, since multiple realisability can be extended to absurdity — any sufficiently complex physical system can be described as realising any function; (2) it fails to capture intentionality (the property of mental states to be about something); (3) it leaves the problem of qualia untouched.

Legacy

Despite these objections, functionalism remains the dominant theoretical framework in analytic philosophy of mind and cognitive science. Debates about artificial intelligence, machine consciousness, and the possibility of artificial minds rest, to a large degree, on functionalist premises. The decisive question remains: can there be a system that performs all mental functions without having subjective experience? If so, functionalism is insufficient as a theory of mind; if not, mind is function and can be computationally realised.

← Glossary