Is the brain a computer?

Outright dismissal of a hypothesis is just as strong a stance as the strong stance itself.
Its not outright dismissal, so your point is moot.

"I am not convinced, because you have been unable to define the terms you use, let alone form a cogent argument with them."

That's skepticism. A healthy trait that keeps the Snake Oil Salesmen at-bay.
A useless enterprise, because you always avoid positing your (correct?) "understanding" of the science.
Try asking me. I'm happy to answer questions, if you're not sure about something, or if you want to know something. I'm not an expert in all of science, of course, but I know quite a lot of things. Also, I will let you know when I don't know the answer to something, which is much better than pretending.
oh, man, I consider that a slanderous statement. (shivers)
How dare I question the Great and Powerful Tegmark? Is that what you're saying?

I merely asked you what he is being paid for. I take it that you don't know; hence the blustering and bluffing and the faux outrage.
No, It can do research much faster than any of us.
Chalk up another thing you don't understand very well. ChatGPT, Copilot and other large-language model AI bots don't do "research". They merely calculate what word they ought to print next in any piece of generated text.

You shouldn't rely on them too much because they often get things wrong. They shouldn't be a replacement for your brain.
The brain is not a computer, there I said it.

Workers in the war doing calculations were called "computers" they computed but that was before we had computers.
The brain is not a computer, there I said it.
Workers in the war doing calculations were called "computers" they computed but that was before we had computers.
Then why do we have definitions like: Computational theory of mind
In philosophy of mind, the computational theory of mind (CTM), also known as computationalism, is a family of views that hold that the human mind is an information processing system and that cognition and consciousness together are a form of computation.
The computational theory of mind holds that the mind is a computational system that is realized (i.e. physically implemented) by neural activity in the brain. The theory can be elaborated in many ways and varies largely based on how the term computation is understood. Computation is commonly understood in terms of Turing machines which manipulate symbols according to a rule, in combination with the internal state of the machine. The critical aspect of such a computational model is that we can abstract away from particular physical details of the machine that is implementing the computation.[3]
For example, the appropriate computation could be implemented either by silicon chips or biological neural networks, so long as there is a series of outputs based on manipulations of inputs and internal states, performed according to a rule. CTM therefore holds that the mind is not simply analogous to a computer program, but that it is literally a computational system.[3]

And IMO, if we extend that argument, we end up with this.


Schematic depiction of a function described metaphorically as a "machine" or "black box" that for each input yields a corresponding output


  • upload_2024-5-8_10-47-6.png
    1 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
Do you think that because there is a theory that the theory is therefore true?
No, but at the same time, can anyone say it is not true?
I can see the brain (or the entire physical system) as a biological black box. I see nothing speculative about that. It has been defined in context.

The only mistique about thought is its abstract experiential nature (the hard problem), not its function.
Do you now agree with DaveC that Copilot is not a search engine?
No, that is parsing and you know it.
It is much more, but can certainly be used as a search engine. It says so itself.
Do you think that an AI doesn't know if it can be used as a search engine?

Let me repeat what it said: Copilot: "So, while Copilot is not a search engine in the traditional sense, it offers a unique and interactive way to search the web, combining the functionality of a traditional web search with AI tools..".
What about that sentence disqualifies it as as a search engine?
It is like taking a Ferrari to go to the church. It wasn't designed for that, but its certainly capable to "get you to the church on time"
Personally, I doubt that it is solely your ability to communicate that is the root of the problem here. This is a judgment based on conversations I have had with you over a period of years, now
Of course it could be that you are so entrenched that you just refuse to even try.
Just like you did above with the concept that an AI can be used as a very sophisticated search engine. You and Dave are wrong.
Anything is possible, but in my judgment it is highly unlikely.
Well, we've come a long way from your initial ad hominems that I personally am totally incapable of understanding anything.
That's known as "overcoming resistance".
I'll be generous and leave it at that.
Last edited:
“Mind-as-software is an unspoken background assumption that needs no justification. It is as obvious as the existence of the devil used to be. For what is the alternative to mind-as-software? A soul? Come on! In reality, though, mind-as-software and its twin, brain-as-computer, are convenient but poor tropes when it comes to subjective experience, an expression of functional ideology run amok. They are more rhetoric than science. Once we understand the mythos for what it is, we wake as from a dream and wonder how we ever came to believe in it. The mythos that life is nothing but an algorithm limits our spiritual horizon and devalues our perspective on life, experience, and the place of sentience in time's wide circuit.”
― Christof Koch, The Feeling of Life Itself: Why Consciousness Is Widespread but Can't Be Computed