Some people argue this by:

Let's think of a really stupid person that you know. He does thing according to what was told to him. And he only knows to the extent of what is being taught to him, and will not go beyond that.

Can we say that the person can't think? Or should we say he can, because he is a human and have a working brain?


Or let's say you have a friend, and he talks and behaves normally just like everyone else you know. You have discuss matters with him, and you consider him to be an intelligent person. One day, this friend of yours got hit by a car and his head cracked open. You found in his head not water and blood and brain, but tangling wires and other electrical devices.

Would you now say the person (computer) cannot think? Or is it that we have never seen a computer that can think, but in fact computers have the potential to think, even though it still follows the same concept of how all digital computers work (does not go beyond what's programmed)?

What if computers are fully capable of self-learning? (the only problem is the computers have limited storage, but if assuming that they have unlimited storage, and have a always expanding database?)

I always hated the Mind-Body question...