Same job, same mind — that is the promise. Kind one: the job done with no FEEL. Kind two: the job done with no MEANING.
Is a mental state defined by the job it does — its causes, its effects and its links to other mental states — rather than by what it is made of?
The unit's positions, lined up. Tap a position to see what it claims and where it is strong or weak. If you can order them, you understand them.
Tap a circle — or use Tab and Enter — to explore each position.
This lesson maps functionalism: the job, any stuff, and two kinds of case where the mind seems missing. Lesson 2 tests the feel; Lesson 3 tests the meaning, then weighs every theory of mind.
The Churchlands said beliefs and wants may not exist. Functionalism says they do — and says what they are: states defined by the job they do.
Going from left to right, more of the mind slips out of the job. On the left, the job is the whole mind. On the right, even the feel of pain escapes it — the part some functionalists give up. In the essay, you decide where on the line the truth sits.
Next lesson tests kind one: swapped colours, the China brain and Mary. Can the job of pain ever capture how pain FEELS?
3 lessons, taught in this order. The first is the map of the whole unit — this page mirrors it — and each lesson after it takes one part deeper. Timetabled for Track A · Spring 1 (W15–17). See the whole year plan ↗
Functional roles; multiple realisability; functionalism between behaviourism and identity theory; the issues previewed.
Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪Inverted qualia; Block's China brain; the knowledge argument against functionalism; the functionalist replies.
Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪Searle's Chinese room and its replies; as-if intentionality; weighing every theory of mind against intentionality and qualia.
Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪Defined by the job, not by the stuff What they deny is that pain is one kind of STUFF, like one kind of brain cell. A can-opener is anything that opens cans, whatever it is made of. In the same way, pain is anything that does pain's JOB: caused by damage, making you want it to stop, making you wince. So a mind could be made of brain cells, silicon chips or something alien. But this lesson meets two kinds of case where the job is done and the mind seems missing. Kind one: no FEEL — nothing hurts (the China brain). Kind two: no MEANING — nothing is understood (the Chinese room).
Every position in this unit is tested on cases. Read each one, decide what you would say, then tap for the question the examiners would ask.
Say it before you write it. Four moves, with the sentence stems the examiners are listening for in your essay — connect, challenge, weigh, reason from cases.
Five rungs, one per question type. Open a rung for the shape a full answer takes and this unit's plan, then write. Everyone climbs Q01–Q04; Q05 is the stretch.
Everything for the unit, in one place. The lesson, the booklet and the podcast belong to this unit; the Metaphysics of Mind booklets runs across the whole series.
LINKS list near the bottom, and paste each SharePoint share link once. Buttons with no link show as "Link not set".Use the resources in this order. The Metaphysics of Mind booklets is where you learn to plan all five question types.
A teacher and a student argue every position through to a judgement. Pause at each position and say what it claims before they do.
Given text on the left, your words on the right. Decide the strength and the weakness YOU would give each position.
Key terms first, then the positions. A term you cannot define in one sentence is a Q01 you cannot yet answer.
Precision questions. Open each rung, plan from the shape, write, then check every part the specification names is there.
In the Companion: Part 4, the Q05 planning frame. Plan today's Q05 — thesis, causal role, advantages over rivals, the issues, judgement.
Functionalism (AQA) — watch for functionalism for AQA — Sally Latham, 18:10
Flip a card to check yourself. Switch between key terms (term → meaning) and positions (position → claim, strength & weakness).
Three things to recall, one to argue. Answer them in your book before you leave the unit.
Argue: If you could use only ONE case against functionalism in an essay, which would you pick — and why is it the strongest?