In approximately 1,500 words, address one of the following topics. The topics are broad, so you will want to narrow down the focus of your paper, depending on what you have to say. Your goal should be developing your own original contribution, in a way that is informed by the views and arguments from the readings and class discussion. While you should take the readings as a starting point for your own thinking, the aim isn’t just to summarize what others have already said. Instead, it is to develop the strongest case for your own view, and to address what you think are the strongest points on the other side. For example, you might defend a view responding to an objection made in one of the readings. Or you might propose a new view by drawing a distinction that was overlooked in the readings, and explaining why it is important. Or object to a view from the reading by considering a counterexample that the author did not consider.
Essay Quesstion: What is functionalism, and what supervenience thesis are functionalists like David Armstrong committed to? How is functionalism different from the kind of materialist view proposed by J. J. C Smart? Martine Nida-Rümelin and John Searle present what they take to be counterexamples to functionalism. Explain how they are supposed to show that functionalism is false. What should a functionalist say in response to these alleged counterexamples? Are these replies successful?
