ABSTRACT

Block’s critique challenges functionalism’s notion that mental states are defined by functional roles, arguing that it neglects consciousness’ qualitative aspects (qualia). This raises doubts about machines’ capacity for genuine consciousness and understanding, despite mimicking human cognitive functions. This paper examines Ned Block’s argument that machines lack genuine intentionality and consciousness, despite functional equivalence to human cognition. In addressing this, the use of descriptive and analytical research methodology is employed through collecting of data from primary and secondary sources. Through a critical analysis of Block’s arguments, this study accessed the implications for artificial intelligence, cognitive science, and the philosophy of mind. We consider counterarguments from computationalists and functionalists, and explore the boundaries between machine functionality and genuine consciousness.