Which is where the wheels come off:
Dawkins does not advance an argument for why “anything that a human brain can do can be replicated in silicon,” apart from the fact that he is “committed to the view that there’s nothing in our brains that violates the laws of physics.” That is, of course, a statement of faith, not a finding…
In short, Dawkins thinks that the Hard Problem of our own consciousness may be “forever beyond us” because we didn’t evolve so as to be able to understand it. But we are not to draw any inferences about consciousness from that remarkable state of affairs.
The odd situation is in fact evidence that consciousness is not wholly governed by physics, as Dawkins claims. But we are not to pursue it. Why not?
Looking back after a couple of years, the question arises: Is all this past its sell-by date?News, “Why Richard Dawkins thinks AI may replace us” at Mind Matters News
Four researchers whose work sheds light on the reality of the mind The brain can be cut in half, but the intellect and will cannot, says Michael Egnor. The intellect and will are metaphysically simple.
Philosopher: Consciousness is not a problem: Dualism is. Physicalist David Papineau says consciousness is just “brain processes that feel like something.”
Why is science growing comfortable with panpsychism (“everything is conscious”)?