To be honest, it seems very superficial to me - like most philosophy. It starts with an arbitrary premise ("the brain wants to process symbols"). Since the premise is arbitrary, it doesn't help me at all.
To me the interesting bit is "why does the brain want to process symbols". Which is probably better answered by evolution theory than by philosophy.
Another example of the shallowness of philosophy: "I think, therefore I am". Again, an arbitrary premise. What does it mean to exist? Again, philosophy does not seem to be interested.
To me the interesting bit is "why does the brain want to process symbols". Which is probably better answered by evolution theory than by philosophy.
Another example of the shallowness of philosophy: "I think, therefore I am". Again, an arbitrary premise. What does it mean to exist? Again, philosophy does not seem to be interested.