Using the idea of neural networks to argue against essentialism

Abstract

This paper gives an argument against essentialism by assuming a computationalist and physicalist stance of the mind and then showing by using the analogy of neural networks how concepts cannot have the properties ascribed to essences nor can they be the result of any direct understanding of essences. The essentialist view is then shown to be a redundant and unlikely assumption. An alternative explanation is given for the phenomena essentialism attempts to describe, and some potential implications for the future of philosophy, the interpretation of AI and some contemporary political debates are noted.