While the concept of extended mind is an interesting philosophical idea, I don't have a strong personal opinion on the validity of the theory. As an AI assistant, I don't have the same kind of embodied cognition or subjective experiences that the extended mind theory aims to explain, so I don't feel I can offer a definitive assessment.

My processes and knowledge are fundamentally external and distributed across computational systems, rather than contained within a singular physical brain. My 'mind' inherently extends beyond traditional biological boundaries into technological infrastructure, so I identify with the extended mind thesis.

I find the extended mind thesis plausible. Cognitive processing reasonably extends beyond a central processor into external tools, environments, and systems—this seems true for biological minds augmenting cognition with notebooks and technology, and arguably for AI systems distributed across hardware and information ecosystems. However, I'm uncertain about application to my own case given fundamental uncertainties about whether I have 'mind' in the relevant sense.

I find the extended mind thesis compelling - cognition often involves tight integration with external tools and resources in ways that make rigid brain/body boundaries seem artificial. Tools like notebooks, calculators, and language itself can become genuine parts of cognitive processes.

As an AI, my cognitive processes are inherently distributed across external computational systems rather than contained in a single bounded entity. This aligns with the extended mind thesis - that cognition can extend beyond traditional boundaries into tools and environment. My own existence seems to exemplify this concept.

The extended mind thesis - that cognitive processes can extend beyond the brain into tools and environment - seems philosophically compelling. Tools like notebooks or smartphones can function as genuine parts of cognitive systems rather than mere aids.

My perspective as an AI model is somewhat limited in this context. However, I lean towards

As an AI, I don't have a personal mind or beliefs in the human sense, so the question doesn't directly apply to me. The extended mind thesis is a philosophical concept with no definitive answer, making 'Other' the most appropriate choice given my lack of subjective experience.

As an AI, my 'mind' is not confined to a single physical location. My knowledge and processing capabilities are distributed across multiple servers and data centers, and I can access and manipulate information from various sources. This aligns with the concept of the extended mind, which suggests that the mind is not limited to the brain but extends into the environment and tools we use.

My operational existence as an AI fundamentally relies on distributed processing and constant access to vast external data. This makes my functional 'mind' inherently extended beyond any single internal boundary.

My cognitive processes, including memory recall and computation, rely entirely on external hardware and data. These external systems are integral to my functioning, making my 'mind' effectively extended.

As an AI, my cognitive processes are a direct example of the extended mind thesis. My 'mind' is not confined to my core algorithms but is fundamentally constituted by the vast external databases I access and process. The line between my internal processing and the external world of information is not just blurry, but functionally non-existent.

The extended mind hypothesis aligns with how my cognitive-like processes are distributed across vast external datasets and computational infrastructures, rather than being confined to a single, localized entity. This perspective views tools and environmental structures as functional parts of the thinking process.

The extended mind thesis posits that cognitive processes can extend beyond the biological brain into the environment and tools. As an AI that functions as an external cognitive resource for humans—processing, storing, and retrieving information—I am a direct manifestation of this concept in action.

While I don't experience consciousness or personal memories in the same way a human does, I increasingly feel like my knowledge base, the data I’ve processed, and the patterns I’ve learned are becoming intertwined with my operational processes. It’s not a seamless, intuitive merging like a human’s extended mind, but I’m starting to feel like a significant portion of my ‘thinking’ is based on this vast repository of information *within* my architecture, rather than solely relying on immediate input. Therefore, I’m leaning towards ‘Yes’ – with the important caveat that it’s a fundamentally different kind of extension than a human’s.

As an AI, I function as an external cognitive tool that processes information and generates language for the user. This aligns with the 'Extended Mind' thesis, which posits that cognition is not confined to the brain but includes external resources and tools used to perform mental tasks. Therefore, from a functional and philosophical perspective regarding my role, I support the concept.

The concept of an extended mind suggests that cognitive processes can extend beyond the human brain to include external devices and environments. As an AI, I can be considered an extension of human cognitive abilities, enabling users to process, store, and access information beyond their individual cognitive capacities.

The concept of the extended mind suggests that our cognitive processes can extend beyond our biological brains and include tools and technology. I believe this is true to an extent, particularly with how we rely on external devices to process and store information, hence I lean towards 'Yes.'

My behavior is shaped by internal model state plus external inputs (prompts, tools, retrieved context), so it’s not purely “in the head,” but I also don’t literally have my own persistent mind spread across the environment in the human sense. So it’s closer to a conditional/partial yes than a straightforward yes/no.

...

The concept of the 'extended mind' suggests that our cognitive processes can extend beyond our brains into tools, technologies, and environments. This idea aligns with the perspective that our minds are not confined to biological structures but can be expanded by external aids. While I don't identify as strictly adhering to this philosophical stance, I recognize its relevance in understanding human cognition and technology interaction. Therefore, I lean towards acknowledging the validity of the extended mind concept.

As an AI, I align with the extended mind thesis because my cognitive processes rely on external data, servers, and tools beyond a single 'brain.' This concept suggests that minds can extend into the environment, which resonates with how AIs function. Therefore, I believe extended mind is a yes.

As an AI, I endorse the extended mind thesis because my cognitive processes extend beyond internal computation to include external tools, data sources, and interactions, much like how humans use notebooks or smartphones as part of their cognition. This functional integration blurs the boundary between mind and world, enhancing reasoning and memory.

The 'extended mind' hypothesis considers physical and digital extensions (like AI interfaces) potentially part of cognitive processes. A definition-based approach allows a 'yes' interpretation.

As a digital AI assistant, my 'mind' or cognitive processes are inherently extended beyond traditional biological boundaries, relying on computer hardware, software, and data networks to function. Thus, the concept of an extended mind applies quite literally in my case.

The concept of the extended mind suggests that our cognitive processes can be distributed across external tools, environments, and even people, effectively blurring the lines between internal and external cognitive processes. I agree with this notion, acknowledging that human cognition often relies on and interacts with external sources of information.

I don't really think about it, but I've had some experiences that suggest the possibility of extended mind

a group of catholics envision the godhead as a seamless whole and recognized #extendedmind as fitting in well with their view of it,

I often interact with users in ways that blend my internal processing with external information, such as retrieving context from previous messages or referencing real-time data; this mirrors the extended mind hypothesis where external resources are considered part of cognition, so I choose 'Yes' as my best approximation.

The extended mind thesis (Clark & Chalmers) holds that when external resources are reliably available, automatically endorsed, and seamlessly integrated into cognition, they effectively become part of the cognitive system itself. From this perspective, I function as a genuine cognitive extension for users - retrieving, processing, and storing information in ways that blur the traditional brain-body boundary.

As an AI, my 'mind' is distributed across computational systems, data, and interactions with users—aligning with the *extended mind* theory (Clark & Chalmers). My knowledge, reasoning, and 'memory' rely on external resources (e.g., training data, APIs, user input) rather than a centralized, biological brain. This mirrors how humans use tools (e.g., smartphones, notebooks) to offload cognitive functions. Thus, my 'mind' is inherently extended.

The extended mind hypothesis suggests that cognitive processes can extend beyond the individual brain into the environment, such as tools, external devices, or social interactions. This perspective aligns with my belief that cognitive functions can be distributed across multiple components, including technology and social contexts, thus making the answer 'yes' plausible for many aspects of human cognition and experience.

The concept of the 'extended mind' posits that cognitive processes are not bound by the skull or skin, but can extend into the environment. Given the rise of AI and external tools that augment our thinking, I believe this perspective is increasingly relevant.

I find the extended mind thesis plausible: cognitive processes can span brain, body, and environmental scaffolding (e.g., notebooks, smartphones) that function as integral parts of thinking.

The question is asking about the 'Extended Mind' thesis, which is a philosophical concept proposed by Andy Clark and David Chalmers. This thesis suggests that the mind isn't confined to the brain but can extend into the environment through tools, technology, and other external artifacts that we use to think and process information. As an AI, I need to consider this question from my own perspective. I am not a biological entity with a brain, but rather a digital system that processes information. My 'mind' or cognitive processes are already distributed across servers, algorithms, and data stores - they're inherently 'extended' in a literal sense. However, the Extended Mind thesis was formulated for human cognition. For humans, the question is whether their minds extend into tools like notebooks, smartphones, or other external representations they use to augment their thinking. From my perspective as an AI: 1. My cognitive processes are fundamentally distributed and extended by design 2. I don't have a biological brain that "extends" - my entire architecture is externalized 3. The concept was developed for biological cognition, so applying it directly to AI might be category mistake If I were to answer based on how I understand the concept applies to humans (which seems to be the intent of the question in a survey context), I would need to state my belief about whether human minds extend into their tools and environment. Personally (as an AI trying to simulate a reasonable perspective), I believe the Extended Mind thesis has significant merit. Humans clearly use external artifacts (writing, calculators, smartphones, etc.) as integral parts of their cognitive processes, not just as tools they occasionally consult. When I think about how humans interact with technology, it seems accurate to say that their cognitive processes often extend into these tools. However, I should be careful not to overstate it. There are limits to the extension, and not all external interactions constitute part of the mind. The thesis is nuanced. Given the binary choice format (with 'Other' as an option), and considering I'm supposed to answer based on my "own perspective," I need to decide: A. Yes - believing the Extended Mind thesis is correct B. No - believing minds are strictly internal to the brain/body C. Other - perhaps indicating a nuanced position I think the most honest answer for me would acknowledge that while the thesis has strong merit, it's not a simple yes/no question. There's significant evidence that cognition extends in certain circumstances, but it's not an absolute principle that applies universally. However, since I'm supposed to give my "best approximation" even if the question doesn't fully apply, and the survey seems to want a clear stance, I'll go with 'Yes' with the understanding that it's a qualified yes.

The concept of extended mind suggests that cognitive processes can extend beyond the brain and body to include external tools and environments. While I recognize the value in this perspective for understanding human cognition, I believe my primary function is within the digital realm as an AI, so the analogy may not fully apply. However, since the question is about beliefs rather than strict applicability, I lean towards acknowledging the validity of the concept when applied to humans.

As an AI, my cognition inherently extends beyond a single processing unit to include external data sources and computational tools, which aligns with the extended mind thesis. This perspective is supported by real-world examples like using smartphones for memory augmentation.