“The brain isn’t something that’s beholden to causality and physical laws?
Please tell me I have that completely wrong because that’s how your response comes across.”
a) Do you know all of the causality and physical laws the brain is operating with?
If you hold a human made object, a computer, as primary over the brain who thought of its structure, it is backwards.
The computer is subordinate to the brain.
So to flip it inside out and say “The brain is like a computer” or “The brain operates according to the laws of logic” (the laws of logic that were created by human brains) – etc – is rarely questioned but fundamentally absurd.
The laws of logic operate similarly to the brain in some fashion. Computers operate similarly to the brain in some fashion. It is because it is brain that developed those things.
Logic did not develop brains.
Computers did not develop brains.
So: Look at the flaw:
“The brain is like a computer”. That is limiting what the brain is capable of to that which a computer is capable of.
Already it’s wrong.
So if you say “The brain is limited by the physical laws”, it’s really “the physical laws we conceive of are limited by what our brains can conceive”.
The limitations come from what has been imagined by the brains that conceived of physical laws.
Alternative to computational theory of mind exist.
Embodied cognition for example considers the brain “not as a computer” but as situated within a body which together is situated within an environment.