Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bruce!frank
From: frank@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Frank Breen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: The Turing Test is no good!
Message-ID: <2883@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU>
Date: 19 Aug 90 15:08:04 GMT
References: <2860@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU> <3156@gara.une.oz.au> <1179@zeus.usq.edu.au> <3240@gara.une.oz.au>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Monash Uni. Computer Science, Australia
Lines: 14

In <3240@gara.une.oz.au> pnettlet@gara.une.oz.au (Philip Nettleton) writes:

>I didn't bring Searl up again, I would rather forget the stupid Searl debate
>altogether. We were discussing the Turing Test and Frank brought up Searl.
>Searl's argument sucks - it proves nothing! So lets just let it drop!
>Philosophers should stick to the meaning of life - it more up there alley.

I'm sorry for bringing up Searle again - I was sick of that arguement as well
but it was after reading Searl that made me start thinking about the Turing
test differently which led me to starting this thread.

Oh well.

Frank Breen