Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!bohm
From: bohm@cs.Buffalo.EDU (Eric "Gothmog" Bohm)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Turing Test: opinions on an idea
Message-ID: <77177@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 20 May 91 15:50:25 GMT
References: <1991May15.055331.10631@cs.ubc.ca> <53693@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1991May16.143804.16487@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <1991May17.064714.5942@latcs2.lat.oz.au> <76933@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <1991May20.115838.8969@nntp.hut.fi>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci
Lines: 47
Nntp-Posting-Host: jarvis.cs.buffalo.edu
Originator: bohm@jarvis.cs.Buffalo.EDU


In article <1991May20.115838.8969@nntp.hut.fi>, krista@sandman.hut.fi (Krista Hannele Lagus) writes:
|> There are stupid people, why couldn't there be stupid computers?
|> What are we *trying* to measure with Turing tests? The intelligence,
|> consciousness or humanlikeness? Why would intelligence necessarily be
|> like human intelligence (if such a type exists)? When will wi invent a
|> computer that tries to decide which one is which, the person and the
|> computer, and how does it interpret the results, which one is the
|> measure of intelligence, the human or the computer? 
|> 
|> Krista Lagus


	What is intelligence?
	Your question simply begs the original question Turing was trying
to avoid dealing with in his test.
	Lacking any kind of objective measure of intelligence (don't talk to
me about IQ tests) all we have when dealing with exterior agents is our own
perception. If I perceive you to be intelligent, a perception I extend to 
most humans, then I treat you as an intelligent entity. Does your appearance, hardware, mode of walking etc. need to be relevant to my deciding whether you
are intelligent or not? I do not believe so.
	How do I tell you from a manniken?  By communication. How do I tell an
AI computer from an non-AI computer? Thats the problem.
	Turing's test is simply using the old.
"If it walks like a duck, and acts like a duck, it might be a chicken, but
we might as well consider it a duck." aphorism. What else do we have to go on
when you come down to the final analysis?
	
|>	 Why would intelligence necessarily be
|> like human intelligence (if such a type exists)? When will wi invent a
|> computer that tries to decide which one is which, the person and the
|> computer, and how does it interpret the results, which one is the
|> measure of intelligence, the human or the computer? 

	It wouldn't necessarily be like human intelligence, but how do you
recognize that something is intelligent if it isn't intelligence as we humans
know it? 
	Turing's Test wasn't supposed to be a catch all, _THIS IS IT_, test. It
was simply a way to test for intelligence without getting into the fuzzy area
of what intelligence actually is. Its not perfect, its not undeniably correct,
but it is beautifully simple to implement.

-- 
Eric "Gothmog" Bohm
	It can be shown that a neat .sig file can be created and
        that a valid address exists for this user.
        (the proof is left as an exercise for the student.)