Xref: utzoo comp.ai.philosophy:1058 comp.ai:9543
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!mdisea!snead
From: snead@MDI.COM (Gregory Snead)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai
Subject: Re: Turing Test, what's the point?
Keywords: AI, computers
Message-ID: <1991Jun25.205828.11828@MDI.COM>
Date: 25 Jun 91 20:58:28 GMT
References: <612@ckgp.UUCP>
Sender: news@MDI.COM
Distribution: na
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Lines: 30
Originator: snead@fh18c


In article <612@ckgp.UUCP>, thomas@ckgp.UUCP (Michael Thomas) writes:
|> Hi everyone,
|> 
|> 	Now it was my understanding that Turing felt that a computer
|>  would never be able to "Think" or actually be "Intelligent", and
|>  dispite the definitions of these terms, we all understand what is
|>  meant. (I hope) So it was also my understanding that Turing felt
|>  that the best a computer might be able to do someday is imitate
|>  a person. So he devised a test to deturmine if a computer at some
|>  point could accomplish this task....
|> 
|>  So, is this correct so far??? (I believe it is...)
|> 
|>  	So, does anyone else feel that prehaps Turing was incorrect in 
|>  his analysis of future computer technology (current computer technology)?
|>         Does anyone feel that this is still a valid test, which should be
|>  used in every case to deturmine if a system is intelligent, as compared
|>  to humans? 
|>         Does anyone believe that this test is in anyway valid in
|>  deturmining if a system is intelligent? 
|>         

The TT is valid in a limited scope -- human intelligence. Perhaps a better
way to put it is the TT is a good test of comparing an artificial system
to an organic one. So an artificial cat would be compared to a real
cat.

I believe this is limiting. This form of AI is imitation. We should
draw upon the human intelligence paradigm -- but not be bound by it.