Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!olivea!uunet!mcsun!ukc!warwick!nott-cs!ucl-cs!news
From: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: RE: IF IT DOES NOT PASS TT IT IS NOT INTELLIGENT????
Message-ID: <1657@ucl-cs.uucp>
Date: 22 Jun 91 17:00:24 GMT
Sender: news@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Lines: 28

Stephen Smoliar writes, on the subject of Turing's orignal paper,
 > Unless I am mistaken,
 > Turing uses his opening paragraphs to argue that it is a waste of time
 > to consider a question as naive as "Can a machine think?" 

Perhaps some should tell John Searle. One of his lectures in "Minds,
brains and science : the 1984 Reith lectures" is just that: "Can a
machine think?"

 > Therefore,
 > in the interest of being more productive, he introduces his "Imitation
 > Game" as a more realistic arena for investigation.  In other words he
 > replaces the intelligence question with that of whether or not a machine
 > could play the Imitation Game well enough that the other player would not
 > recognize it as a machine.  He then devotes the rest of the paper to arguing
 > why it is feasible that this would eventually be the case.

I think I am missing something. If it a box could "walk, talk and chew
gum", how different would it appear if it could only "imitate" said
behaviour?

____

Gordon Joly                                       +44 71 387 7050 ext 3716
Internet: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk          UUCP: ...!{uunet,ukc}!ucl-cs!G.Joly
Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT

                    Order is paramount in anarchy.