Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!unogate!unocal!genisco!arcturus!berry
From: berry@arcturus.uucp (Berry;Craig D.)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: If it does not pass TT it is not intelligent????
Keywords: TT, intelligence
Message-ID: <1991Jun28.010926.17791@arcturus.uucp>
Date: 28 Jun 91 01:09:26 GMT
References: <1991Jun17.064232.2536@panix.uucp> <1991Jun19.111622.5491@tygra.Michigan.COM> <2213@ccsg.tau.ac.il>
Organization: Rockwell International
Lines: 36

yonadav@VIRGO.MATH.TAU.AC.IL (Perry Yonadav) writes:

>In article <1991Jun19.111622.5491@tygra.Michigan.COM> dave@tygra.Michigan.COM (David Conrad) writes:
>>The Turing Test does not test for intelligence.  At a literal level it tests
>>for a specific ability, the ability to mimic human answers to questions,
>>which we may hope requires at least some kind of 'intelligence'.
>>

>But wouldn't it be logical to define 'intelligence' as human-like behavior?

But what aspect of human-like behavior?  Examples:

(1) Gets sick when exposed to certain microorganisms.  [A clearly
	irrelevant behavior for AI, but still very characteristically
	human behavior.]

(2) Twitches limbs (manipulators?) when struck in certain spots with
	a rubber hammer.  [Grey area -- how important is body awareness
	and reflex loops to what we think of as "intelligence"?]

(3) Avoids situations which might lead to injury, seeks food and
	shelter (or equivalents).  [Probably necessary for anything we
	would like to think of as "intelligent".]

(4) Gets sad watching tragic play.  [Emotional response and empathy
	may or may not be critical to intelligence in general.]

(5) Debates philosophy.  [Clearly requires only reflexive behavior :-)]

(6) Plays world-class chess.  [Once thought a hallmark of intelligence,
	now known to be a "simple" matter of combining fast hardware and
	cleverly designed algorithms.]

Where do you draw the line when deciding if a purported AI is "human-like"
and therefore intelligent by your definition?