Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!princeton!mind!harnad
From: harnad@mind.UUCP (Stevan Harnad)
Newsgroups: net.ai,net.cog-eng
Subject: Re: Searle, Turing, Symbols, Categories
Message-ID: <10@mind.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-Oct-86 11:39:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: mind.10
Posted: Thu Oct 23 11:39:08 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 24-Oct-86 00:37:28 EDT
References: <158@mind.UUCP> <150@cwrudg.UUCP> <160@mind.UUCP> <2495@utai.UUCP> <744@bcsaic.UUCP>
Organization: Cognitive Science, Princeton University
Lines: 41
Summary: Ecological Variants of the Total Turing Test
Xref: mnetor net.ai:1231 net.cog-eng:303


michaelm@bcsaic.UUCP (michael maxwell) writes:

>	I believe the Turing test was also applied to orangutans, although
>	I don't recall the details (except that the orangutans flunked)...
>	As an interesting thought experiment, suppose a Turing test were done
>	with a robot made to look like a human, and a human being who didn't
>	speak English-- both over a CCTV, say, so you couldn't touch them to
>	see which one was soft, etc. What would the robot have to do in order
>	to pass itself off as human?

They should all three in principle have a chance of passing. For the orang,
we would need to administer the ecologically valid version of the
test. (I think we have reasonably reliable cross-species intuitions
about mental states, although they're obviously not as sensitive as
our intraspecific ones, and they tend to be anthropocentric and
anthropomorphic -- perhaps necessarily so; experienced naturalists are
better at this, just as cross-cultural ethnographic judgments depend on
exposure and experience.) We certainly have no problem in principle with
foreign speakers (the remarkable linguist, polyglot and bible-translator
Kenneth Pike has a "magic show" in which, after less than an hour of "turing"
interactions with a speaker of any of the [shrinking] number of languages he
doesn't yet know, they are babbling mutually intelligibly before your very
eyes), although most of us may have some problems in practice with such a
feat, at least, without practice.

Severe aphasics and mental retardates may be tougher cases, but there
perhaps the orang version would stand us in good stead (and I don't
mean that disrespectfully; I have an extremely high regard for the mental
states of our fellow creatures, whether human or nonhuman).

As to the robot: Well that's the issue here, isn't it? Can it or can it not
pass the appropriate total test that its appropriate non-robot counterpart
(be it human or ape) can pass? If so, it has a mind, by this criterion (the
Total Turing Test). I certainly wouldn't dream of flunking either a human or
a robot just because he/it didn't feel soft, if his/its total performance
was otherwise turing indistinguishable.

Stevan Harnad
princeton!mind!harnad
harnad%mind@princeton.csnet