David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (3):115-121 (2000)
The Turing Test, originally proposed as a simple operational definition of intelligence, has now been with us for exactly half a century. It is safe to say that no other single article in computer science, and few other articles in science in general, have generated so much discussion. The present article chronicles the comments and controversy surrounding Turing's classic article from its publication to the present. The changing perception of the Turing Test over the last fifty years has paralleled the changing attitudes in the scientific community towards artificial intelligence: from the unbridled optimism of 1960's to the current realization of the immense difficulties that still lie ahead. I conclude with the prediction that the Turing Test will remain important, not only as a landmark in the history of the development of intelligent machines, but also with real relevance to future generations of people living in a world in which the cognitive capacities of machines will be vastly greater than they are now.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
John R. Searle (1980). Minds, Brains and Programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
Paul Smolensky (1988). On the Proper Treatment of Connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11 (1):1-23.
Alan M. Turing (1950). Computing Machinery and Intelligence. Mind 59 (October):433-60.
Stevan Harnad (1990). The Symbol Grounding Problem. Philosophical Explorations 42:335-346.
Ned Block (1981). Psychologism and Behaviorism. Philosophical Review 90 (1):5-43.
Citations of this work BETA
Kevin Warwick, Huma Shah & James Moor (2013). Some Implications of a Sample of Practical Turing Tests. Minds and Machines 23 (2):163-177.
Robert I. Damper (2006). The Logic of Searle's Chinese Room Argument. Minds and Machines 16 (2):163-183.
John F. Stins (2009). Establishing Consciousness in Non-Communicative Patients: A Modern-Day Version of the Turing Test. Consciousness and Cognition 18 (1):187-192.
Paul Schweizer (2012). The Externalist Foundations of a Truly Total Turing Test. Minds and Machines 22 (3):191-212.
Carlo Penco (2012). Updating the Turing Test. Wittgenstein, Turing and Symbol Manipulation. Open Journal of Philosophy 2 (3):189-194.
Similar books and articles
Bruce Edmonds (2000). The Constructability of Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Logic Language and Information 9 (4):419-424.
Ayse P. Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman (2000). Turing Test: 50 Years Later. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
James H. Moor (2001). The Status and Future of the Turing Test. Minds and Machines 11 (1):77-93.
B. Jack Copeland (2000). The Turing Test. Minds and Machines 10 (4):519-539.
Saul Traiger (2000). Making the Right Identification in the Turing Test. Minds and Machines 10 (4):561-572.
Robert French (1996). The Inverted Turing Test: How a Mindless Program Could Pass It. Psycoloquy 7 (39).
Gerald J. Erion (2001). The Cartesian Test for Automatism. Minds and Machines 11 (1):29-39.
Robert M. French (2000). Peeking Behind the Screen: The Unsuspected Power of the Standard Turing Test. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 12 (3):331-340.
Jose Hernandez-Orallo (2000). Beyond the Turing Test. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):447-466.
A. P. Saygin & I. Cicekli (2000). Turing Test: 50 Years Later. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads113 ( #31,784 of 1,789,824 )
Recent downloads (6 months)26 ( #31,261 of 1,789,824 )
How can I increase my downloads?