Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):425-445 (2000)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Turing's celebrated 1950 paper proposes a very general methodological criterion for modelling mental function: total functional equivalence and indistinguishability. His criterion gives rise to a hierarchy of Turing Tests, from subtotal ("toy") fragments of our functions (t1), to total symbolic (pen-pal) function (T2 -- the standard Turing Test), to total external sensorimotor (robotic) function (T3), to total internal microfunction (T4), to total indistinguishability in every empirically discernible respect (T5). This is a "reverse-engineering" hierarchy of (decreasing) empirical underdetermination of the theory by the data. Level t1 is clearly too underdetermined, T2 is vulnerable to a counterexample (Searle's Chinese Room Argument), and T4 and T5 are arbitrarily overdetermined. Hence T3 is the appropriate target level for cognitive science. When it is reached, however, there will still remain more unanswerable questions than when Physics reaches its Grand Unified Theory of Everything (GUTE), because of the mind/body problem and the other-minds problem, both of which are inherent in this empirical domain, even though Turing hardly mentions them.
|
Keywords | Artificial Intelligence Indistinguishable Logic Mind Turing Test Turing, A |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Reprint years | 2004 |
DOI | 10.1023/A:1008315308862 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
The Uncanny Advantage of Using Androids in Cognitive and Social Science Research.Karl F. MacDorman & Hiroshi Ishiguro - 2006 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 7 (3):297-337.
Open Problems in the Philosophy of Information.Luciano Floridi - 2004 - Metaphilosophy 35 (4):554-582.
Does Japan Really Have Robot Mania? Comparing Attitudes by Implicit and Explicit Measures.Karl F. MacDorman, Sandosh K. Vasudevan & Chin-Chang Ho - 2009 - AI and Society 23 (4):485-510.
On the Claim That a Table-Lookup Program Could Pass the Turing Test.Drew McDermott - 2014 - Minds and Machines 24 (2):143-188.
View all 14 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
The Annotation Game: On Turing (1950) on Computing, Machinery, and Intelligence.Stevan Harnad - 2006 - In Robert Epstein & Grace Peters (eds.), [Book Chapter] (in Press). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Other Bodies, Other Minds: A Machine Incarnation of an Old Philosophical Problem. [REVIEW]Stevan Harnad - 1991 - Minds and Machines 1 (1):43-54.
Minds, Machines and Searle.Stevan Harnad - 1989 - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 1 (4):5-25.
Does Mind Piggyback on Robotic and Symbolic Capacity?Stevan Harnad - 1995 - In H. Morowitz & J. Singer (eds.), The Mind, the Brain, and Complex Adaptive Systems. Addison Wesley.
Turing Test: 50 Years Later. [REVIEW]Ayse Pinar Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
Imitation Versus Communication: Testing for Human-Like Intelligence.Jamie Cullen - 2009 - Minds and Machines 19 (2):237-254.
Turing Test: 50 Years Later. [REVIEW]Ayse P. Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total views
290 ( #27,592 of 2,403,176 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #156,541 of 2,403,176 )
2009-01-28
Total views
290 ( #27,592 of 2,403,176 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #156,541 of 2,403,176 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads