In Robert Epstein & Grace Peters (eds.), [Book Chapter] (in Press). Kluwer Academic Publishers (2006)

Authors
Stevan Harnad
Université du Québec à Montréal
Abstract
This quote/commented critique of Turing's classical paper suggests that Turing meant -- or should have meant -- the robotic version of the Turing Test (and not just the email version). Moreover, any dynamic system (that we design and understand) can be a candidate, not just a computational one. Turing also dismisses the other-minds problem and the mind/body problem too quickly. They are at the heart of both the problem he is addressing and the solution he is proposing.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,972
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Consciousness: An Afterthought.Stevan Harnad - 1982 - Cognition and Brain Theory 5:29-47.
Minds, Machines and Searle.Stevan Harnad - 1989 - Journal of Theoretical and Experimental Artificial Intelligence 1:5-25.
Minds, Machines and Turing: The Indistinguishability of Indistinguishables.Stevan Harnad - 2000 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):425-445.
Can a Machine Be Conscious? How?Stevan Harnad - 2003 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 10 (4-5):67-75.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Eliminating the “Concept” Concept.Stevan Harnad - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):213-214.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
158 ( #60,770 of 2,410,230 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #540,207 of 2,410,230 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes