From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!samsung!uunet!news.smith.edu!milkyway!orourke Wed Apr 22 12:04:10 EDT 1992
Article 5157 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!samsung!uunet!news.smith.edu!milkyway!orourke
>From: orourke@sophia.smith.edu (Joseph O'Rourke)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Intelligence, awareness, and esthetics
Message-ID: <1992Apr20.204409.15218@sophia.smith.edu>
Date: 20 Apr 92 20:44:09 GMT
References: <1992Apr20.191345.27706@javelin.sim.es.com>
Sender: root@sophia.smith.edu (Operator)
Organization: Smith College, Northampton, MA, US
Lines: 18

In article <1992Apr20.191345.27706@javelin.sim.es.com> 
	biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:

 >This suggests an alternative to the Turing test: a computer can be
 >said to exhibit human intelligence and awareness if it is capable of
 >producing a work of art which finds both wide acceptance among art
 >lovers, and is indistinguishable from similar pieces or art produced
 >by human artists.

I see no reason to expect computers to exhibit *human* intelligence 
and awareness, especially if measured by producing art that humans
appreciate.  The best art distills distinctly human experiences in a form
that speaks directly to humans.  I find it hard to imagine computers
producing truly original human-art without having human experiences 
to draw upon:  having parents, growing up, dating in high school, having 
children, etc.  It seems more likely that computers will create art 
that other computers can best appreciate, perhaps art that ONLY other
computers can appreciate.


