From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!mercury.unt.edu!mips.mitek.com!spssig.spss.com!markrose Thu Apr 30 15:22:37 EDT 1992
Article 5248 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!mercury.unt.edu!mips.mitek.com!spssig.spss.com!markrose
>From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Intelligence, awareness, and esthetics
Message-ID: <1992Apr24.174822.29402@spss.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1992 17:48:22 GMT
References: <1992Apr21.221135.20165@ccu.umanitoba.ca> <1992Apr23.152759.2272@javelin.sim.es.com> <1992Apr24.154950.25222@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca>
Nntp-Posting-Host: spssrs7.spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Lines: 26

In article <1992Apr24.154950.25222@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> pindor@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca 
(Andrzej Pindor) writes (quoting Heiner Biesel):
>>You seem to think of the Turing test as some generic means of establishing
>>awareness on the part of others; t'aint so. I have no idea of what you
>>mean by "...this ingraining of knowledge was hard-won though carefull (sic)
>>Turing testing."
>>
>Obviously you do not fully appreciate what 'Turing test' means.

It's not certain that you know what it is yourself, if you think it's
something people apply to each other.

"Turing test" sometimes seems to be used to mean any probing for intelligence
based on behavior.  Expanding the term in this way creates confusion and
violates Turing's original conception, which was surely to simplify the
problem and focus attention on what he thought was the crux of what
intelligence is.

I think no one should be satisfied to stop at the Turing Test.  If we humans
have the ability to judge, based on behavior, whether something is 
intelligent, then we are applying a set of criteria (perhaps in a very
complex way).  It is those criteria that we should be elucidating.

To define intelligence by referring to the Turing Test is like defining a
dog as "something a human being calls a dog."  To say the least, we need
to go a bit deeper than that.


