From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!caen!umeecs!dip.eecs.umich.edu!marky Wed Aug 12 16:52:37 EDT 1992
Article 6580 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!caen!umeecs!dip.eecs.umich.edu!marky
>From: marky@dip.eecs.umich.edu (Mark Anthony Young)
Subject: Re: Defining intelligence
Message-ID: <1992Aug8.203153.29752@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
Sender: news@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Mr. News)
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
References: <BILL.92Jul14224037@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu> <1992Jul15.233344.6478@u.washington.edu> <BILL.92Jul16201712@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu>
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992 20:31:53 GMT
Lines: 19

%r bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs)
%q sanelson@milton.u.washington.edu (S. A. Nelson) writes:
%q 
%q    I'm with the Turing-Test crowd in that I think the closest thing
%q    we have to defining "X is intelligent" is "X behaves like me."
%q 
%q If this were true, the sentence "X is far more intelligent than any
%q living human" would seem absurd to us.

Of course.  The appropriate definition for "more intelligent" is:

  "X is more intelligent than me if X behaves like me, but doesn't
   do all the stupid things I do."

That is, it does things the way I would if I'd had more time to think about
them, or that I would do given its example.

...mark young



