From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rutgers!usc!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!otago.ac.nz!barryp Thu Jul  9 16:20:35 EDT 1992
Article 6427 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rutgers!usc!wupost!waikato.ac.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!otago.ac.nz!barryp
>From: barryp@otago.ac.nz
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Defining other intelligence out of existence
Message-ID: <1992Jul8.092458.3088@otago.ac.nz>
Date: 7 Jul 92 20:24:58 GMT
References: <1992Jul1.044930.8970@news.media.mit.edu> <1992Jul7.002937.27952@oracle.pnl.gov>
Organization: University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Lines: 10

>  I have trouble
> separating the outward evidence of intelligence such as speaking or planning
> from the inward activity itself.  This, I think, is the essence of the problem
> with the Turing Test.

This is teh essence of the Turing Test.  It is in principle impossible to judge
intelligence on the basis of the inward activity.  The outward evidence is the
only available criterion.

Barry Phease


