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!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!destroyer!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!access.usask.ca!ccu. Mon May 25 14:05:34 EDT 1992
Article 5672 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: 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!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!destroyer!ubc-cs!unixg.ubc.ca!kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca!access.usask.ca!ccu.
umanitoba.ca!zirdum
>From: zirdum@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Antun Zirdum)
Subject: Here we go again (Turing test)
Message-ID: <1992May15.045454.8581@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Fri, 15 May 1992 04:54:54 GMT
Lines: 64

In article   writes:
>pa.asd.contel.com!uunet!psinntp!bony1!richieb
>From: richieb@bony1.bony.com (Richard Bielak)
>Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
>Subject: Turing test and language
>Keywords: turing test language acquisition new yorker
>Message-ID: <1992May12.205205.14441@bony1.bony.com>
>Date: 12 May 92 20:52:05 GMT
>Organization: multi-cellular
>Lines: 35
>
RE: Ferral children
>
>The interesting thing is that the girl never really acquired language.
>She learned words, but syntax was beyond her - for example, she never
>learned how to make negatives.
>
>I thought that if she had been used in a Turing test - playing the
>role of computer - she would have failed miserably. The tester would
>have declared her _not_ intelligent.

You are mistaken, the turing test does not have to
be restricted to test for only verbal intelligence.
I do not think that you will dissagree that verbally
she was not very intelligent. (I think I put a triple
negative in that one :-)

You see, there are many types of intelligence, and
reasoning abilities, so we must test for all of them
in the intelligent computers we build.
>
>Yet, according to her caretakers, she _was_ intelligent.  She was
>eerily good at non-verbal communications and was excellent in spacial
>reasoning.
>
>The implication is that the Turing test does not prove or disprove the
>intelligence of the entity tested.
>
How did her caretakers determine that she was good
at other forms of reasoning? Magic, ESP, Guessing?
I imagine they tested her on the other forms of
reasoning, she passed their tests, after she passed
many of them they decided that it was much more than
pure chance - and LO and Behold, they proclaimed her
intelligent!
(Note: the tests they gave her need not be formal,
the only requirement is that they are tests!)
>
>...richie
>
>
>
>-- 
>* Richie Bielak   (212)-815-3072   | "Your brain is a liquid-cooled parallel  *
>* Internet:       richieb@bony.com | super-computer". He pointed to his nose, *
>* Bang {uupsi,uunet}!bony1!richieb | "This is the fan."                       *
>*    - Strictly my opinions -      |                     - David Chudnovsky - *


-- 
*****************************************************************
*   AZ    -- zirdum@ccu.umanitoba.ca                            *
*     " The first hundred years are the hardest! " - W. Mizner  *
*****************************************************************


