Subject: Re: IPD and Turing Test (was Re: Turing Test on its head)
References: <4gkl3i$f9m@sundog.tiac.net> <DnE24u.Hr1.0.staffin.dcs.ed.ac.uk@dcs.ed.ac.uk> <4gstnm$jss@news.bu.edu> <DnFM87.40M.0.staffin.dcs.ed.ac.uk@dcs.ed.ac.uk> <4gv5cs$6p@sundog.tiac.net> <p9Lr78S.predictor@delphi.com>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!ub!dsinc!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.coast.net!news00.sunet.se!sunic!news99.sunet.se!news.uni-c.dk!imada.ou.dk!breese
From: breese@imada.ou.dk (Bjorn Reese)
Message-ID: <1996Mar4.154314.27833@imada.ou.dk>
Sender: news@imada.ou.dk
Nntp-Posting-Host: wagner.imada.ou.dk
Organization: Dept. of Math. & Computer Science, Odense University, Denmark
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:43:14 GMT
Lines: 22
Newsgroups: comp.ai.games

Will Dwinnell (predictor@delphi.com) wrote:
> Whether the Turing Test is useless depends on what you want to use
> it for.  If you want to use it as a thought experiment to help shed
> light on these issues, then it may be of much use.  As a test of
> "intelligence" (fill in your favorite definition here), then it is
> likely not of as much use.  Besides, what most people think of when
> they say "intelligence" is really quite a multifacted thing.  I don't think
> it takes much imagination to realize that you can have intelligence
> without conversation or conversation without intelligence.

Exactly! The Turing test is more like a philosophical than a practical
tool. When people talk about intelligence in c.s. they tend to forget
that it isn't binary, ie. you're either intelligent or not. Intelligence
is a gradual scale; some are more intelligent than others. I furthermore
think many people confuse intelligence with consciousness when dealing
with these matters.

--
Bjorn Reese                      Email: breese@imada.ou.dk
Odense University, Denmark       URL:   http://www.imada.ou.dk/~breese

"It's getting late in the game to show any pride or shame" - Marillion
