Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!uhog.mit.edu!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!insosf1.infonet.net!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Bag the Turing test (was: Penrose and Searle)
Message-ID: <D07264.8F8@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <1994Nov24.135351.25743@unix.brighton.ac.uk> <3befha$8u5@mp.cs.niu.edu> <D021p7.681@spss.com> <OZ.94Dec2004207@nexus.yorku.ca>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 17:34:51 GMT
Lines: 13

In article <OZ.94Dec2004207@nexus.yorku.ca>,
ozan s. yigit <oz@nexus.yorku.ca> wrote:
>Mark Rosenfelder writes: [amongst other things]
>   If people stuck to Turing's definition we'd be better off; but they don't,
>   and even defend their extrapolations.  
>
>of course they should extrapolate, present their arguments and even (!)
>try to defend them. turing extrapolated from descartes. others extrapolate 
>from turing, and argue. such as philosophy. too much for you?

People can extrapolate all they want; I'd just rather they didn't call
their constructions "the Turing test".  It's kind of nice when terms
have some specific meaning.  Too much for you?
