No: passing the Test is not decisive

Even if a computer were to pass the Turing test, this would not justify the conclusion that it was thinking intelligently.

Ned Block, 1981.


Note: Because the issue of passing the Turing Test is closely tied with the issue of what can be inferred from external behaviour, this region of the map contains arguments that are similar to those in the "Is the test, behaviorally or operationally construed, a legitimate intelligence test?" arguments on this map.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
Artificial Intelligence
Can the Turing Test determine this? [2] 
No: passing the Test is not decisive
A zombie or unconscious machine could pass the test
Human judges may be fooled too easily
Merely syntactic machines could pass the test
Nonstandard human controls can mislead a judge
The Anthropomorphizing Objection
The Chinese Room passes the test
The Turing test is too narrow
Turing Test underdetermines creation of humanlike robots
Ned Block
Vulnerable to counter-examples
Operational interpretation is too rigid
Can inductive evidence determine this?
No: failing the Test is not decisive
No: but Neo-Turing test is adequate
Yes: human imitation is sufficient
No: simulated intelligence isn't real intelligence
No: existing AI programs have passed the test
No: Test assumes representationalist theory of mind
No: Turing assumes the brain's a machine
Yes: defines intelligence operationally/behaviorally
No: ESP would confound the test
Turing Test misleads AI research
The Loebner Prize
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip