comments
Respond
Comment on the article
Add a citation
Reply with an article
Start a new topic
Edit
Edit article
Delete article
Share
Invite
Link
Embed
Social media
Avatar
View
Graph
Explorer
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 levels
Load all levels
All
Dagre
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 level
Load all levels
All
Tree
SpaceTree
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Radial
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Box
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Down
Article ✓
Outline
Document
Down
All
Page
Canvas
Time
Timeline
Calendar
Updates
Subscribe to updates
Get updates
Past 24 hours
Past week
Past month
Past year
Pause updates
Contact us
Human judges may be fooled too easily
Human judges can be fooled by unintelligent machines.
Ned Block, 1981.
RELATED ARTICLES
Explain
⌅
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence☜A collaboratively editable version of Robert Horns brilliant and pioneering debate map Can Computers Think?—exploring 50 years of philosophical argument about the possibility of computer thought.☜F1CEB7
⌃
Can the Turing Test determine this? [2]
Can the Turing Test determine this? [2] ☜Is the Turing Test—proposed by Alan Turing in 1950—an adequate test of thinking? Can it determine whether a machine can think? If a computer passess the test by persuading judges via a teletyped conversation that its human can it be said to think?☜FFB597
⌃
No: passing the Test is not decisive
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. ☜59C6EF
■
Human judges may be fooled too easily
Human judges may be fooled too easily☜Human judges can be fooled by unintelligent machines. ☜98CE71
↳
A serious judge would not be easily fooled
A serious judge would not be easily fooled☜A critical judge would not lazily interact with a competitor in the Turing test, but would be focused on distinguishing the human from the computer. Such a judge could not be easily fooled.☜EF597B
↳
The ELIZA effect
The ELIZA effect☜The ELIZA effect is a tendency to read more into computer performance than is warranted by their underlying code—e.g. the psychotherapy program ELIZA gives apparently sympathetic responses, but in fact is only utilizing a set of canned responses.☜EF597B
⇤
Human judges are unreliable
Human judges are unreliable☜The behavioral disposition argument avoids the problems associated with the operational interpretation, but relies on human judges, who may chauvanistically reject intelligent machines or foolishly pass cleverly designed but unintelligent machines.☜FFFACD
⇥
Ned Block
Ned Block☜Arguments advanced by Ned Block.☜FFFACD
□
A zombie or unconscious machine could pass the test
A zombie or unconscious machine could pass the test☜A behaviourally sophisticated but unconscious zombie could pass the Turing test, but it would not be thinking. Similarly, a behaviourally sophisticated but unconscious computer might pass the test without thinking.☜98CE71
□
Merely syntactic machines could pass the test
Merely syntactic machines could pass the test☜Purely syntactic machines might pass—but sans a full naturalistic semantics, giving a global model of situational context allowing flexible interaction with the world and sustained self-perpetuation, its doubtful theyd ever think in a human sense.☜98CE71
□
Nonstandard human controls can mislead a judge
Nonstandard human controls can mislead a judge☜An unintelligent machine could pass the Turing Test if it were compared with a stupid, flippant, or in general anomalous control.☜98CE71
□
The Anthropomorphizing Objection
The Anthropomorphizing Objection☜Our tendency to anthropomorphize machines should caution us against calling them intelligent. Conversing and passing the Turing test isnt enough to establish intelligent thought. Introspection is also necessary and the test doesnt reveal it.☜98CE71
□
The Chinese Room passes the test
The Chinese Room passes the test☜The Chinese Room thought experiment involves a system that passes the Turing test by speaking Chinese but fails to understand Chinese.☜98CE71
□
The Turing test is too narrow
The Turing test is too narrow☜The Turing test is limited in scope. It narrowly focuses on one ability—the ability to engage in human conversation—and is therefore inadequate as a test of general intelligence.☜98CE71
□
Turing Test underdetermines creation of humanlike robots
Turing Test underdetermines creation of humanlike robots☜The Tests focus on a subset of human behavior—symbolic capacity—underconstrains the engineering task of creating robots with human capabilities. Thus, machines that pass wont be easily extensible to machines that have other human capacities.☜98CE71
□
Graph of this discussion
Graph of this discussion☜Click this to see the whole debate, excluding comments, in graphical form☜dcdcdc
Enter the title of your article
Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Click the button to enter task scheduling information
Open
Enter the main body of your article
Prefer more work space? Try the
big editor
Enter task details
Message text
Select assignee(s)
Due date (click calendar)
RadDatePicker
RadDatePicker
Open the calendar popup.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<
<
July 2024
>
<<
July 2024
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
27
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
28
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
29
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
30
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
31
28
29
30
31
1
2
3
32
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Reminder
No reminder
1 day before due
2 days before due
3 days before due
1 week before due
Ready to post
Copy to text
Enter
Cancel
Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered
Lock
Cancel
Save
Comment graphing options
Choose comments:
Comment only
Whole thread
All comments
Choose location:
To a new map
To this map
New map options
Select map ontology
Options
Standard (default) ontology
College debate ontology
Hypothesis ontology
Influence diagram ontology
Story ontology
Graph to private map
Cancel
Proceed
+Comments (
0
)
- Comments
Add a comment
Newest first
Oldest first
Show threads
+Citations (
0
)
- Citations
Add new citation
List by:
Citerank
Map
+About
- About
Entered by:-
David Price
NodeID:
#241
Node type:
SupportiveArgument
Entry date (GMT):
6/13/2006 8:53:00 PM
Last edit date (GMT):
12/9/2007 9:58:00 PM
Show other editors
Incoming cross-relations:
1
Outgoing cross-relations:
1
Average rating:
0
by
0
users
Enter comment
Select article text to quote
Cancel
Enter
welcome text
First name
Last name
Email
Skip
Join
x
Select file to upload