comments

Can inductive evidence determine this?

Is the test—as a source of inductive evidence—a legitimate test of intelligence? Such evidence may be weak or strong, but never deductively certain. A claim that a system thinks based on its passing the test is open to further evidence and revision.



James Moor, 1976 & 1987.
RELATED ARTICLESExplain
⌅
Artificial Intelligence
⌃
Can the Turing Test determine this? [2] 
■
Can inductive evidence determine this?
↳
No: induction provides weak evidence
↳
Yes: induction provides strong evidence
⇥
James Moor
⇥
Vulnerable to counter-examples
□
No: passing the Test is not decisive
□
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 (2)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip