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
Alan Turing
Arguments advanced by Alan Turing.
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
⌃
Protagonists
Protagonists☜The contributions of over 300 protagonists can be explored via a surname search, or using the growing list developing here.☜D3B8AB
■
Alan Turing
Alan Turing☜Arguments advanced by Alan Turing.☜D3B8AB
⇤
Computers can make certain types of mistakes
Computers can make certain types of mistakes☜Machines cant commit errors of functioning—arising from physical construction—if they are properly constructed. But can commit errors of conclusion—arising from the reasoning process—eg by making faulty inferences based on inadequate information.☜FFFACD
⇤
Computers can be subject of own thoughts
Computers can be subject of own thoughts☜When a computer solves equations, the equations can be said to be the object of its thought. Similarly when a computer is used to predict its own behaviour or to modify its own program, we can say that its the object of its own thoughts.☜FFFACD
⇤
Behaviour diversity dependent on storage capacity
Behaviour diversity dependent on storage capacity☜Great diversity of behaviour is possible for machines if they have large enough storage capacities. Objection is based on misconception that it is not possible for a machine to have much storage capacity.☜FFFACD
⇤
Strawberry-enjoying computers may yet be made
Strawberry-enjoying computers may yet be made☜Computers may yet be created that will enjoy strawberries and cream, but the only importance of this would be to illuminate other issues, such as the possibility of friendship between man and machine.☜FFFACD
⇤
Poor inductions from limited experience
Poor inductions from limited experience☜Disability arguments are bad inductions from a limited base of experience. Just because the machines we have seen are clunky, ugy, mechanical and so forth, we cant assume that a machine could never fall in love or enjoy strawberries and cream. ☜FFFACD
⇤
Be a solipsist or be pragmatic
Be a solipsist or be pragmatic☜Regarding consciousness as a necessary requirement for thought seems reasonable until you consider how you know if someone else is conscious. Solipsism is one respose to the uncertainty, judging pragmatically on the basis of behaviour another.☜FFFACD
⇤
Turing Test is an adequate test of thinking
Turing Test is an adequate test of thinking☜If a computer can persuade judges that it is human via teletyped conversations, it passes the test and is deemed able to think.☜FFFACD
⇤
Computers aren't entirely predictable
Computers aren't entirely predictable☜Belief that computers are entirely predictable is based on false assumption that humans can know everything that follows deductively from a set of premises. But humans learn new things in part through the working out of deductive consequences.☜FFFACD
⇤
Machines frequently surprise us
Machines frequently surprise us☜Computer users and even experts are often surprised by the things that computers do.☜FFFACD
⇤
Argument applies to any case of surprise
Argument applies to any case of surprise☜You could always say that being surprised came from you, the interpreter, not from anything original on the other persons or machines part—eg surprise at a joke could be attributed to your interpretation rather than creativity by the joke teller.☜FFFACD
⇤
Random selection produces free will
Random selection produces free will☜Machines can exhibit free will by way of random selection, produced in the machine via the generation of random values (for example by sampling random noise).☜FFFACD
⇤
Theological argument is ungrounded
Theological argument is ungrounded☜The view that only humans have souls is as ungrounded as the view that men have souls but women dont. For all we know, in creating thinking machines, we may be serving Gods ends by providing dwellings for souls he creates.☜FFFACD
⇤
The Transmigration Consolation
The Transmigration Consolation☜Heads-in-sand objections too trivial to merit response; consolation is more appropriate. Some comfort may be found in belief that souls may pass from humans to machines when humans die by the theological doctrine of the transmigration of the soul.☜FFFACD
⇤
A human can't simultaneously beat all machines
A human can't simultaneously beat all machines☜Theorems like Churchs, Gödels, and Turings, show only that a human can beat one machine on a given occasion. But theres no reason to believe that a human can out-think all machines. ☜FFFACD
⇤
Confuses rules of conduct with rules of behaviour
Confuses rules of conduct with rules of behaviour☜We cant formulate a complete set of rules of conduct for human performance, but human behaviour is still governed by natural laws that can in principle be given a mechanical description—and hence its possible to build a machine to fit this descript☜FFFACD
⇤
Perform the test in telepathy-proof rooms
Perform the test in telepathy-proof rooms☜To prevent ESP related problems the test would have to be carried out in telepathy-proof rooms.☜FFFACD
⇤
Yes: human imitation is sufficient
Yes: human imitation is sufficient☜The orginal Turing Test is an imitation game in 2 stages: 1) a man and a woman each try to convince an iterrogator that he or she is a woman; 2) the man is replaced by a machine. If the machine successfully imitates the man, it can think.☜FFFACD
□
Daniel Dennett
Daniel Dennett☜Arguments advanced by Daniel Dennett.☜D3B8AB
□
David Chalmers
David Chalmers☜Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and director of the Centre for Consciousness at ANU, and Professor of Philosophy and co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness at NYU.☜D3B8AB
□
David Cole
David Cole☜Arguments advanced by David Cole.☜D3B8AB
□
David Rumelhart
David Rumelhart☜Arguments advanced by David Rumelhart.☜D3B8AB
□
Douglas Hofstadter
Douglas Hofstadter☜Arguments advanced by Douglas Hofstadter.☜D3B8AB
□
George Lakoff
George Lakoff☜Arguments advanced by George Lakoff.☜D3B8AB
□
Georges Rey
Georges Rey☜Arguments advanced by Georges Rey.☜D3B8AB
□
Herbert Simon
Herbert Simon☜Arguments advanced by Herbert Simon.☜D3B8AB
□
Hilary Putnam
Hilary Putnam☜Arguments advanced by Hilary Putnam.☜D3B8AB
□
Hubert Dreyfus
Hubert Dreyfus☜Arguments advanced by Hubert Dreyfus.☜D3B8AB
□
Hugh Loebner
Hugh Loebner☜Arguments advanced by Hugh Loebner.☜D3B8AB
□
Jack Copeland
Jack Copeland☜Arguments advanced by Jack Copeland.☜D3B8AB
□
James McClelland
James McClelland☜Arguments advanced by James McClelland.☜D3B8AB
□
James Moor
James Moor☜Arguments advanced by James Moor.☜D3B8AB
□
Jerry Fodor
Jerry Fodor☜Arguments advanced by Jerry Fodor.☜D3B8AB
□
John Lucas
John Lucas☜Arguments advanced by John Lucas.☜D3B8AB
□
John Searle
John Searle☜Arguments advanced by John Searle.☜D3B8AB
□
Joseph F. Rychlak
Joseph F. Rychlak☜Arguments advanced by Joseph F. Rychlak.☜D3B8AB
□
Keith Gunderson
Keith Gunderson☜Arguments advanced by Keith Gunderson.☜D3B8AB
□
L.J. Landau
L.J. Landau☜☜D3B8AB
□
Ned Block
Ned Block☜Arguments advanced by Ned Block.☜D3B8AB
□
Robert French
Robert French☜Arguments advanced by Robert French.☜D3B8AB
□
Roger Penrose
Roger Penrose☜Arguments advanced by Roger Penrose.☜D3B8AB
□
Selmer Bringsjord
Selmer Bringsjord☜Arguments advanced by Selmer Bringsjord.☜D3B8AB
□
Stephen Kosslyn
Stephen Kosslyn☜Arguments advanced by Stephen Kosslyn.☜D3B8AB
□
Zenon Pylyshyn
Zenon Pylyshyn☜Arguments advanced by Zenon Pylyshyn.☜D3B8AB
□
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:
#2768
Node type:
Protagonist
Entry date (GMT):
7/20/2007 6:03:00 PM
Last edit date (GMT):
7/20/2007 6:03:00 PM
Show other editors
Incoming cross-relations:
0
Outgoing cross-relations:
17
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