Details view: Human judges may be fooled too easily

Views
Add
Edit
- Edit page
- Delete page
Share
Login
- Member login
- Register now for a free account
🔎

Human judges may be fooled too easily SupportiveArgument1 #241 Human judges can be fooled by unintelligent machines.
Ned Block, 1981.

CONTEXT(Help)

Artificial Intelligence »Artificial IntelligenceArtificial 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] 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 decisiveNo: 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 easilyHuman 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 fooledA 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 effectThe 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 unreliableHuman 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 BlockNed Block☜Arguments advanced by Ned Block.☜FFFACD

Heading

Summary

Click the button to enter task scheduling information

Details

Enter task details

Message text

Select assignee(s)

Due date (click calendar)

RadDatePicker

Open the calendar popup.

Calendar

Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<	<	November 2024	>	<<

November 2024
	S	M	T	W	T	F	S
44	27	28	29	30	31	1	2
45	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
46	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
47	17	18	19	20	21	22	23
48	24	25	26	27	28	29	30
49	1	2	3	4	5	6	7

Reminder

Ready to post Copy to text

Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered

Lock

Comment graphing options

Choose comments:Comment onlyWhole threadAll comments

Choose location:To a new mapTo this map

New map options

Select map ontology Graph to private map

+Comments (0)

- CommentsAdd a commentNewest firstOldest firstShow threads

+Citations (0)

- CitationsAdd new citationList by: CiterankMap

+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

x Select file to upload