Lucas may be a Turing machine
If we fix up Lucas's argument so that it's more accurate, we discover that it proves something different than Lucas intended. It shows that: Lucas may be a Turing machine—and that, if he is, he has no way of knowing which one he is.
The corrected argument, it turns out, shows that:
  • Lucas may be a Turing machine. So Lucas's intended argument—that is not a machine—fails.
  • Furthermore, if Lucas is a Turing machine, he has no way of knowing which one he is.
Paul Benacerraf (1967).

Note: This argument Simeon stimulates a highly technical thread of debate that is not represented here because of its length and complexity.

The thread includes papers from Hanson (1971), Chahara (1972), and Reinhardt (1986).
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
▲
Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7] »Are thinking computers mathematically possible? [7]
▲
No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems »No: computers are limited by Gödel's theorems
■
Lucas may be a Turing machine
●
Benacerraf’s argument is inconsistent »Benacerraf’s argument is inconsistent
●
Lucas sure that he isn't a machine »Lucas sure that he isn't a machine
+Komentarai (0)
+Citavimą (0)
+About