The Turing Test: Verbal Behavior as the Hallmark of Intelligence

328 Pages·2.332 MB·English

by  Shieber Stuart M. (Editor)

Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7

The Turing Test
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
The Turing Test
Verbal Behavior as the Hallmark of Intelligence
edited by Stuart M. Shieber
ABradfordBook
TheMITPress
Cambridge,Massachusetts
London,England
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
(cid:1)c 2004MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereproducedinanyformbyany
electronicormechanicalmeans(includingphotocopying,recording,orinforma-
tionstorageorretrieval)withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublisher.
This book was set in Sabon by Interactive Composition Corporation and was
printedandboundintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
TheTuringtest:verbalbehaviorasthehallmarkofintelligence/editedbyStuart
M.Shieber.
p. cm.
“ABradfordbook.”
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN0-262-69293-7(pbk.:alk.paper)
1.Turingtest. I.Shieber,StuartM.
Q341.T8742004
006.3—dc22
2003061234
10987654321
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
ToCassiaWyner
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
“Justthinkingoutloud....Howsmart’sanAI,Case?”
“Depends.Somearen’tmuchsmarterthandogs.Pets.Costafortuneanyway.
TherealsmartonesareassmartasTuringheatiswillingtolet’emget.”
“Look, you’re a cowboy. How come you aren’t just flat-out fascinated with
thosethings?”
“Well,”hesaid,“forstarts,they’rerare.Mostofthemaremilitary,thebright
ones,andwecan’tcracktheice.That’swherealltheicecomesfrom,youknow?
Andthenthere’stheTuringcops,andthat’sbadheat.”Helookedather.“Idunno,
itjustisn’tpartofthetrip.”
“Jockeysallthesame,”shesaid.“Noimagination.”
—WilliamGibson,Neuromancer
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
Contents
EditorialNotes xiii
Introduction 1
I Precursors 15
TheBeˆteMachine 17
1 DiscourseontheMethod,ChapterV 23
Rene´ Descartes
IfAnimalsCouldTalk 31
2 LettertotheMarquessofNewcastle 35
Rene´ Descartes
TheHommeMachine 39
3 SelectionsfromMachineMan 45
JulienOffraydeLaMettrie
II Turing’sTest 59
ComputerTechnology 61
4 ComputingMachineryandIntelligence 67
AlanM.Turing
TheEphemera 97
5 IntelligentMachinery,AHereticalTheory 105
AlanM.Turing
6 CanDigitalComputersThink? 111
AlanM.Turing
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
x Contents
7 CanAutomaticCalculatingMachinesBeSaidtoThink? 117
M.H.A.Newman,AlanM.Turing,SirGeoffreyJefferson,
andR.B.Braithwaite
III PhilosophicalReactionandtheMindResponsa 133
ImmediateResponses 135
CanMachinesHaveNeuroses? 141
8 DoMachinesThinkaboutMachinesThinking 143
LeonardPinsky
TheWedgeandtheSpark 147
9 TheImitationGame 151
KeithGunderson
EarlyHarbingersofLaterIssues 163
10 BeatingtheImitationGame 165
RichardPurtill
11 InDefenceofTuring 173
GeoffreySampson
12 OnthePointoftheImitationGame 177
P.H.Millar
TuringTestChauvinism 181
13 SubcognitionandtheLimitsoftheTuringTest 183
RobertM.French
TheSparkofIntentionality 199
14 Minds,Brains,andPrograms 201
JohnR.Searle
TheSparkofRichnessofInformationProcessing 225
15 PsychologismandBehaviorism 229
NedBlock
TheSupportingView 267
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
Contents xi
16 CanMachinesThink? 269
DanielC.Dennett
TheTuringTest’sEvidentiaryValue 293
17 AnAnalysisoftheTuringTest 297
JamesH.Moor
18 WhyMachinesCan’tThink:AReplytoJamesMoor 307
DouglasF.Stalker
19 ExplainingComputerBehavior 311
JamesH.Moor
DumpingtheBigQuestion 315
20 Turingonthe“ImitationGame” 317
NoamChomsky
Conclusion 323
Acknowledgments 325
Sources 327
Bibliography 331
Index 341
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:7
Editorial Notes
Thefollowingnonstandardtextualconventionsareusedinthisvolume.
Throughoutthetext,theAmericanconventionofmovingpunctuation
withinclosingquotationmarks(whetherornotthepunctuationispartof
whatisbeingreferredto)isdroppedinfavorofthemorelogicalandcon-
sistentconventionofplacingonlythequotedmaterialwithinthemarks.
Theclose-knitsetofworkscollectedinthisvolumefrequentlyciteoth-
ers collected here. In such cases, chapter (and occasionally page) infor-
mation is added to the references. This internal reference information is
distinguishedfromotherreferenceinformationbybeingplacedinitalics,
as“(Descartes1646,chapter2,36)”.InthecaseofTuring’sseminalMind
paper,wherethereprintingprovidesinformationontheoriginalpagina-
tion,pagereferencesaregiventothatpagination,as“(Turing1950,442,
chapter4)”.
Shieber-79040 book April1,2004 12:11

Introduction
Howdoyoutellifsomethingisameterlong?Youcompareitwith
an object postulated to be a meter long. If the two are indistin-
guishablewithregardtothepertinentproperty,theirlength,then
youcanconcludethatthetestedobjectisthegivenlength.
Now,howdoyoutellifsomethingisintelligent?Youcompare
it with an entity postulated to be intelligent. If the two are indis-
tinguishablewithregardtothepertinentproperties,thenyoucan
concludethatthetestedentityisintelligent.
Atestofintelligencesuchasthis,basedonindistinguishability,
has a certain plausibility to it, and a long history. In its modern
form, such a test has come to be known as the Turing Test, af-
ter Alan Turing, the scientist who most explicitly and concretely
proposedit.
In1950,Turingpublishedapaperentitled“ComputingMachin-
eryandIntelligence”inthejournalMind.Inthepaper,hedefineda
simpletestasathoughtexperimenttocrystallizethequestionssur-
roundingthepossibilityofanintelligentartifact.Inessence,Turing
proposedtotestwhethertheartifactwasindistinguishablefroma
person with regard to what he took to be the pertinent property,
verbal behavior. But unlike the case of meter measurement, the
identificationofthepertinentpropertiesforintelligencearesubtle,
andramifieswidelyinthefoundationofthephilosophyofmind.
Although the philosophical issues that the Turing Test raises
had arisen before (as seen in part I) in philosophy, science, and
literature, Turing’s encapsulation of them in his simple thought
experiment stands out as a trenchant codification of these issues
aroundwhichdiscussioncannaturallyrevolve.Thefamiliarityand