Advertisement

The Turing Test: 55 Years Later

  • John R. Searle

Abstract

In spite of the clarity of the original article, Turing’s Test has been subject to different interpretations. I distinguish three of these, corresponding to my earlier distinction between Strong AI and Weak AI. The two strong Turing Tests are subject to refutation by the Chinese Room Argument, the weak Turing Test is not.

The obvious falsity of behaviorism, on which the strong Turing Test was based, leads one to wonder whatever motivated behaviorism in the first place. It is best construed as a consequence of verificationism. The fact that Turing was led into error by the confusions of behaviorism does not diminish his overall achievement or contributions to philosophy and mathematics.

Keywords

Turing Test Strong AI Weak AI the Chinese Room Argument behaviorism functionalism brain processes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berkeley, G., 1998, A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, Jonathon Dancy, ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Mill, J. S., 1865, An Examination of Sir William Hamilton’s Philosophy, London.Google Scholar
  3. Searle, J. R., 1980, Minds, brains, and programs, Behavioral and Brains Sciences 3: 417–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Turing, A., 1950, Computing machinery and intelligence, Mind 59(236): 433–460.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • John R. Searle
    • 1
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations