Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy

Living Edition
| Editors: Mortimer Sellers, Stephan Kirste

Artificial Intelligence

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_745-1

Introduction: A Bit of History

The first scholarly inquiries into artificial intelligence (“AI”) date back to 1943 and are linked to the work of Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts in the United States (Russell and Norvig 2010, p. 16). However, the first use of the expression “artificial intelligence” occurred in 1956, when it was adopted by John McCarthy, during a lecture at the Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire (Kaplan 2016, p. 13). Many other papers about the subject were published in the following years, as described by Nilsson (2009, pp. 71–85).

It is worth discussing the “Turing test” – also known as the “imitation game” (Turing 1950, pp. 433–460). In 1950, Alan Turing designed a test to identify whether a machine evolved to the point that it would be able to produce results indistinguishable from the results produced by human actions. A machine that can pass this test could be, according to Turing, called “intelligent.” Despite its historical importance, the Turing test...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Balkin JM (2017) The three laws of robotics in the age of big data. Yale Law School research paper no 592, p 01-28, Yale Law School – New Haven, Connecticut. August 2017Google Scholar
  2. Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Brynjolfsson E, McAfee A (2016) The second machine age: work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Calo R (2017) Artificial intelligence policy: a primer and roadmap. University of Washington research paper 01-28. University of Washington Law School – Washington, DC. August 2017Google Scholar
  5. Casey AJ, Niblett A (2017) The death of rules and standards. Indiana Law J 92(4):1.401–1.447. Bloomington: Maurer School of LawGoogle Scholar
  6. Cath C et al (2017) Artificial intelligence and the ‘good society’: the US, EU, and UK approach. Sci Eng Ethics 23(2):1–24. New York: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hayes P, Ford K (1995) Turing test considered harmful. In: Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence – IJCAI-95, vol 1. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Montreal, pp 972–977Google Scholar
  8. Kaplan J (2016) Artificial intelligence: what everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Kurzweil R (2005) The singularity is near: when humans transcend biology. Penguin Group, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Nilsson NJ (2009) The quest for artificial intelligence: a history of ideas and achievements. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Remus D, Levy F (2016) Can robots be lawyers? Computers, lawyers, and the practice of law. Massachusetts Institute of Technology research paper 01-77. Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  12. Russell SJ, Norvig P (2010) Artificial intelligence: a modern approach, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  13. Sample I, Hern A (2014) Scientists dispute whether computer ‘Eugene Goostman’ passed Turing test. The Guardian, 9 JuneGoogle Scholar
  14. Scherer MU (2016) Regulating artificial intelligence systems: risks, challenges, competencies and strategies. Harv J Law Technol 29(2):353–400. Cambridge: Harvard Law SchoolGoogle Scholar
  15. Solum LB (1992) Legal personhood for artificial intelligences. N C Law Rev 70(4):1.231–1.288. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina School of LawGoogle Scholar
  16. Susskind R (2013) Tomorrow’s lawyers: an introduction to your future. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 49:433–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zimmerman EJ (2016) Machine minds: frontiers in legal personhood. University of Chicago working paper 01-41. University of Chicago Law School – Chicago, IllinoisGoogle Scholar

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Federal University of Minas Gerais – UFMGBelo HorizonteBrazil

Section editors and affiliations

  • Marcelo Galuppo
    • 1
  • Vitor Medrado
    • 2
  1. 1.College of LawFederal University of Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil
  2. 2.Pontifical Catholic University of Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil