| Full text | |
| Author(s): |
Goncalves, Bernardo
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Journal article |
| Source: | MINDS AND MACHINES; v. N/A, p. 31-pg., 2022-11-27. |
| Abstract | |
The Turing test has been studied and run as a controlled experiment and found to be underspecified and poorly designed. On the other hand, it has been defended and still attracts interest as a test for true artificial intelligence (AI). Scientists and philosophers regret the test's current status, acknowledging that the situation is at odds with the intellectual standards of Turing's works. This article refers to this as the Turing Test Dilemma, following the observation that the test has been under discussion for over seventy years and still is widely seen as either too bad or too good to be a valuable experiment for AI. An argument that solves the dilemma is presented, which relies on reconstructing the Turing test as a thought experiment in the modern scientific tradition. It is argued that Turing's exposition of the imitation game satisfies Mach's characterization of the basic method of thought experiments and that Turing's uses of his test satisfy Popper's conception of the critical and heuristic uses of thought experiments and Kuhn's association of thought experiments to conceptual change. It is emphasized how Turing methodically varied the imitation game design to address specific challenges posed to him by other thinkers and how his test illustrates a property of the phenomenon of intelligence and suggests a hypothesis on machine learning. This reconstruction of the Turing test provides a rapprochement to the conflicting views on its value in the literature. (AU) | |
| FAPESP's process: | 19/21489-4 - The future of artificial intelligence: the logical structure of Alan Turing's argument |
| Grantee: | Bernardo Nunes Gonçalves |
| Support Opportunities: | Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral |