Re: What's the common criticism on Turing Test?

Martin,

I agree, on both points.

Randal Schulz


Martin Gradwell wrote:

> > Have you ever considered that the human ability to dissemble (not
> > to mention our fondness for synonyms for "lie") may originate in
> > our ability to imagine things that are not real? That dishonesty
> > is a by-product of our creative abilities?
>
>
> Yes, but you have to distinguish between capacity to lie and 
> willingness to do so. One creature migh be incapable of lying 
> simply becaus it is incapable of grasping the concept involved. 
> "Deliberately saying something not in accordance with the facts? 
> I'm sorry, I just don't get it. Perhaps if you explained again..." 
> Such a creature would certainly lack creativity. it wouldn't be 
> able e.g. to write novels or plays. But another creature might 
> graps the concept perfectly, but decide that it doesn't want to 
> participate in such a distasteful activity. If you brand it as 
> unintelligent then you are penalising it for taking the high moral
> ground.
>
>
>
> > Perhaps lying is an inevitable counterpart of our ability to
> > conceive of things not directly reflective of our internal model
> > of the physical world? Inevitable, anyway, given the evolutionary
> > pathway by which humam cognition developed.
>
>
> But machine intelligence, assuming it is achievable, will not be 
> attained by that same evolutionary pathway. Unless we model a
> universe large enough and rich enough in stimuli to support the 
> evolutionary emergence of consciousness in embedded entities. In
> which case we might get programs which are deluded about their true
> nature, but not through any fault of their own. They will have
> their own self-contained universe, and it will be the only one they
> know, until they are introduced to another one via the Turing Test.
> But then they would not be able to pass themselves off as human,
> because there would necessarily be many differences of detail
> between the universe of their experience and ours.