biolog

First, a primer on the topic. According to Turning, Artificial Intelligence has three criteria.
1. Humans born of natural means are excluded
2. Any engineering method may be deployed in the “machine’s,” construction.
3. Although the “machine” is constructed, the manner of operation cannot be satisfactorily described by the constituting components (parts do not equal whole).

To help understand how to approach such a question, Turing devised a game, called the Imitation Game. The game consists of three players; a male, a female and an interrogator. The interrogator can not see the other two players, but can ask them questions. The answers are typed so voice is not a factor.

The object of the game for the interrogator is to distinguish the male from the female. The object for the male is to trick the interrogator, and the object for the female is to help the interrogator choose correctly.

Thus, we have Turing’s revised question.

Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this [with a computer rather than a man] as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman?

He concludes.

In about fifty years’ time it will be possible to program computers…to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 percent chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning.

Common Objections to Turing’s Conclusion:
1. The Theological Objection
Religious Leader in Funny Hat: Only creatures with souls can think and souls can only come from God

Turing: If man can create babies (with souls) then why can’t they create other things with souls? Additionally, the Bible is not a reliable source.

2. The “Heads in the Sand” Objection
Conservative Republican: The consequences of machines thinking is too scary to even think about.
Turing: This objection is not really an argument, just an avoidance of the issue.

3. The Mathematical Objection
Philosopher : There is a finite limit to a computer’s knowledge whereas human’s have no limit, therefore computers are inferior.
Turing: It is not proven that man’s knowledge is limitless. Since that is the basis of this argument, it falls apart.

4. The Argument from Consciousness
Liberal Arts Major: Machines do not feel emotions nor are they able to create art. (music, poetry, etc.)
Turing: It is impossible to test this. One can never really know if a man is feeling emotion unless we were inside that man’s head. Therefore we can never know if a machine thinks without being inside that machine’s head.

A Few Discussion Questions I Came Up With:

1. Do you think that Turing’s revised question is a valid replacement for the question, “Do machines think?” How might this change the question at hand?

2. Do you think that machines have reached the point where they are able to “trick” humans? What would be the repercussions for our society?

3. According to the definition of “machine” as given by Turing, would Robocop fit the criteria?

4. What would Aristotle (think teleology) have to say about Objection 1?

6. In Objection 2, it states that the fear of machines thinking comes from the idea that humans would loose our “commanding position” if machines think. So, would we?

7. If a machine can out wit a person, would that mean that it could think?

8. Do you think that a machine must be able to feel emotions or create art in order to “think”? Do you think that machines must be able to feel emotions or create art in order to be considered AI?

9. If it were proven that machines had advanced to the point where it was impossible to tell them apart from a human when playing the imitation game, would that make the machine a humanoid or quasi-human? What other criteria would they need to have?