The Turing Test, Consciousness and Imago Dei

[TheWall]

Even if we did make life possessing hnau as C.S Lewis called it, or imago dei which personally i think is impossible it would prove that intelligence and deliberate planning are necessary for life.

[Smash Boy]

To me the turing test doesn't prove anything other than how gullible the person who is testing is. What fools one person might not fool someone else. Also even if the machine could pass the test, all it proves is that it can fake being intelligent. It doesn't prove that it has consciousness or can actually think for itself. It just means it is good at the Turing test.

These are exactly the thoughts of people like Mark Halpern when he addressed the Test even granting the scenario where the computer does pass.

[Smash Boy]

Just as some would want it to be murder to kill and eat animals. I see it all as a dark and consistent effort to undermine the uniqueness of human beings. We are no better or different than animals, and now in this case machines.

I agree. But so far, as elusive the Test is, no machine so far has achieved what Alan Turing had in mind.

[Sparko]

I agree. But so far, as elusive the Test is, no machine so far has achieved what Alan Turing had in mind.

um,,,

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27762088

but like you said, it probably wasn't what Turing had in mind. Not some rigged chatbox event, but having an actual extended conversation with the bot and a person with no conditions or limits. And not having a bot that pretends to be an ignorant foreign teenager to cover up the bots errors.

[shunyadragon]

The 'Turing Test' is history, and yes a computer passed the test.



I do not believe test nor the fact that the test was busted resulted in any conclusive evidence of machine intelligence equivalent to human intelligence, but I do not consider it a difficult task to achieve this in the near future.

[Jedidiah]

Simulation.

[Jedidiah]

If you have to create programing for it you do not have real consciousness.

[Jedidiah]

To me the turing test doesn't prove anything other than how gullible the person who is testing is. What fools one person might not fool someone else. Also even if the machine could pass the test, all it proves is that it can fake being intelligent. It doesn't prove that it has consciousness or can actually think for itself. It just means it is good at the Turing test.

In other words you have a very good program, not a person.

[JimL]

Doesn't this test assume that being able to answer questions is all that constitutes consciousness?

[shunyadragon]

Doesn't this test assume that being able to answer questions is all that constitutes consciousness?

No, there is more to the test than that. The computer program has to be able to convince people it is a human not only in answering question, but also in dialogue.

[JimL]

No, there is more to the test than that. The computer program has to be able to convince people it is a human not only in answering question, but also in dialogue.

The computer can only convince one that it is conscious if it can't be seen which I assume is why it's not being visible is stipulated. If you are sitting in front of the computer no dialogue no matter how conscious sounding is going to convince anyone that the computer in front of them is conscious. Thinking and communicating is only part of what consciousness is.

[Sparko]

No, there is more to the test than that. The computer program has to be able to convince people it is a human not only in answering question, but also in dialogue.

Another problem with the current test is that they seem to be limited to text interfaces. Even a human being can't have a natural conversation in text. We tend to shorten our answers, consolidating words, etc. Where in natural conversations, people will express themselves, show emotions, etc, which a machine just can't do. So the tests are "rigged"

[shunyadragon]

The computer can only convince one that it is conscious if it can't be seen which I assume is why it's not being visible is stipulated. If you are sitting in front of the computer no dialogue no matter how conscious sounding is going to convince anyone that the computer in front of them is conscious. Thinking and communicating is only part of what consciousness is.

I already acknowledged the tests are limited, but nonetheless the Truing Test has been achieved.

[shunyadragon]

Another problem with the current test is that they seem to be limited to text interfaces. Even a human being can't have a natural conversation in text. We tend to shorten our answers, consolidating words, etc. Where in natural conversations, people will express themselves, show emotions, etc, which a machine just can't do. So the tests are "rigged"

I believe that present technology is capable of simulating natural conversation from text. Robotics in Japan has achieved considerable success in achieving this.

[Sparko]

I believe that present technology is capable of simulating natural conversation from text. Robotics in Japan has achieved considerable success in achieving this.

that's not even what I said. I said that the human even has a hard time simulating a natural conversation in text. so it makes it harder for another human to determine if even a human is human based only on text conversations.

OK I am calling it folks. Shunyadragon is an AI. He failed the Turing Test.