Turing devised a system to analyze behavior that in my opinion self-affirms a negative existential. In terms of behavior a computer, according to Turing, was always in the mode towards a human being of imitation. There's even a movie about this, called, The Imitation Game. But, computerized behavior is neither a game or one derived from deeper analysis as if standing in front of a mirror and getting a deeper resolution picture at your features, in my opinion. — Shawn
The new form of the problem can be described in terms of a game which we call the ‘imitation game’. It is played with three people, a man (A), a woman (B), and an interrogator (C) who may be of either sex. The interrogator stays in a room apart from the other two. The object of the game for the interrogator is to determine which of the other two is the man and which is the woman.
And, so, I have thought about this deeply, and think that imitation isn't all that Turing machines would only be able to accomplish. Thinking a little deeper, if a Generalized-Artificial-Intelligence computer can define behavior of a human being outwardly, then doesn't that de facto prove that it would have to have its own sentient behavior towards this human being gazing into their own picture without any surroundings? — Shawn
ELIZA's creator, Weizenbaum regarded the program as a method to show the superficiality of communication between man and machine, but was surprised by the number of individuals who attributed human-like feelings to the computer program, including Weizenbaum’s secretary.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.