Key Arguments

• Turing notes that contemporary interest in ‘thinking machines’ is specifically about electronic or digital computers, and he asks ‘Can [such] machines think?’
• He proposes replacing this vague question with a more precise ‘imitation game’ involving an interrogator trying to distinguish a man from a woman through written questions and answers.
• Turing then modifies the game by having a machine take the part of one of the human players and asks whether the interrogator would decide wrongly as often in this case as in the purely human version.
• He explicitly states that these questions ‘replace our original, “Can machines think?”’, thereby defining intelligence operationally as success in the imitation game.
• Dreyfus notes that philosophers ‘may doubt’ whether behavioral similarity is sufficient ground for attributing intelligence, indicating a philosophical controversy about the adequacy of this criterion.
• Nonetheless, Dreyfus concedes that for AI practitioners Turing’s test provided both a concrete goal for construction and a practical criterion for evaluating claims of machine intelligence.

Source Quotes

This was just what Hobbes and Leibniz had ordered, and Martin Heidegger appropriately saw in cybernetics the culmination of the philosophical tradition.15* Thus while practical men like Eckert and Mauchly, at the University of Pennsylvania, were designing the first electronic digital machine, theorists, such as Turing, trying to understand the essence and capacity of such machines, became interested in an area which had thus far been the province of philosophers: the nature of reason itself. In 1950, Turing wrote an influential article, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," in which he points out that "the present interest in 'thinking machines' has been aroused by a particular kind of machine, usually called an 'electronic computer' or a 'digital computer.'"16 He then takes up the question "Can [such] machines think?" To decide this question Turing proposes a test which he calls the imitation game: The new form of the problem can be described in terms of a game which we call the "imitation game."

In 1950, Turing wrote an influential article, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," in which he points out that "the present interest in 'thinking machines' has been aroused by a particular kind of machine, usually called an 'electronic computer' or a 'digital computer.'"16 He then takes up the question "Can [such] machines think?" To decide this question Turing proposes a test which he calls the imitation game: 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.

She can add such things as "I am the woman, don't listen to him!" to her answers, but it will avail nothing as the man can make similar remarks. We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman?

We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?"

Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" 17 This test has become known as the Turing Test.

These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" 17 This test has become known as the Turing Test. Philosophers may doubt whether merely behavioral similarity could ever give adequate ground for the attribution of intelligence,18 but as a goal for those actually trying to construct thinking machines, and as a criterion for critics to use in evaluating their work, Turing's test was just what was needed.

17 This test has become known as the Turing Test. Philosophers may doubt whether merely behavioral similarity could ever give adequate ground for the attribution of intelligence,18 but as a goal for those actually trying to construct thinking machines, and as a criterion for critics to use in evaluating their work, Turing's test was just what was needed. Of course, no digital computer immediately volunteered or was drafted for Turing's game.

Key Concepts

• In 1950, Turing wrote an influential article, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," in which he points out that "the present interest in 'thinking machines' has been aroused by a particular kind of machine, usually called an 'electronic computer' or a 'digital computer.'"
• He then takes up the question "Can [such] machines think?"
• The new form of the problem can be described in terms of a game which we call the "imitation game."
• We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?"
• Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman?
• These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?"
• This test has become known as the Turing Test.
• Philosophers may doubt whether merely behavioral similarity could ever give adequate ground for the attribution of intelligence,18 but as a goal for those actually trying to construct thinking machines, and as a criterion for critics to use in evaluating their work, Turing's test was just what was needed.

Context

End of the provided section I passage, where Dreyfus introduces Turing’s 1950 proposal as the dominant practical and methodological criterion for AI, while hinting at philosophical reservations.