Turing's Two Tests for Intelligence*

On a literal reading of `Computing Machinery and Intelligence', Alan Turing presented not one, but two, practical tests to replace the question `Can machines think?' He presented them as equivalent. I show here that the first test described in that much-discussed paper is in fact not equivalent to the second one, which has since become known as `the Turing Test'. The two tests can yield different results; it is the first, neglected test that provides the more appropriate indication of intelligence. This is because the features of intelligence upon which it relies are resourcefulness and a critical attitude to one's habitual responses; thus the test's applicablity is not restricted to any particular species, nor does it presume any particular capacities. This is more appropriate because the question under consideration is what would count as machine intelligence. The first test realizes a possibility that philosophers have overlooked: a test that uses a human's linguistic performance in setting an empirical test of intelligence, but does not make behavioral similarity to that performance the criterion of intelligence. Consequently, the first test is immune to many of the philosophical criticisms on the basis of which the (so-called) `Turing Test' has been dismissed.

[1]  James H. Moor,et al.  An analysis of the turing test , 1976 .

[2]  John Heil,et al.  Philosophy of Mind , 2019 .

[3]  A. M. Turing,et al.  Computing Machinery and Intelligence , 1950, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[4]  Andy Clark,et al.  Machines and Thought: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Volume I , 1997 .

[5]  R. Descartes,et al.  A Discourse on Method , 2020 .

[6]  John Haugeland,et al.  Artificial intelligence - the very idea , 1987 .

[7]  S. Shieber Subcognition and the Limits of the Turing Test , 2004 .

[8]  Andy Clark,et al.  Connectionism, Concepts, and Folk Psychology: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Volume Ii , 1996 .

[9]  Stuart M. Shieber,et al.  Lessons from a restricted Turing test , 1994, CACM.

[10]  R. French Subcognition and the Limits of the TuringTest , 1990 .

[11]  A. M. Turing,et al.  Computing Machinery and Intelligence , 1950, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[12]  Gualtiero Piccinini,et al.  Turing's Rules for the Imitation Game , 2000, Minds and Machines.

[13]  I. Biederman In: An invitation to cognitive science , 2003 .

[14]  Blay Whitby,et al.  The Turing Test: AI's biggest blind alley? , 1996 .

[15]  K. Gunderson,et al.  Descartes, La Mettrie, Language, And Machines , 1964, Philosophy.

[16]  A. Turing Intelligent Machinery, A Heretical Theory* , 1996 .

[17]  J. Genova Turing's sexual guessing game , 1994 .

[18]  Bent Flyvbjerg The Lying Game , 2003 .

[19]  Saul Traiger,et al.  Making the Right Identification in the Turing Test1 , 2000, Minds and Machines.

[20]  Donald Michie,et al.  Turing's Test and Conscious Thought , 1993, Artif. Intell..

[21]  D. Dennett Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds , 1998 .

[22]  M. V. Wilkes,et al.  Can Machines Think? , 1953, Proceedings of the IRE.

[23]  N. Rescher Discourse on a Method , 1968 .

[24]  Deborah Boyle,et al.  Descartes’s Tests for (Animal) Mind , 1999 .

[25]  Kenneth M. Ford,et al.  Turing Test Considered Harmful , 1995, IJCAI.

[26]  H. Sangani,et al.  DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP? , 2020, Faculty Brat.

[27]  B. Jack Copeland,et al.  The Turing Test* , 2000, Minds and Machines.

[28]  Intelligence , 1836, The Medico-chirurgical review.

[29]  H. Dreyfus What Computers Can't Do , 1972 .