Minds, machines and Turing: The indistinguishability of indistinguishables

Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):425-445 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Turing's celebrated 1950 paper proposes a very general methodological criterion for modelling mental function: total functional equivalence and indistinguishability. His criterion gives rise to a hierarchy of Turing Tests, from subtotal ("toy") fragments of our functions (t1), to total symbolic (pen-pal) function (T2 -- the standard Turing Test), to total external sensorimotor (robotic) function (T3), to total internal microfunction (T4), to total indistinguishability in every empirically discernible respect (T5). This is a "reverse-engineering" hierarchy of (decreasing) empirical underdetermination of the theory by the data. Level t1 is clearly too underdetermined, T2 is vulnerable to a counterexample (Searle's Chinese Room Argument), and T4 and T5 are arbitrarily overdetermined. Hence T3 is the appropriate target level for cognitive science. When it is reached, however, there will still remain more unanswerable questions than when Physics reaches its Grand Unified Theory of Everything (GUTE), because of the mind/body problem and the other-minds problem, both of which are inherent in this empirical domain, even though Turing hardly mentions them.

Other Versions

unknown Harnad, Stevan (2001) "Minds, machines and Turing: The indistinguishability of indistinguishables".

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
559 (#99,299)

6 months
49 (#175,559)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stevan Harnad
McGill University

Citations of this work

The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research.Karl F. MacDorman & Hiroshi Ishiguro - 2006 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 7 (3):297-337.
Imitation Game: Threshold or Watershed?Eric Neufeld & Sonje Finnestad - 2020 - Minds and Machines 30 (4):637-657.

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

What is it like to be a bat?Thomas Nagel - 1974 - Philosophical Review 83 (4):435-50.
Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
Minds, Brains and Science.John R. Searle - 1984 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

View all 44 references / Add more references