Web-Books
in the Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
Zeitschriften
LIMINA - Grazer theologische Perspektiven
Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Volume 3:2
Page - 159 -
  • User
  • Version
    • full version
    • text only version
  • Language
    • Deutsch - German
    • English

Page - 159 - in Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Volume 3:2

Image of the Page - 159 -

Image of the Page - 159 - in Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Volume 3:2

Text of the Page - 159 -

159 | www.limina-graz.eu Frank G. Bosman | The turning of Turing’s tables that he was actually the puppet of an artificial puppet master, just as Ava was in the player’s eyes. And since the A.I.-controlled player was unaware of the manipulation, he has passed the test by judg- ing himself to be human-while-not. Secondly, the passing of the Turing test is also visible – as was the case with TOM – in the dual ending of the game. The player exhibits characteristic human behaviour, or otherwise formulated, behaviour that would be judged as human by a third impartial instance, either way. The player may choose to kill both women, thus exhibiting moral judgement, even in the face of grave consequences (the death of two, potentially biologically immortal people), or the player may choose to let TOM/him-/herself (de- pending on the level of experienced identification between player and TOM) be killed by the women, even in the face of greater con- sequence (the death of TOM/the player). The Chinese Room Above, I spoke about “characteristic human behaviour” as something the Turing test would be able to judge, like moral judgement or emotions. In the original test, however, as TOM faithfully relates, the focal point was the ability of the A.I. to “have a polite conversation” (“Level B17”). When Ava asks TOM if he thinks he can pass the test, he replies positively: “I am quite capable of polite conversation, wouldn’t you say?” The language-oriented original test has been criticized by – among others – John Searle (1980) in his famous thought experiment of the Chinese Room, as TOM also re- lates: “The Turing Test has been criticized. Researchers claim it does not correctly test a machine’s ability to think, but rather its ability to deceive” (“Level B18”). Searle’s experiment (explained in “Level B18”, “Level B19”, and “Level B20”, and faithfully rendered in the game itself as a physical experiment in “Chinese Room” between “Level E46” and “Level E47”), conjures up the idea of a non-Chinese-speaking person sitting in a closed-off room with nothing but an English instruction manual. Outside the room, there is a Chinese-speaking person writing notes in Chinese and pushing them In the original Turing test, the focal point was the ability of the A.I. to “have a polite conversation”.
back to the  book Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Volume 3:2"
Limina Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Volume 3:2
Title
Limina
Subtitle
Grazer theologische Perspektiven
Volume
3:2
Editor
Karl Franzens University Graz
Date
2020
Language
German
License
CC BY-NC 4.0
Size
21.4 x 30.1 cm
Pages
270
Categories
Zeitschriften LIMINA - Grazer theologische Perspektiven
Web-Books
Library
Privacy
Imprint
Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
Limina