Seite - 168 - in Limina - Grazer theologische Perspektiven, Band 3:2

168 | www.limina-graz.eu Frank G. Bosman | The turning of Turing’s tables The same applies to the example of The Talos Principle. EL0HIM, and to a lesser degree the MLA, pass the Turing test since it takes both the child program and the player considerable time to discover that both are arti- ficial intelligences instead of real people. The child also passes the Turing test, since it takes the player approximately the same amount of time to find out its avatar is not of (virtual) flesh and blood, but also an A.I.5 The player, again, has also passed the Turing test, when – and only when – he or she decides to disobey EL0HIM’s instructions to ascend the Tower. In this case again, the player is his or her own judge, and can pass judgement only in retrospect (after having experienced both endings). In both cases, The Turing Test and The Talos Principle, the “convincing of the judge” that a given entity is actually either an artificial or a human one, is done by different criteria. In the first game, the differentiating notions were morality, creativity and language (such as the realization of a conver- sation), while in the second game disobedience was central. Only when Ava/TOM/the player were creative enough to solve the puzzle (including some rather divergent thinking “out of the box”) and were mor- ally conscious enough to understand the difficult decision that had to be made between two possibly equally unfavourable choices, the concept of being human arose. And only when the child program/the player became aware that being disobedient was the only option to escape the circular world of the Expanded Lifespan servers, was the issue of becoming – quite literally – “humanoid” raised. In both cases, Turing tests, active and passive, regular and reversed, were narratively used to stimulate the player to contemplate the source of all an- thropological questioning and reasoning: what does it mean to be (called) “human”? As Stefano Gualeni has already argued, digital game environ- ments are perfect “locations” for executing thought experiments. The Turing Test and The Talos Principle are two of such “experimental spaces”. What does it mean to be human, to become human? When we play games, we begin to understand. The artificial intelligences in the two games are philosophical mirrors in narrative disguises in which our exclusively hu- man traits are literally reflected and critically reflected upon. The theological consequences of these insights are primarily found in the field of theological anthropology: it sheds new light on the idea of human- ity as imago Dei, that is as ‘created co-creators’, and on the new (religious) 5 While this is rhetorically true, a number of players will figure out the artificial nature of their avatar much quicker, because when the avatar is executing certain player-intended actions – like typing on a key- board or resetting the level to its starting point – two robotic hands are shown. The same is true for the start of the first level (“Level A1”), when the avatar briefly (and nearly visibly) shields its eyes from the sun, or when the player discovers the only mirror in the game showing the robotic body of the child program (“Star World A”). When we play games, we begin to understand.