DOCSLIB.ORG

I V Anthropomorphic Attachments in U.S. Literature, Robotics, And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I V Anthropomorphic Attachments in U.S. Literature, Robotics, And Anthropomorphic Attachments in U.S. Literature, Robotics, and Artificial Intelligence by Jennifer S. Rhee Program in Literature Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Kenneth Surin, Supervisor ___________________________ Mark Hansen ___________________________ Michael Hardt ___________________________ Katherine Hayles ___________________________ Timothy Lenoir Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Literature in the Graduate School of Duke University 2010 i v ABSTRACT Anthropomorphic Attachments in U.S. Literature, Robotics, and Artificial Intelligence by Jennifer S. Rhee Program in Literature Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Kenneth Surin, Supervisor ___________________________ Mark Hansen ___________________________ Michael Hardt ___________________________ Katherine Hayles ___________________________ Timothy Lenoir An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Literature in the Graduate School of Duke University 2010 Copyright by Jennifer S. Rhee 2010 Abstract “Anthropomorphic Attachments” undertakes an examination of the human as a highly nebulous, fluid, multiple, and often contradictory concept, one that cannot be approached directly or in isolation, but only in its constitutive relationality with the world. Rather than trying to find a way outside of the dualism between human and not- human, I take up the concept of anthropomorphization as a way to hypersaturate the question of the human. Within this hypersaturated field of inquiry, I focus on the specific anthropomorphic relationalities between human and humanoid technology. Focusing primarily on contemporary U.S. technologies and cultural forms, my dissertation looks at artificial intelligence and robotics in conversation with their cultural imaginaries in contemporary literature, science fiction, film, performance art, and video games, and in conversation with contemporary philosophies of the human, the posthuman, and technology. In reading these discourses as shaping, informing, and amplifying each other and the multiple conceptions of the human they articulate, “Anthropomorphic Attachments” attends to these multiple humans and the multiple morphologies by which anthropomorphic relationalities imagine and inscribe both humanoid technologies and the human itself. iv Contents Abstract.............................................................................................................................. iv List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ix Acknowledgements............................................................................................................. x Introduction: The Double-Articulation of the Human........................................................ 1 1 Misidentification’s Promise: The Turing Test in Richard Powers’ Galatea 2.2, Joseph Weizenbaum’s ELIZA, and Emily Short’s Galatea......................................................... 10 1.1 Anthropomorphization, Perverse Metaphor, and Turing’s Imitation Game......... 13 1.1.1 Gender between the Turing Test and Turing’s Test ........................................ 20 1.1.2 The Standard Turing Test: The Human Cut on the Bias ................................. 25 1.2 The Richard Test as Binding Narrative ................................................................ 28 1.2.1 The Turing Test Meets the Richard Test ........................................................... 37 1.3 From Sputnik to ELIZA: A Brief History of Natural Language Artificial Intelligence.................................................................................................................. 41 1.4 The Loebner Prize: Anthropomorphization Foreclosed ....................................... 46 1.4.1 The Anthropomorphic Imaginary: Misidentifications, Determination, and Desire ........................................................................................................................ 58 1.5 Intimacy and Distributed Agency in Emily Short’s Galatea ................................ 59 2 Intelligence Embodied, Worlded, and Emergent: Rudy Rucker’s Software and Rodney Brooks’ Robotics .............................................................................................................. 65 2.1 “Picture a ‘brain in a vat’...” ................................................................................. 67 2.2 Brains, Bodies, and Boppers................................................................................. 76 2.2.1 The Body in Multiples ..................................................................................... 77 2.2.2 The Matter and the Memory ............................................................................ 82 v 2.3 Pure Body and Becoming-Robot .......................................................................... 85 2.3.1 Embodiment, Situatedness, and Emergent Intelligence................................... 92 2.4 Brain in a Vat Redux: A Coda on Consciousness................................................. 98 3 Worlds beyond the Uncanny Valley: Philip K. Dick and the Robots of Cynthia Breazeal and Dave Hanson ............................................................................................................ 103 3.1 Design Choices and the Uncanny Valley............................................................ 104 3.2 Kismet: Animal, Infant, and Lowering the Threshold........................................ 110 3.2.1 Affect-Emotion, Anthropomorphization, and Breazeal’s Sociable Robots... 113 3.3 The Face I See and The Face You Know: Intersubjectivity and Recognition.... 115 3.3.1 Intersubjectivity as Indistinguishability: The Rubber Hand Illusion and Self- Face Recognition: ................................................................................................... 117 3.4 Affect-Emotion ................................................................................................... 120 3.4.1 Sociable Robots and Affect-Emotion ............................................................ 123 3.4.2 Affective Anthropomorphization................................................................... 125 3.4.3 HRI and Leonardo.......................................................................................... 128 3.5 Beyond the Uncanny Valley: David Hanson and Philip K. Dick....................... 132 3.5.1 Life, Simulacrum, and De-Anthropomorphization in Dick’s We Can Build You ................................................................................................................................. 141 3.5.2 Sympathy and the Simulacrum ...................................................................... 146 3.5.3 Affect-Emotion and the Limits of the Face ................................................... 149 3.5.4 Alterity, Fugues, and Agency ........................................................................ 152 3.5.5 Initial Dis-articulation in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?................ 154 3.5.6 Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and the Construction of Empathy .. 156 3.5.7 Anticipation as Invention: Dave Hanson’s Philip K. Dick Android.............. 163 vi 3.5.8 Post-Script: An Expansion of the Cultural Imaginary ................................... 167 4 Anthropomorphization Incorporated and Abjected: Stelarc’s Extra Ear..................... 168 4.1 The Visibility of Obsolescence: Stelarc’s Obsolete Body.................................. 170 4.2 Stelarc’s Extra Ear .............................................................................................. 176 4.2.1 Iteration 1: Extra Ear on the Face.................................................................. 176 4.2.2 Iteration 2: Extra Ear: ¼ Scale ...................................................................... 178 4.2.3 Iteration 3: Extra Ear on the Arm.................................................................. 179 4.3 The Abject........................................................................................................... 182 4.3.1 Abjection of the Living.................................................................................. 185 4.4 The Double Invisibility of the Senses................................................................. 188 4.5 McLuhan and the Senses .................................................................................... 192 4.6 Stelarc, McLuhan, and the Role of the Artist ..................................................... 195 5 Anthropomorphic Transduction and Speculation: Spielberg’s A.I. and Microsoft’s Milo ......................................................................................................................................... 199 5.1 The Humanoid Transduced................................................................................. 200 5.2 Milo, Molyneux, and the Creation of the Human............................................... 203 5.2.1 What Claire Knew.......................................................................................... 204 5.2.2 What Claire Felt............................................................................................. 209 5.2.3 Where Claire Is .............................................................................................. 212 5.2.4 What Claire Drew .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Turing Test Round One Loebner Prize Competition: November 8
    Summer 1 9 9 1 r Museum I VVS Turing Test Round One Loebner Prize Competition: November 8 The first round of the classic Turing Test of While the subject has been debated for machine intelligence will be held November 8, decades, artificial intelligence experts will get 1991 , at The Computer Museum. New York their first shot at a Turing Test real-time this philanthropist Dr. Hugh Loebner, President of fall at the Museum. Instead of being open­ Crown Industries, Inc., has offered a $100,000 ended- a challenge that no computer can prize for the first machine to pass the test. The approach at this time-each "conversation" historic contest is being will be limited to a particular subject to give ".. .ang computer that actuallg passes the unrestricted administered by the Cambridge the computer a better chance. Using a format (MA) Center for Behavioral akin to a public chess match, the judges will Turing Test will he. in euerg theoreticallg interesting Studies and the Museum. hold conversations on several computer In 1950, the brilliant British terminals in the Museum's auditorium. The sense. athinking thing. "[Daniel t Dennett] mathematician Alan Turing responses of each terminal will be controlled issued the ultimate challenge to either by "human confederates" or computers. computer science. He proposed an experiment The audience will be able to see the conversa­ to determine if a machine could think. His test tions on large screens near each terminal. requires a computer to emulate human behavior Afterwards, the tally of scores comparing (via a computer terminal) so well that it fools human and computer performances will be human judges into thinking its responses are announced.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons 1926 to Circa 1990
    A History of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons 1926 to circa 1990 TT King TT King A History of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons, 1926 to circa 1990 TT King Society Archivist 1 A History of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons, 1926 to circa 1990 © 2017 The Society of British Neurological Surgeons First edition printed in 2017 in the United Kingdom. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval sys- tem or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permis- sion of The Society of British Neurological Surgeons. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the infor- mation contained in this publication, no guarantee can be given that all errors and omissions have been excluded. No responsibility for loss oc- casioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by The Society of British Neurological Surgeons or the author. Published by The Society of British Neurological Surgeons 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields London WC2A 3PE www.sbns.org.uk Printed in the United Kingdom by Latimer Trend EDIT, DESIGN AND TYPESET Polymath Publishing www.polymathpubs.co.uk 2 The author wishes to express his gratitude to Philip van Hille and Matthew Whitaker of Polymath Publishing for bringing this to publication and to the British Orthopaedic Association for their help. 3 A History of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons 4 Contents Foreword
    [Show full text]
  • APA Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Spring
    NEWSLETTER | The American Philosophical Association Philosophy and Computers SPRING 2019 VOLUME 18 | NUMBER 2 FEATURED ARTICLE Jack Copeland and Diane Proudfoot Turing’s Mystery Machine ARTICLES Igor Aleksander Systems with “Subjective Feelings”: The Logic of Conscious Machines Magnus Johnsson Conscious Machine Perception Stefan Lorenz Sorgner Transhumanism: The Best Minds of Our Generation Are Needed for Shaping Our Future PHILOSOPHICAL CARTOON Riccardo Manzotti What and Where Are Colors? COMMITTEE NOTES Marcello Guarini Note from the Chair Peter Boltuc Note from the Editor Adam Briggle, Sky Croeser, Shannon Vallor, D. E. Wittkower A New Direction in Supporting Scholarship on Philosophy and Computers: The Journal of Sociotechnical Critique CALL FOR PAPERS VOLUME 18 | NUMBER 2 SPRING 2019 © 2019 BY THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION ISSN 2155-9708 APA NEWSLETTER ON Philosophy and Computers PETER BOLTUC, EDITOR VOLUME 18 | NUMBER 2 | SPRING 2019 Polanyi’s? A machine that—although “quite a simple” one— FEATURED ARTICLE thwarted attempts to analyze it? Turing’s Mystery Machine A “SIMPLE MACHINE” Turing again mentioned a simple machine with an Jack Copeland and Diane Proudfoot undiscoverable program in his 1950 article “Computing UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY, CHRISTCHURCH, NZ Machinery and Intelligence” (published in Mind). He was arguing against the proposition that “given a discrete- state machine it should certainly be possible to discover ABSTRACT by observation sufficient about it to predict its future This is a detective story. The starting-point is a philosophical behaviour, and this within a reasonable time, say a thousand discussion in 1949, where Alan Turing mentioned a machine years.”3 This “does not seem to be the case,” he said, and whose program, he said, would in practice be “impossible he went on to describe a counterexample: to find.” Turing used his unbreakable machine example to defeat an argument against the possibility of artificial I have set up on the Manchester computer a small intelligence.
    [Show full text]
  • Births, Marriages, and Deaths
    DEC. 31, 1955 MEDICAL NEWS MEDICALBRrsIJOURNAL. 1631 Lead Glazes.-For some years now the pottery industry British Journal of Ophthalmology.-The new issue (Vol. 19, has been forbidden to use any but leadless or "low- No. 12) is now available. The contents include: solubility" glazes, because of the risk of lead poisoning. EXPERIENCE IN CLINIcAL EXAMINATION OP CORNEAL SENsITiVrry. CORNEAL SENSITIVITY AND THE NASO-LACRIMAL REFLEX AFTER RETROBULBAR However, in some teaching establishments raw lead glazes or ANAES rHESIA. Jorn Boberg-Ans. glazes containing a high percentage of soluble lead are still UVEITIS. A CLINICAL AND STATISTICAL SURVEY. George Bennett. INVESTIGATION OF THE CARBONIC ANHYDRASE CONTENT OF THE CORNEA OF used. The Ministry of Education has now issued a memo- THE RABBIT. J. Gloster. randum to local education authorities and school governors HYALURONIDASE IN OCULAR TISSUES. I. SENSITIVE BIOLOGICAL ASSAY FOR SMALL CONCENTRATIONS OF HYALURONIDASE. CT. Mayer. (No. 517, dated November 9, 1955) with the object of INCLUSION BODIES IN TRACHOMA. A. J. Dark. restricting the use of raw lead glazes in such schools. The TETRACYCLINE IN TRACHOMA. L. P. Agarwal and S. R. K. Malik. APPL IANCES: SIMPLE PUPILLOMETER. A. Arnaud Reid. memorandum also includes a list of precautions to be ob- LARGE CONCAVE MIRROR FOR INDIRECT OPHTHALMOSCOPY. H. Neame. served when handling potentially dangerous glazes. Issued monthly; annual subscription £4 4s.; single copy Awards for Research on Ageing.-Candidates wishing to 8s. 6d.; obtainable from the Publishing Manager, B.M.A. House, enter for the 1955-6 Ciba Foundation Awards for research Tavistock Square, London, W.C.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from a Restricted Turing Test
    Lessons from a Restricted Turing Test Stuart M. Shieber Aiken Computation Laboratory Division of Applied Sciences Harvard University March 28, 1994 (Revision 6) Abstract We report on the recent Loebner prize competition inspired by Turing’s test of intelligent behavior. The presentation covers the structure of the competition and the outcome of its first instantiation in an actual event, and an analysis of the purpose, design, and appropriateness of such a competition. We argue that the competition has no clear purpose, that its design prevents any useful outcome, and that such a competition is inappropriate given the current level of technology. We then speculate as to suitable alternatives to the Loebner prize. arXiv:cmp-lg/9404002v1 4 Apr 1994 This paper is to appear in Communications of the Association for Comput- ing Machinery, and is available from the Center for Research in Computing Technology, Harvard University, as Technical Report TR-19-92 and from the Computation and Language e-print server as cmp-lg/9404002. The Turing Test and the Loebner Prize The English logician and mathematician Alan Turing, in an attempt to develop a working definition of intelligence free of the difficulties and philosophical pitfalls of defining exactly what constitutes the mental process of intelligent reasoning, devised a test, instead, of intelligent behavior. The idea, codified in his cel- ebrated 1950 paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” (Turing, 1950), was specified as an “imitation game” in which a judge attempts to distinguish which of two agents is a human and which a computer imitating human re- sponses by engaging each in a wide-ranging conversation of any topic and tenor.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence: a Course Outline
    Teaching Philosophy 9:2, June 1986 103 Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence: A Course Outline WILLIAM J. RAPAPORT State University ofNew York, Buffalo In the Fall of 1983, I offered a junior/senior-level course in Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence, in the Department of Philosophy at SUNY· Fredonia, after retuming there from a year's leave to study and do research in computer science and artificial intelligence (AI) at SUNY Buffalo. Of the 30 students enrolled, most were computer-science majors, about a third had no <;omputer background, and only a handful had studied any philosophy. (I might note that enrollments have subsequently increased in the Philosophy Department's AI-related courses, such as logic, philosophy of mind, and epistemology, and that several computer­ science students have added philosophy as a second major.) This article describes that course, provides material for use in such a course, and offers a bibliography of relevant articles in the AI, cognitive science, and philosophical literature. Course Organization and Texts My original intention, inspired in part by Moulton and Voytek 1980, was to spend the first half of the semester discussing working AI programs, in order to get the students excited about what computers could do, using the first edition of Patrick Henry Winston's Artificial Intelligence (Winston 1977) as the text. During the second half of the semester, my plan was to discuss Hubert L. Dreyfus's What Computers Can't Do (Dreyfus 1979), as a sort of antidote and source of philosophical reflection. While I still think that this might have been a good course, I chose instead to use lohn Haugeland's anthology, Mind Design (Haugeland 1981), for the philosophical half of the course, since it offers a wider-and fairer-spectrum ofphilosophical essays, besides including the most important section ofDreyfus's book.
    [Show full text]
  • Much Has Been Written About the Turing Test in the Last Few Years, Some of It
    1 Much has been written about the Turing Test in the last few years, some of it preposterously off the mark. People typically mis-imagine the test by orders of magnitude. This essay is an antidote, a prosthesis for the imagination, showing how huge the task posed by the Turing Test is, and hence how unlikely it is that any computer will ever pass it. It does not go far enough in the imagination-enhancement department, however, and I have updated the essay with a new postscript. Can Machines Think?1 Can machines think? This has been a conundrum for philosophers for years, but in their fascination with the pure conceptual issues they have for the most part overlooked the real social importance of the answer. It is of more than academic importance that we learn to think clearly about the actual cognitive powers of computers, for they are now being introduced into a variety of sensitive social roles, where their powers will be put to the ultimate test: In a wide variety of areas, we are on the verge of making ourselves dependent upon their cognitive powers. The cost of overestimating them could be enormous. One of the principal inventors of the computer was the great 1 Originally appeared in Shafto, M., ed., How We Know (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985). 2 British mathematician Alan Turing. It was he who first figured out, in highly abstract terms, how to design a programmable computing device--what we not call a universal Turing machine. All programmable computers in use today are in essence Turing machines.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Python for Chatbots
    Schedule: 1. History of chatbots and Artificial Intelligence 2. The growing role of Chatbots in 2020 3. A hands on look at the A.I Chatbot learning sequence 4. Q & A Session Schedule: 1. History of chatbots and Artificial Intelligence 2. The growing role of Chatbots in 2020 3. A hands on look at the A.I Chatbot learning sequence 4. Q & A Session Image credit: Archivio GBB/Contrasto/Redux History •1940 – The Bombe •1948 – Turing Machine •1950 – Touring Test •1980 Zork •1990 – Loebner Prize Conversational Bots •Today – Siri, Alexa Google Assistant Image credit: Photo 172987631 © Pop Nukoonrat - Dreamstime.com 1940 Modern computer history begins with Language Analysis: “The Bombe” Breaking the code of the German Enigma Machine ENIGMA MACHINE THE BOMBE Enigma Machine image: Photographer: Timothy A. Clary/AFP The Bombe image: from movie set for The Imitation Game, The Weinstein Company 1948 – Alan Turing comes up with the concept of Turing Machine Image CC-BY-SA: Wikipedia, wvbailey 1948 – Alan Turing comes up with the concept of Turing Machine youtube.com/watch?v=dNRDvLACg5Q 1950 Imitation Game Image credit: Archivio GBB/Contrasto/Redux Zork 1980 Zork 1980 Text parsing Loebner Prize: Turing Test Competition bit.ly/loebnerP Conversational Chatbots you can try with your students bit.ly/MITsuku bit.ly/CLVbot What modern chatbots do •Convert speech to text •Categorise user input into categories they know •Analyse the emotion emotion in user input •Select from a range of available responses •Synthesize human language responses Image sources: Biglytics
    [Show full text]
  • 'Realness' in Chatbots: Establishing Quantifiable Criteria
    'Realness' in Chatbots: Establishing Quantifiable Criteria Kellie Morrissey and Jurek Kirakowski School of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Ireland {k.morrissey,jzk}@ucc.ie Abstract. The aim of this research is to generate measurable evaluation criteria acceptable to chatbot users. Results of two studies are summarised. In the first, fourteen participants were asked to do a critical incident analysis of their tran- scriptions with an ELIZA-type chatbot. Results were content analysed, and yielded seven overall themes. In the second, these themes were made into statements of an attitude-like nature, and 20 participants chatted with five win- ning entrants in the 2011 Chatterbox Challenge and five which failed to place. Latent variable analysis reduced the themes to four, resulting in four subscales with strong reliability which discriminated well between the two categories of chatbots. Content analysis of freeform comments led to a proposal of four dimensions along which people judge the naturalness of a conversation with chatbots. Keywords: Chatbot, user-agent, intelligent assistant, naturalness, convincing, usability, evaluation, quantitative, questionnaire, Turing, Chatterbox. 1 Evaluating for Naturalness Conversational agents, or chatbots, are systems that are capable of performing actions on behalf of computer users; in essence, reducing the cognitive workload on users engaging with computer systems. There are two key strategies used. The first is the use of a set of well-learnt communicative conventions: natural language
    [Show full text]
  • The Mutual Influence of Science Fiction and Innovation
    Nesta Working Paper No. 13/07 Better Made Up: The Mutual Influence of Science fiction and Innovation Caroline Bassett Ed Steinmueller George Voss Better Made Up: The Mutual Influence of Science fiction and Innovation Caroline Bassett Ed Steinmueller George Voss Reader in Digital Media, Professor of Information and Research Fellow, Faculty of Arts, Research Centre for Material Technology, SPRU, University University of Brighton, Visiting Digital Culture, School of of Communication Sussex Fellow at SPRU, University of Media, Film and Music, Sussex University of Sussex Nesta Working Paper 13/07 March 2013 www.nesta.org.uk/wp13-07 Abstract This report examines the relationship between SF and innovation, defined as one of mutual engagement and even co-constitution. It develops a framework for tracing the relationships between real world science and technology and innovation and science fiction/speculative fiction involving processes of transformation, central to which are questions of influence, persuasion, and desire. This is contrasted with the more commonplace assumption of direct linear transmission, SF providing the inventive seed for innovation– instances of which are the exception rather than the rule. The model of influence is developed through an investigation of the nature and evolution of genre, the various effects/appeals of different forms of expression, and the ways in which SF may be appropriated by its various audiences. This is undertaken (i) via an inter- disciplinary survey of work on SF, and a consideration the historical construction of genre and its on-going importance, (ii) through the development of a prototype database exploring transformational paths, and via more elaborated loops extracted from the database, and (iii) via experiments with the development of a web crawl tool, to understand at a different scale, using tools of digital humanities, how fictional ideas travel.
    [Show full text]
  • British Medical Journal
    SUPPLEMENT TO THE BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL LONDON: SATURDAY, APRIL 11th, 1936 CONTENTS PACE PAGE CORRESPONDENCE: BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION CAPITATION FEE FOR PERSONS RESTORED TO BENEFIT. ... 146 Annual Meeting, Oxford, July, 1936: THE PROBLEM OF THE OUT-PATIENT ... ... ... ... 146 ORDER OFBEss ... ... ... ... ... 137 NAVAL, MILITARY, AND AIR FORCE APPOINTMENTS... 146 SCIENTIFIC SECTIONS ... 138 ASSOCIATION NOTICES: ... ... ... PROVISIONAL TImE-TABLE ... ... ... 141 TABLE OF OFFICIAL DATES. ... ... 147 COLLEGE, HOTEL, AND BOARDING HOUSE ACCOMMODATION ... 142 BRANCH AND DIVISION MIEETINGS TO BE HELD ...... 147 INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICE WEEK BY WEEK .-.. 144 ASSOCIATION INTELLIGENCE AND DIARY .... ... 147 RECEPTION TO GLASGOW MEDICAL STUDENTS. ... 145 DIARY OF SOCIETIES AND LECTURES ...... 147 CURRENT NOTES: VACANCIES AND APPOINTMENTS. ...... 148 TREASURER'S CuP GOLF COMPEIITION ... ... ... ... 146 BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS ... ... ... ... 148 British Medical Association ONE HUNDRED AND FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING, OXFORD, JULY, 1936 Patron His MAJESTY THE KING President: SIR JAMES BARRETT, K.B.E., C.B., C.M.G., LL.D., M.D., M.S., F.R.C.S., Deputy Chancellor of Melbourne University. President-Elect: SIR E. FARQUHAR BUZZARD, Bt., R.C.V.O., LL.D., D.M., F.R.C.P., Regius Professor of Medicine in the University of Oxford. Chairman of Representative Body: H. S. SOUTrTAR, C.B.E., M.D., M.Ch., F.R.C.S. Chairman of Council: E. KAYE LE FLEMING, M.A., M.D. Treasurer: N. BISHOP HARMAN, LL.D., F.R.C.S. PROVISIONAL PROGRAMME The Annual Representative Meeting will begin at the functions confined to ladies, will be at Rhodes House, Town Hall on Friday, July 17th,-at 9.30 a.m., and be South Parks Road.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Machines Think? the Controversy That Led to the Turing Test, 1946-1950
    Can machines think? The controversy that led to the Turing test, 1946-1950 Bernardo Gonçalves1 Abstract Turing’s much debated test has turned 70 and is still fairly controversial. His 1950 paper is seen as a complex and multi-layered text and key questions remain largely unanswered. Why did Turing choose learning from experience as best approach to achieve machine intelligence? Why did he spend several years working with chess-playing as a task to illustrate and test for machine intelligence only to trade it off for conversational question-answering later in 1950? Why did Turing refer to gender imitation in a test for machine intelligence? In this article I shall address these questions directly by unveiling social, historical and epistemological roots of the so-called Turing test. I will draw attention to a historical fact that has been scarcely observed in the secondary literature so far, namely, that Turing's 1950 test came out of a controversy over the cognitive capabilities of digital computers, most notably with physicist and computer pioneer Douglas Hartree, chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, and neurosurgeon Geoffrey Jefferson. Seen from its historical context, Turing’s 1950 paper can be understood as essentially a reply to a series of challenges posed to him by these thinkers against his view that machines can think. Keywords: Alan Turing, Can machines think?, The imitation game, The Turing test, Mind-machine controversy, History of artificial intelligence. Robin Gandy (1919-1995) was one of Turing’s best friends and his only doctorate student. He received Turing’s mathematical books and papers when Turing died in 1954, and took over from Max Newman in 1963 the task of editing the papers for publication.1 Regarding Turing’s purpose in writing his 1950 paper and sending it for publication, Gandy offered a testimony previously brought forth by Jack Copeland which has not yet been commented about:2 It was intended not so much as a penetrating contribution to philosophy but as propaganda.
    [Show full text]