Davidson's no-priority thesis in defending the Turing Test

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Turing does not provide an explanation for substituting the original question of his test – i.e., “Can machines think?” with “Can a machine pass the imitation game?” – resulting in an argumentative gap in his main thesis. In this article, I argue that a positive answer to the second question would mean attributing the ability of linguistic interactions to machines; while a positive answer to the original question would mean attributing the ability of thinking to machines. In such a situation, defending the Turing Test requires establishing a relationship between thought and language. In this regard, Davidson's no-priority theory is presented as an approach for defending the test.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-01-03
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
204 ( #34,840 of 70,017 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #26,069 of 70,017 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.