Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Critical Pragmatics: An Inquiry Into Reference and Communication.Kepa Korta & John Perry - 2011 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by John Perry.
    Critical Pragmatics develops three ideas: language is a way of doing things with words; meanings of phrases and contents of utterances derive ultimately from human intentions; and language combines with other factors to allow humans to achieve communicative goals. In this book, Kepa Korta and John Perry explain why critical pragmatics provides a coherent picture of how parts of language study fit together within the broader picture of human thought and action. They focus on issues about singular reference, that is, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   47 citations  
  • Essentially Incomplete Descriptions.Carlo Penco - 2010 - European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 6 (2):47 - 66.
    In this paper I offer a defence of a Russellian analysis of the referential uses of incomplete (mis)descriptions, in a contextual setting. With regard to the debate between a unificationist and an ambiguity approach to the formal treatment of definite descriptions (introduction), I will support the former against the latter. In 1. I explain what I mean by "essentially" incomplete descriptions: incomplete descriptions are context dependent descriptions. In 2. I examine one of the best versions of the unificationist “explicit” approach (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Turing test: 50 years later.Ayse Pinar Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.
    The Turing Test is one of the most disputed topics in artificial intelligence, philosophy of mind, and cognitive science. This paper is a review of the past 50 years of the Turing Test. Philosophical debates, practical developments and repercussions in related disciplines are all covered. We discuss Turing's ideas in detail and present the important comments that have been made on them. Within this context, behaviorism, consciousness, the 'other minds' problem, and similar topics in philosophy of mind are discussed. We (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • Converging towards what: on semantic and pragmatic competence.Carlo Penco - 2005 - In L. Serafini & P. Bouquet (eds.), CEUR-Workshops.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The chinese room argument.David Cole - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  • (1 other version)Minds, brains, and programs.John Searle - 1980 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3):417-57.
    What psychological and philosophical significance should we attach to recent efforts at computer simulations of human cognitive capacities? In answering this question, I find it useful to distinguish what I will call "strong" AI from "weak" or "cautious" AI. According to weak AI, the principal value of the computer in the study of the mind is that it gives us a very powerful tool. For example, it enables us to formulate and test hypotheses in a more rigorous and precise fashion. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1768 citations  
  • The truly total Turing test.Paul Schweizer - 1998 - Minds and Machines 8 (2):263-272.
    The paper examines the nature of the behavioral evidence underlying attributions of intelligence in the case of human beings, and how this might be extended to other kinds of cognitive system, in the spirit of the original Turing Test. I consider Harnad's Total Turing Test, which involves successful performance of both linguistic and robotic behavior, and which is often thought to incorporate the very same range of empirical data that is available in the human case. However, I argue that the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • (1 other version)Computing machinery and intelligence.Alan Turing - 1950 - Mind 59 (236):433-60.
    I propose to consider the question, "Can machines think?" This should begin with definitions of the meaning of the terms "machine" and "think." The definitions might be framed so as to reflect so far as possible the normal use of the words, but this attitude is dangerous, If the meaning of the words "machine" and "think" are to be found by examining how they are commonly used it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the meaning and the answer to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1072 citations  
  • The Turing test.B. Jack Copeland - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):519-539.
    Turing''s test has been much misunderstood. Recently unpublished material by Turing casts fresh light on his thinking and dispels a number of philosophical myths concerning the Turing test. Properly understood, the Turing test withstands objections that are popularly believed to be fatal.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  • The Turing test: The first fifty years.Robert M. French - 2000 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (3):115-121.
    The Turing Test, originally proposed as a simple operational definition of intelligence, has now been with us for exactly half a century. It is safe to say that no other single article in computer science, and few other articles in science in general, have generated so much discussion. The present article chronicles the comments and controversy surrounding Turing's classic article from its publication to the present. The changing perception of the Turing Test over the last fifty years has paralleled the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • Other bodies, other minds: A machine incarnation of an old philosophical problem. [REVIEW]Stevan Harnad - 1991 - Minds and Machines 1 (1):43-54.
    Explaining the mind by building machines with minds runs into the other-minds problem: How can we tell whether any body other than our own has a mind when the only way to know is by being the other body? In practice we all use some form of Turing Test: If it can do everything a body with a mind can do such that we can't tell them apart, we have no basis for doubting it has a mind. But what is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   89 citations  
  • The status and future of the Turing test.James H. Moor - 2001 - Minds and Machines 11 (1):77-93.
    The standard interpretation of the imitation game is defended over the rival gender interpretation though it is noted that Turing himself proposed several variations of his imitation game. The Turing test is then justified as an inductive test not as an operational definition as commonly suggested. Turing's famous prediction about his test being passed at the 70% level is disconfirmed by the results of the Loebner 2000 contest and the absence of any serious Turing test competitors from AI on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Turing test considered harmful.Patrick Hayes & Kenneth M. Ford - 1995 - Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1:972-77.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  • (1 other version)Minds, machines and Turing: The indistinguishability of indistinguishables.Stevan Harnad - 2000 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 9 (4):425-445.
    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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Indexicals and Demonstratives.John Perry - 1997 - In Bob Hale, Crispin Wright & Alexander Miller (eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Language. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 486--612.
    When you use the word “I” it designates you; when I use the same word, it designates me. If you use “you” talking to me, it designates me; when I use it talking to you, it designates you. “I” and “you” are indexicals. The designation of an indexical shifts from speaker to speaker, time to time, place to place. Different utterances of the same indexical designate different things, because what is designated depends not only on the meaning associated with the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   105 citations  
  • (1 other version)Insensitive Semantics.Herman Cappelen & Ernie Lepore - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):443-450.
    We give a precis of our book Insensitive Semantics.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   212 citations