cugini@icst-ecf.UUCP.UUCP (02/03/87)
> Harnad: {iii} The Total Turing Test (a variant of my own devise, not > to be confused with the classical turing test -- see prior chapters > in these discussions) is the only relevant criterion that has so far > been proposed and defended. Similarities of appearance are obvious > nonstarters, including the "appearance" of the nervous system to > untutored inspection. Just a quick pout here - last December I posted a somewhat detailed defense of the "brain-as-criterion" position, since it seemed to be a major point of contention. (Again, the one with the labeled events A1, B1, etc.). No one has responded directly to this posting. I'm prepared to argue the brain-vs-TTT case on its merits, but it would be helpful if those who assert the TTT position would acknowledge the existence, if not the validity, of counter-arguments. John Cugini <Cugini@icst-ecf> ------