Levels of abstraction and the Turing test

Kybernetes 39 (3):423-440 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An important lesson that philosophy can learn from the Turing Test and computer science more generally concerns the careful use of the method of Levels of Abstraction (LoA). In this paper, the method is first briefly summarised. The constituents of the method are “observables”, collected together and moderated by predicates restraining their “behaviour”. The resulting collection of sets of observables is called a “gradient of abstractions” and it formalises the minimum consistency conditions that the chosen abstractions must satisfy. Two useful kinds of gradient of abstraction – disjoint and nested – are identified. It is then argued that in any discrete (as distinct from analogue) domain of discourse, a complex phenomenon may be explicated in terms of simple approximations organised together in a gradient of abstractions. Thus, the method replaces, for discrete disciplines, the differential and integral calculus, which form the basis for understanding the complex analogue phenomena of science and engineering. The result formalises an approach that is rather common in computer science but has hitherto found little application in philosophy. So the philosophical value of the method is demonstrated by showing how making the LoA of discourse explicit can be fruitful for phenomenological and conceptual analysis. To this end, the method is applied to the Turing Test, the concept of agenthood, the definition of emergence, the notion of artificial life, quantum observation and decidable observation. It is hoped that this treatment will promote the use of the method in certain areas of the humanities and especially in philosophy.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The method of levels of abstraction.Luciano Floridi - 2008 - Minds and Machines 18 (3):303–329.
The Turing test.B. Jack Copeland - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):519-539.
Making the right identification in the Turing test.Saul Traiger - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):561-572.
The cartesian test for automatism.Gerald J. Erion - 2001 - Minds and Machines 11 (1):29-39.
A simple comment regarding the Turing test.Benny Shanon - 1989 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 19 (June):249-56.
The status and future of the Turing test.James H. Moor - 2001 - Minds and Machines 11 (1):77-93.
Turing's three philosophical lessons and the philosophy of information.Luciano Floridi - 2012 - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 370 (1971):3536-3542.
Levels of abstraction, emergentism and artificial life.Emanuele Ratti - 2014 - Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence:1-12.
Turing test: 50 years later.Ayse Pinar Saygin, Ilyas Cicekli & Varol Akman - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (4):463-518.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-06-23

Downloads
354 (#51,845)

6 months
90 (#40,826)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Luciano Floridi
Yale University

References found in this work

Computing machinery and intelligence.Alan M. Turing - 1950 - Mind 59 (October):433-60.
On the morality of artificial agents.Luciano Floridi & J. W. Sanders - 2004 - Minds and Machines 14 (3):349-379.
Meditations.René Descartes - 1951 - New York,: Liberal Arts Press.
The Liar.J. Barwise & J. Etchemendy - 1990 - Studia Logica 49 (3):426-427.

View all 11 references / Add more references