A British mathematician, Alan Turing, designed a test in 1950 in responding to this old question that whether computers can think or not. Although some contests were successful in proving the intelligence of computers and even were awarded by huge cash, there are some skeptical views on them as the lecture castes doubt on.
Based on reading passage, the contest, known as Turning Test, was implemented between a man and a computer. A person asks a question and the computer or another person responds to it via computer connection. If the question asker recognize the answer from human or dose not recognize which one, the computer or a person, has answered him/her, the computer will pass the contest. But the lecture casts doubt on the authenticity of the test by claiming that the test does not design based on the analyzing the question intelligently. The computer with its large database just chooses the best response automatically. Thus, it cannot be asserted that computer can think; it just behaves in a particular manner based on its database. The lecture mentions to the Chinese Room Test as a paradox to prove it. In this test an English speaker is asked a question by a Chinese speaker and he/she first tries to find the meaning of the Chinese question based on some references and then finds the appropriate answer from the database to resend to the Chinese speaker. So, intelligence in order to manipulate the question does not exist in this behavioral manner even if both sides are human.
I wrote too!!! Just compare:
The professor casts doubt on Alan Turing’s test. While the passage claims that the Turing test can be used to examine a particular computer’s ability to think, the professor asserts that any kind of a machine no matter failed or passed the Turing test can’t think as humans do.
First of all, the reading passage conveys the general process of the Turing Test. The reading passage also describes that this test was built in order to find the answer to the question can the computers think. On the contrary, the professor emphasizes that John Searle’s argument about accuracy of this test is true.
Furthermore, the reading passage describes how the Turing Test is based: people in one room are expected to ask any questions they want by typing them onto a computer screen; then, when the answers are received, people must select which of all received answers are computer given and which are human given; afterwards, if one marks a computer answer as a human given one—the machine passed the test. In opposition, the professor says that this whole procedure is wrong because people speak different languages; and moreover, the professor gives a John Searle’s example that monolingual English person won’t understand a Chinese person’s answers because of a natural reason.
Lastly, the professor argues against the passage’s point that this test can determine if a particular machine can think by stating that computers can be constructed to give a similar answer to the humans’ one but unlike human machines are not aware of what they are actually doing. The professor points out that Turing test’s disability to find out the answer to the main question can human made intelligence think, in fact, is actually the case.
Thanks so much dear Kitos. As a matter of fact, I’m not interested to write in such topics, too. But, there is no way! That was the integrated writing task in the Modal Test 2 of Barron’s iBT book. Sometimes in the dam TOEFL we have to read, listen, speak, and write in some topics that not only are not related to our major at all, which one may only encounter during the examination, but also there is no point in them. Anyway, I really grateful for your effort to help us improve our skills in English.
Hi Aghmore, I don’t think that Kitos meant as you thought. What he really meant (IMO), is that you should make your work clearer and more interesting, not that he encourage us to write on some uninteresting topics.
What mean “coach will ignore your writing”? First of all, who is “coach”? Second, I posted it for you. I wanted to show you my essay on this topic. Moreover, I am pretty sure that my writing is good. I took the TOEFL ibt 2 days ago and I wrote 350 and 470 word essay in integrated and independent tasks, respectively. Please, refrain your self from being angry.
And you meant you came here to show off your talent, not to learn???. We are all here to long to Kito’s help- our respected and beloved Teacher- our coach ( are you illiterate? don’t you know Kitos is our coach? ) No matter how intelligent and clever you are, there are lots of things for you to learn, open your eyes!!! SUCH A BIG-HEAD!!!
What you desperately need is WELL-MANNER!!! Your very FIRST lesson!!! Reconsider yourself!!!
Teaching someone doesn’t mean to write numbers like “7.5/10 or 8/10”. The Teaching is an important part of humanity’s development. “Teacher” is an instructor who shows how to learn the particular subject considering student’s personality and personal qualities. But, excuse me, writing “dead” numbers is not a teaching.
Perhaps you wouldn’t mind filling in for a few days whilst I recuperate then Richard.
Apart from one good essay here the rest of your work has not been too outstanding.
If you bothered to actually read the essays that others write you would plainly see that editing of their work has taken place. They are asked to review this edited version in the hope of learning from their mistakes.
Now, if you have a better method, then I am sure we are all waiting with baited breaths to hear your response.
