Can machines think?
Turing didn't describe the human vs. machine game right away, to make a point. He didn't just flip a coin to see what he was going to write about. His point is simple. If you can distinguish between a man and a machine, in the game, you could come to the conclusion that the machine doesn't think, right? WRONG! He introduced the idea of the man vs. woman game to prove that making such a conclusion is not in fact a conclusion, but an assumption.
If it was a fact that, if you could differentiate between the man and the machine in the game, than the machine doesn't think, than it would stand to reason that you could say the same thing about the man vs. woman game. On these principles, you could say that if you can distinguish between a man and a woman in the game, than one of them must not think, when in fact, that would be quite wrong, as we all know.
Turing didn't just dive right into the man vs. machine game for a reason. Without the background information provided by his choice of even mentioning the man vs. woman game, and mentioning it first, one would not have the proper information to clearly and informatively interpret what they were reading. After reading the description of the man vs. woman game, one would have something to compare the man vs. machine game description to. Without that, one would just read the man vs. machine game, and simply accept, as fact, that if you can distinguish a man from a machine in the game, than the machine must not think. After reading the man vs. woman game, one would be able to say that just because you can differentiate between a man and a machine, doesn't mean that the machine doesn't think. They will have read the man vs. woman game, and have something to compare it to.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document