Can Machines Actually Think?

The Turing Test is a test invented by Alan Turing who is a founder of computer science. A panel of judges ask questions by computer to unseen correspondents. One of the correspondents is a human while the other is a computer program. The point of the test is to be able to decide correctly which is which. Dialogue for the Turing test can range from small talk to things of a factual nature to gossip. After a conversation, judges must decide if they were talking to a human or talking to a computer. A possible thought Turing could have had was that by computers achieving and passing the Turing test they would have somehow become human like concerning their intelligence and ability to trick humans. Overall Turing seemed to believe that if computers could somehow manage to beat out humans and pass the Turing test, these machines would have displayed their intelligence because they will have shown their ability to actually think.  It is a long standing belief that machines/computers do not and will never demonstrate the ability to form their own thoughts. Sure, they can give facts and answer questions but they cannot truly think like we humans think. By winning the test, a machine will have demonstrated its ability to truly think which ultimately assigns to the machine/robot "intelligence".

The way the Turing Test was won by Charles Platt exhibiting such negative behavior says a lot about humans and what it means to be a human being. The Turing Test seems to presuppose that humans, in their true nature, are obnoxious, moody, and irritable (characteristics by which Charles Platt won). The Turing Tests seems to assume that machines and humans are different due to the seemingly bad nature of human beings. This bad nature is what sets us humans apart from machines. Based on this assumption, it is safe to say that when compared to robots, humans can be seen as hostile, cold, disagreeable, etc.  With Platt winning because of his negative disposition, this implies that human beings are rather unpleasant creatures. We are rude, obnoxious, and there is no other species on Earth as irritating as humans are when it comes to our nature.   

With that presupposed view of humans, it could be stated that machines are assumed to have a less negative nature than humans. Machines are painted as somehow holding the “good” characteristics of human beings. Robots/Machines are considered to be helpful, courteous, and pleasant. This is unlike humans who, by nature, can be uncaring and lazy. The way in which Platt won the Turing test also implies that machines/robots cannot have true emotions. Yes they can be pleasant and helpful, but will they ever truly be anything other than that? Machines cannot get angry at the amount of work they have, like we humans do. Machines cannot truly understand what it means to “backtalk” or have an “attitude” because it is not in their nature. They are programmed to be as mannered and helpful as possible. Machines/Robots cannot beat humans out in being the worst because they do not have the unfavorable nature humans have.