Failed Turing Test?

Post Reply New Topic

A distant cousin visited recently and in discussion I noted all of her statements seemed to have been learned by rote and she had no original thoughts. It occurred to me that she would have failed the Turing Test.

So has anyone else noted that there are humans who would fail the Turning Test?

Not everybody who looks like a human actually is one. Even if they are a human their mental-processes are often disrupted/blocked/interrupted from various forms of mind-scrambling phenomena.

Well, this cousin appeared to be neurotypical, not in any way impaired. I am sure if she were an aspie, she would have passed the Turing test. No this person would have fit in with the crowd very nicely. Probably most of them would not have passed the test, either.

I imagine there are quite a few public figures who would not pass the Turing Test, either. It would be amusing to think of examples.

Understandable questions. I might just be a lot more non-conformist than most non-conformists.
I am not trying to imply that mental-anomalies are an indication of an individual not being a human-being;
I am sure there are logical-explanations for everything but, because many people have not experienced the same trials and tribulations as another, such as how you and I know what it's like to experience homelessness, not everybody will necessarily understand our psychological-reactions to anything that is related to homelessness.

Another example involves when I was driven into psychosis, such that I know what kinds of thoughts go through the minds of psychotic-individuals, and most people who have never experienced psychosis for themselves will have no understanding, what-so-ever, behind the outrage, even to the point of thinking that any blatant lack of remorse for others makes the individual a non-human;

I will bring up Hitler, for example, because many people can recognise him as an example, and based on what I know about him, much of his youth consisted of extreme child-abuse, such to the point where this holocaust thing may make him out to be a non-human in the eyes of those who have never suffered extreme injustices as a child before. Does his complicity to a holocaust make him non-human ? Not necessarily, although it may seem that way to people whom are uninformed about psychological-triggers, and I understand his reactions to actually be a logical one based on what Hitler had experienced, similarly to how Anti-White Black people might have such sentiments when growing up in a culture that is prejudiced against so-called whites (I should mention at this point that much of the culture that Hitler grew up in were already Anti-Jewish/Anti-Zionism, and so this whole Holocaust phenomenon actually started even before Hitler's existence, and I've also come across records of Jews being hunted down like witches even in America during the midieval-centuries).

Anyway, the point is that, even if someone does not seem like a human, does not necessarily rule out logical-reasons for their seemingly non-human (according to standard/mainstream/neurotypical/autistic/alien/whom-ever-the-hell-else-you-want-to-include-amongst-this-list definitions) reactions or behaviours or communication-methods. Psychotic people are made out to be monsters when in reality they've just experienced far more injustices than is even remotely reasonable for a human to experience (imagine what it would be like to experience witnessing your own mother being killed by your own father in front of your eyes as was in the case of records about Hitler's childhood). I know what it is like to have a complete hatrèd for the entire human-species but, for whatever reason, I have since managed to overcome the "sin(s)" that once kept me in a perpetual state of such mental-psychosis (I managed to come out of the psychosis without the use of drugs since drugs do not actually cure anything).

Ban-Dodger wrote:

Not everybody who looks like a human actually is one. Even if they are a human their mental-processes are often disrupted/blocked/interrupted from various forms of mind-scrambling phenomena.

Claudius wrote:

So has anyone else noted that there are humans who would fail the Turning Test?

You seem to be implying that those who are mentally or cognitively impaired are not human. I hope that this is not the meaning you were implying.

On a side note ... Why do the texts of your replies seem to always come before the texts of what you are replying to? We do you not put the texts of your replies after the text of what you are replying to, just like everyone else?

Saying an individual human being isnt...a human being is a rather serious indictment of that person.

If an actual person fails the Turing Test then the logical common sense conclusion would be that the Turing Test is flawed. Not that the person isnt a person.

But for the sake of argument lets say she isnt a human. Then what IS she?

Does that mean that babies or little children who do not speak yet are by definition a non-human ? ;o
I mean, gee, I was told that I never started speaking until well-after I was at least four years of age, then they said that they couldn't get me to shut up after that... (this is where we insert some icon or smiley or animated .gif or whatever of an innocent-looking face with a halo over its head... )

Fnord wrote:

Ban-Dodger wrote:

Not everybody who looks like a human actually is one. Even if they are a human their mental-processes are often disrupted/blocked/interrupted from various forms of mind-scrambling phenomena.

Claudius wrote:

So has anyone else noted that there are humans who would fail the Turning Test?

You seem to be implying that those who are mentally or cognitively impaired are not human. I hope that this is not the meaning you were implying.

On a side note ... Why do the texts of your replies seem to always come before the texts of what you are replying to? We do you not put the texts of your replies after the text of what you are replying to, just like everyone else?

I never have liked putting my reply after, it seems awkward. Doing just like everyone else isn't something I am used to. But just this once, I am putting it after, just to be different.

As for mental or cognitive impairment. I think any human who fails the Turing Test is by definition not a human. That is the nature of the test: Human(pass) Not human(fail). People who can't think for themselves, give knee-jerk responses they have heard someone in authority say; fail the Turing Test. Just my observation. They might as well be a deficient AI.

My question had more to do with social conditioning than mental impairment. Extreme conformity produces people who can't think for themselves, do and say whatever is expected of them by the group they belong to. Such people could be easily emulated by a computer program to give pre-programmed responses to any stimulus. In that sense they fail the Turing Test.

This seems intended to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, but it really isn't. Just try to explain Asperger's to a neurotypical type and you will get rote responses such as "oh, you lack empathy", or some such, because that is what they have been told. It is easier for such people to conform to the opinions of authority than to think for themselves. It is mental laziness. It fails the Turing Test.

And, no the cousin in question was not aware I am an aspie, and it never came up in conversation.

Sure, I can see how people come across as biological-robots, because that is their literal programming.

Within my last response to another thread, something just came to mind in regards to Fnord's current Anti-Trump signature, because Trump-University has a strong resemblance to those Seminar-Scams where the business makes more money selling its seminars rather than selling anything useful like an actual product or service, and since we've both experienced the pains of what it was like to financially struggle (even to the point that having any form of a permanent-address was very difficult), I can understand his sentiments against things that may be taking advantage of people whom are trying to climb out of a financial-hole through an investment, only to find that it perpetuates their financial-burdens.

Anyway, back to literal programming, I will tell you a parallel with my kung fu training. See, within the martial arts disciplines, some styles have training methods where you just repeat the same thing over and over and over until it becomes automatic-reaction, and so if you see me fighting against another martial artist my movements might seem so automatic to the point where it's like I might come across as a robot who consistently deflects attacks to the face without changing my reaction. Anybody who went through the same training as me would probably also look the same, I no longer have to think about how I am going to counter a move, for my body's already conditioned to have an automatic reflex-action against certain "triggers" for my auto-responses. Similarly, people who go through academic-schooling also go through a lot of rote-memorisation, repeat, and regurgitation of so-called facts and information. I mean, consider how many students are taught about this "separation of church and state" thing in schools, yet they still recite "one nation under GOD" within their Pledge of Allegiance, and I mentioned this before a high-school girl once and she was all like : "Oh my God ! I never thought about that before ! O_O" ...clearly... many schools don't seem to bother to teach their students to do much thinking so if I come across as arrogant, egotistical, condescending, etc., against most academic-institutions, you can bet your bottom dollar that it's because I view most of them as being nothing more than indoctrination-institutions.

The Turing test isn't meant to test humans though. That said, lots of human conversation is automatic. I might not realize I'm chatting with an AI in a basic conversation until I ask for an original thought or something out of context that wasn't in the programming.

Humans have a kind of programming also. Like, if enough people start believing a stereotype, then more and more people think it's true, and on and on.