Hence why state-of-the art AI research doesn't focus on passing the Turing test ;).

 Reply

But yes, I agree with Tyler that the turing test is hardly rigorous or objective. Regardless, it is still a compelling argument that something is sapient.

 Reply

So if not the Turing test, what? How do we know consciousness when we see it. I guess that's why philosophers and cognitive researchers get paid the big bucks.

 Reply

The rulebooks to handle any conversation, in a language and handle it well, would be so complex that they'd have to be sapient. The person inside the room who just writes notes or answers and shuffles paper around according to the rulebook is just a neuron processing data> He or she doesn't have to understand anything but, the whole system is sapient and capable of semantic understanding.

But this brings us around to your question, if not the Turing test, what can we use?

I don't know what else to use. I mean in daily life how do we know other people are conscious? I'm just this set of disembodied bits of text on a website, pretending to be an interesting conversationalist. Am I really a real person?

We don't have an objective test to prove consciousness yet. It might be a phantasm, maybe there is no way to have an objective test. Consciousness is actually a continuum. It's a matter of degree. There is no clear dividing line between mind and mindlessness.

And our society rolls on regardless. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

 Reply