Three Old Arguments About AI

1. The Turing Test (Imitation Game) from Alan Turing, 1950

I believe that in about fifty years’ time it will be possible to programme computers, with a storage capacity of about $10^9$, to make them play the imitation game so well that an average interrogator will not have more than 70 per cent. chance of making the right identification after five minutes of questioning.

(Source: Computing Machinery and Intelligence - 1950.) 

2. The Many Ideas from Hubert Dreyfus - the old critic of AI. 

Philosophers may doubt whether merely behavioral similarity could ever give adequate ground for the attribution of intelligence. 

(Source: What Computers Can't Do: The Limits of Artificial Intelligence - 1972.)

3. The Chinese Room Argument - American philosopher John Searle, 1980. 

In the case of the English, I understand everything; in the case of the Chinese, I understand nothing. ... It seems to me quite obvious in the example that my 'understanding' of the Chinese involves no understanding whatsoever. We can see that the computer's 'understanding' is not real because... the program is purely formal, but the mind has more than a formal structure.

(Source: Minds, Brains, and Programs - 1980.)

Can artificial intelligence be considered "intelligence"?