雙語暢銷書《艾倫圖靈傳》第9章:退隱山林(48)
Speech may be uttered in order to effect changes in the world, changes inextricably connected with the meaning of the words uttered.
The word 'meaning' led Polanyi into extra-material, religious connotations, but there is nothing at all supernatural about the mundane fact that human brains are connected with the world by devices other than a teleprinter.
"意義"這個詞，被波蘭尼引伸到超自然的宗教觀，但圖靈認爲，大腦與外界的聯繫，本質上跟電傳打字機沒有什麼區別，這事沒有什麼超自然可言。A 'controlling machine' was to have physical effects 'as small as we please', but speech, to be audible or legible, has to have a definite physical effect, tied into the structure of the outside world.
圖靈的模型，是一種"物理作用盡量小"的機器，但是對話這件事，無論是通過聲音還是通過讀寫，都是與物理世界緊密相關的。
The Turing model held that this was an irrelevant fact, to be discarded in the selecting of certain details, but the argument for this irrelevance was left weakly supported.
圖靈的模型，通過"選擇一些特定的細節"，迴避了這種相關性，但他卻沒有給出有力的論點，來證明這種做法的合理性。If, as Alan Turing himself suggested, knowledge and intelligence in human beings derive from interaction with the world, then that knowledge must be stored in human brains in some way that depends upon the nature of that interaction.
圖靈自己也說過，人類的知識和智能，源自與外部世界的交互，既然如此，那麼人類大腦儲存這些知識的方式，就必然也與外部世界的結構有關。The structure of the brain must connect the words it stores, with the occasions for using those words, and with the fists and tears, blushes and fright associated with them, or for which they substitute.
大腦的結構必須能夠儲存這些語言，並且儲存使用這些語言的方法，比如將拳頭與眼淚聯繫起來，將臉紅與害怕聯繫起來。Could the words be stored for 'intelligent' use, within a discrete state machine model of the brain, unless that model were also equipped with the brain's sensory and motor and chemical peripheries?
圖靈的問題在於，他要用一個離散狀態機，儲存語言並以此表現智能，那麼沒有感覺器官能行嗎？沒有運動器官能行嗎？沒有有機的神經突觸能行嗎？Is there intelligence without life? Is there mind without communication? Is there language without living? Is there thought without experience?
沒有生命能有智能嗎？沒有交互能有心靈嗎？沒有意識能有語言嗎？沒有經驗能有思維嗎？These were the questions posed by Alan Turing's argument—questions close to those that worried Wittgenstein.
這些問題，曾經也令維特根斯坦感到困惑。Is language a game, or must it have a connection with real life? For chess thinking, for mathematical thinking, for technical thinking and any kind of purely symbolic problem-solving, there were arguments of great force behind Alan's view.
語言究竟是一種符號遊戲，還是必須與現實生活有聯繫？對於象棋、數學和任何純符號問題來說，圖靈的理由很充分很有力，But in extending it to the domain of all human communication the questions he raised were not properly faced, let alone resolved.
但如果擴展到所有的人類交互，那麼這其中的問題，在這篇論文中連提都沒提，更別說解決了。Indeed, they had been faced more openly in the 1948 report, in choosing activities for a 'disembodied' brain. He had narrowed them down to those not requiring 'senses or locomotion'.
實際上，在圖靈1948年的報告中，這種"脫離身體的大腦"的活動，就已經被限制到了"無需感覺和運動"的範圍。
