Maps | General information
(large file!) | Details and
features | Specifications
| Issue areas | Press
Methodology | Background
paper | The cartographic
metaphor | Criteria | How
the maps work (large file!)
For Instructors and Students | Importance
of Turing debate | For instructors
| For students | Protagonist
index | FAQS
Commentary and Reviews | Commentary
and reviews | Errata and
Action Items | Buy the set
of maps | How you can participate
in this debate
Examples | View the maps. | Map
1 | Map 2 | Map
3 | Map 4 | Map
5 | Map 6 | Map
7 | (large files!)
MacroVU home page | Send us a message |
Director's Home Page
It is clear from several angles that this debate
is far from settled. We expect to release a second edition of
Mapping Great Debates: Can Computers Think? some years
hence. The opportunities for you to participate, therefore, are
several, and your involvement is not only appreciated--it is critical.
Opportunities for joining the debate at its frontiers do exist.
The mapmakers, in fact, refrained from adding their own claims
and arguments even in obvious areas, thus leaving the opportunity
Two Ways To Participate
1. If we missed an argument:
Please send a copy of the article or chapter that you believe
deserves mention along with a completed copy of the New Claim/Rebuttal
2. If you are the author
of a new, or newly published,
argument: Send us your claim using the New Claim/Rebuttal
Participation Form. A book of new arguments will be issued along
with future editions of the maps.
Focus on stating your conclusion, in as straightforward and
direct a manner as possible, using an example if possible. A conclusion
and an example are often sufficient. Remember, the arguments are
above all summaries and placeholders that refer
the reader to your more detailed published texts.
It is not necessary to include all the details of your argument
in the summary. However, if you can briefly state your argument
using a bulleted or numbered list, please do so.
Write your argument with context in mind. Decide where on the
maps (in which region, attached to which previous argument) it
will be placed, and then write the summary with that context in
mind. Pretend you are a reader, moving from one claim to the next
along a thread, and fine-tune your claim accordingly.
If a similar argument exists earlier in the thread or elsewhere
in a region, focus on what is new or unique about your argument.
Don't be redundant. Push the conversation forward.
Too many qualifications dampen an argument. Take as strong
a stance as possible.
If your argument involves a dilemma, a straw man, a red herring,
a vicious circle, or any other common argumentative device, we
probably have graphic conventions which can help you condense
and visually represent your argument.
Office Phone FaxE-Mail
I am submitting:
published argument that you missed (attach a copy of the published
argument (attach a 34 page paper, double-spaced, setting
forth the reasoning behind your argument).
Argument Summary (34 sentences):
My argument addresses claim number on map number
Optional: I have attached a sketch of an icon or illustration
to accompany the argument.
I agree that any submission
by me may be used and
copyrighted by the publisher.
Signature ____________________________________ (Your signature
needed for copyright purposes).
Mail completed form to: MacroVU, Inc., 321 High School
Rd. NE-PMB 366, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110.