Many people have talked about whether or not computing machines can think. Can they or can't they? Almost certainly, a machine can do any work in thinking that a person can do--if the correct way for doing the thinking work can be told exactly. Besides, many programs have been made to direct machines so that they work in very clever ways. Machines have been taught to play chess and to learn from what happens in the games so as to make their play better and better. Machines can beat many persons who play chess. Machines can translate from one language to another. They can prove statements in geometry  as taught in school. Machines can notice printed marks on paper, so that a person is no longer needed to look at the marks. Computers can be used in many ways, such as business, science, industry, and government. _  If people cannot tell exactly the correct way to do certain work in thinking, it is still a question how much of _ a machine can do. Suppose a person is "teaching" the machine and telling the machine "yes" when the machine is right, and "no" when the machine is wrong. Then the machine can keep on searching among possible ways for solving a problem--until the machine can do as well as the person, and perhaps much better. But, what is thinking? People can agree about much that is thinking, and much that is not thinking; but they can't reach agreement because the word "think" is not a scientific word with an exact meaning. A lot of the discussion is wasted breath because the persons are using different meanings of the word "think". People, however, have only had experience with machines that appear to think since 1944. It would be too early to say that after the next 200 years, machines will not be thinking. And to consider that machines can think gives people a big push to give to machines more and more work in thinking. Which probably is the best title for the passage?
What Is Thinking? Can Machines Think? Can Machines Be Taught to Think? Can Machines Beat All Checkers Players?