This, to Dorothy Sayers, made a reductio ad absurdum of determinism.
多罗西·塞耶斯以此来表达自己的决定论观点，
Dorothy Sayers did not know in 1941 that even the little Enigma machine was sufficiently unpredictable to keep hundreds of people in employment.
但他却没有看到，在1941年，小小的谜机就有那么多的变数，需要成百上千的人围着它团团转。
He was certainly fascinated by the fact that a machine like the Delilah key generator could be perfectly deterministic at one level, while producing something apparently 'random' at another. It gave him a model for reconciling determination and free-will.
但图灵当然也知道，黛丽拉密钥生成器虽然会产生一些看似随机的东西，但它在某种层面上也是确定的。这其实是个很好的模型，可以让他在决定论和自由意识之间做出协调，
But this did not go very far. It was the capacity of machines to learn that he saw as the crux of the argument. A learning machine would part company altogether with the 'mere machine' of common parlance.
但他没有顺着这里走下去，他认为机器的学习能力才是这个问题的关键。
The objection from Godel's theorem he answered in the same way as he had in 1947, by separating 'intelligence' from 'infallibility'.
图灵还用1947年的方式，将"智能"与"不出错"区别开，回答了基于哥德尔定理的反驳。
This time he gave an example of how the intelligent approach could be wrong, and the accurate one stupid:
他给出了一个例子，来说明智能反而有可能导致错误：
It is related that the infant Gauss was asked at school to do the addition 15 + 18 + 21 + ...+ 54 (or something of the kind) and that he immediately wrote down 483, presumably having calculated it as (15 + 54) (54—12)/2.3 ...One can ...imagine a situation where the children were given a number of additions to do, of which the first 5 were all arithmetic progressions, but the 6th was say 23 + 34 + 45 ...+ 100 +112+ 122 ...+ 199.
类似于说高斯小时候做的15+18+21+...+54（诸如这样的加法），他立即写出了483，用（15+54）（54-12）/（23）（图）这样的方法……我们想象一种情形，让一个孩子做加法，前面是等差的，但中间却突然变了，比如说23+34+45...+100+112+122…+199。
Gauss might have given the answer to this as if it were an arithmetic progression, not having noticed that the 9th term was 112 instead of 111.
高斯也许会把这当成等差数列，并运用他的技巧，但他却没有注意到，第9个数是112而不是111。
This would be a definite mistake, which the less intelligent children would not have been likely to make.
很显然这是一个错误，但那些不怎么聪明的孩子，却反而不会犯这样的错误。