CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13History of Computing TechnologiesCybernetics and Technology in SocietyArtificial Intelligence Applications

The Limits of Computation: Joseph Weizenbaum and the ELIZA Chatbot

Open access
Berry, David·2023·Weizenbaum Institute
DOI 10.34669/wi.wjds/3.3.2
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Developed in the 1960s by Joseph Weizenbaum, ELIZA is arguably among the most influential computer programs ever written. ELIZA – and especially its most famous persona DOCTOR – continues to inspire programmers, wider discussions about AI, and imitations. This original ancestor of all conversa-tional interfaces and chatbots maintains a special fascination for engineers, historians, and philosophers of artificial intelligence (AI) and computing. With its ability to produce human-like responses using a relatively small amount of computer code, ELIZA has paved the way for a multitude of similar programs. These take the form of conversation agents and other human-computer inter-faces that have inspired entire new fields of study within computer science. This paper examines Weizenbaum’s contribution to AI and considers his more critical writings in the context of contemporary developments in generative AI, such as ChatGPT. Examining how ELIZA has been discussed can provide insights into current debates surrounding machine learning and AI.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.34669/wi.wjds/3.3.2

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The trend of overinterpreting computational technology has been present in discourse for decades and manifested in attribution of human-like qualities to ELIZA and anthropomorphisation of language used to describe AI algorithms.

    “This trend has been present in the discourse for decades and has manifested itself in, for example, in the attribution of human-like qualities to the simple chatbot ELIZA (Weizenbaum, 1966;Berry, 2023) or in the anthropomorphisation of the language used to describe AI algorithms, which McDermott (1976) warned against half a century ago, and which remains problematic today (Shwartz, 2020).”

    From There is no such thing as conscious artificial intelligence (2025) · cites this paper as Berry, 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Berry, D. M. (2008). Copy, rip, burn: The politics of copyleft and open source. Pluto Press.
  2. Berry, D. M. (2011). The philosophy of software: Code and mediation in the digital age. Palgrave.
  3. Berry, D. M. (2014). Critical theory and the digital. Bloomsbury.
  4. Berry, D. M. (2021). Explanatory publics: Explainability and democratic thought. In B. Balaskas, B. and C. Rito (Eds.) Fabricating publics: The dissemination of culture in the post-truth era (pp. 211 -233). Open Humanities Press.
  5. Boden, M. (1977). Artificial intelligence and natural man. MIT Press.
  6. Fisher, A. W., & McKenney, J. L. (1993). The development of the ERMA banking system: Lessons from history. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 15(1).
  7. Irani, Lilly C. and Silberman, M. Six (2013) Turkopticon: interrupting worker invisibility in amazon mechanical turk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 611 -620. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470742 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Irani, L. (2015). The cultural work of microwork. New Media & Society, 17(5), 720 -739.
  9. Marino, M. (2006). I, chatbot: The gender and race performativity of conversational agents [Unpublished Ph.D. thesis]. University of California Riverside.
  10. Maudsley, D., Greenberg, S., & Mander, R. (1993). Prototyping an intelligent agent through Wizard of Oz. In Proceedings of the INTERACT '93 and CHI '93 conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 277 -284). ACM Digital Library.
  11. McQuillan, D. (2023, June 6). Predicted benefits, proven harms: How AI's algorithmic violence emerged from our own social matrix. The Sociological Review Magazine. https://doi.org/10.51428/tsr.ekpj9730 MIT (2008, March 10). · DOI
  12. Natale, Simone, (2021). The ELIZA effect: Joseph Weizenbaum and the emergence of chatbots. In S. Natale (Ed.), Deceitful media: artificial intelligence and social life after the Turing test (pp. 50 -67). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190080365.003.0004 · DOI
  13. Pascal, Blaise (1995). Pensées and Other Writings, Oxford University Press
  14. Pentland, A. (2015). Social physics: How social networks can make us smarter. Penguin.
  15. Retelny, D., Robaszkiewicz, S., To, A., Lasecki, W. Patel, J., Rahmati, N., Doshi, T., Valentine, M., & Bernstein, M. S. (2014, October 5 -8). Expert crowdsourcing with flash teams [Paper presentation]. UIST: ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Honolulu, HI, USA. https://hci.stanford.edu/publications/paper.php?id=284
  16. Rheingold, H. (1985). Tools for thought: The history and future of mind- expanding technology. MIT Press.
  17. Rosenberg, R. L. (1980). Incomprehensible computer systems: Knowledge without wisdom [Unpublished Masters Thesis]. MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
  18. Samuel, A. L. (1959). Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers, IBM Journal of Research and Development, 3(3).
  19. Weil, P. (2015). Seriously writing SIRI. Hyperrhiz: New Media Cultures, 11. doi:10.20415/hyp/011.e05 · DOI
  20. Weizenbaum, J. (1963). Symmetric list processor. Communications of the ACM, 6(9).
  21. Weizenbaum, J. (1966). ELIZA: A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM, 9, 36 -45.
  22. Weizenbaum, J. (1967). Contextual understanding by computers. Communications of the ACM, 10(8). http://www.cse.buffalo. edu/~rapaport/572/S02/weizenbaum.eliza.1967.pdf
  23. Weizenbaum, J. (1987). Not without us. ETC: A review of general semantics, 44(1), 42 -48. Date received: July 2023 Date accepted: July 2023

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Berry, D.
Corresponding author
Berry, David
ORCID
Berry, David
Venue
Weizenbaum Institute
Publisher
Weizenbaum Institute
Published
2023
ISSN
2748-5625 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.34669/wi.wjds/3.3.2
OpenAlex
W6890177569
Cited by
13
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2
FWCI
2.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Weizenbaum Journal of the Digital Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › History of Computing Technologies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
Eliza, Joseph Weizenbaum, chatbots, artificial intelligence, generative AI, ChatGPT, machine learning, human-computer interaction, limits of computation, history of artificial intelligence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review