Not directly related to extended cognition, but these remarks spun out of my thinking about Swampman, which spun out of my thinking about extended cognition.
Too long to put here, but here's a link:
Swampman Takes The Turing Test
The linked document is an organized collection of remarks shaping into an argument. I wouldn't even call it a "draft" yet.
Basically, I argue that the Turing Test provides no evidence that a machine is thinking, because in order for it to provide such evidence to us, we'd have to make certain assumptions which either trivialize or cancel out any conclusions we might have drawn from our observations during the test. The Turing Test provides no evidence for psychology in the same way that an examination of Swampman provides no evidence for biofunction.