Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site iddic.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!iddic!dorettas From: dorettas@iddic.UUCP (Doretta Schrock) Newsgroups: net.cog-eng Subject: Re: Godel, Escher, Bach Message-ID: <2270@iddic.UUCP> Date: Tue, 29-Oct-85 11:59:54 EST Article-I.D.: iddic.2270 Posted: Tue Oct 29 11:59:54 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 2-Nov-85 02:15:11 EST References: <2246@iddic.UUCP> <2336@flame.warwick.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 57 > In article <2246@iddic.UUCP> dorettas@iddic.UUCP (Doretta Schrock) writes: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Please note. I am not Doretta Schrock. We have agreed on this. See below for my True Identity. > >Has anyone else read _Godel, Escher, Bach_? Or Pylyshyn's _Computation and > >Cognition_? Or _The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction_? What did > >you think? > > I've read G,E,B: I can't say I thought much of it at all. I find DH's > style irritating, confusing and condescending. Hmmm. I guess I'd have to agree with the condescending, in some spots, though considering the subject matter I think he was walking a pretty thin line between confusing and condescending. Escher and Bach have always been two of my favorites (math like Godel's always scared me too much :-), so I was overjoyed to see their material fused with AI and etcetera. One of my profs called GEB 'the Bible' for anyone getting started with heavy-duty AI or cognition work. I don't know that I'd go *that* far, but it was good. I wonder if some of your dislike could be idiomatic? Thinking about it, the book does read pretty American. > . . . those who are/were within the AI/Cognition cluster seemed > to appreciate it most, while Computer Scientists tended to dismiss it as > 'trendy garbage'. Engineers liked the pictures :-) I'll have to remember that as a way of classifying the three animal types :-) > Computation & Cognition? Haven't read it through yet (I had 40 minutes > with someone else's copy), but consider it well worth reading on that > limited basis. *This* is a good book. Pylyshyn (it took years of hard work for me to learn to spell that name :-) is a bit heavy on the computational side for me, but his ideas of "functional architecture", "cognitive penetrability", and "carving nature at the joints [from Plato, I think]" are right on the money. This book hasn't gotten nearly the attention it should, but I guess things tend to move slowly in scientific/engineering circles. > Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction? Haven't heard of this. Who's > it by? Would *you* recommend it? This is by Card, Newell, and Moran (correct me if I'm wrong). Probably one of the foundational books of "enlightened" user interface design. We didn't use this when I was in school, though I wish we had. It just occured to me that it is possible that some or all of Drs. Hofstadter, Pylyshyn, Card, Newell, or Moran might be reading this. Comments, anyone? Now, I *am*... Mike Sellers ^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A little nonsense Now and Then Is relished by The wisest men..."