Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!OFFICE-1.ARPA!TLW.MDC From: TLW.MDC@OFFICE-1.ARPA.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest Subject: Is AI a Science? A Pragmatic Test Offered! Message-ID:Date: Thu, 9-Jul-87 17:37:00 EDT Article-I.D.: OFFICE-1.MDC-TLW-BS203 Posted: Thu Jul 9 17:37:00 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jul-87 23:40:15 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 30 Approved: ailist@stripe.sri.com I'm inclined to belive that Don Norman is right, and that AI is not a science; which is okay, there being a number of perfectly good, self-respecting fields of study out there that are not sciences. Still, its likely that there have been sensitivities offended and a defense is to be anticipated. In lieu of a more respectable and formal argument in defense of AI being a science, I am prepared to steal from William James and proffer a pragmatic test. The rationale is as follows: 1. Grant moneys are issued by various public and private agencies for the support of research in both sciences and non-sciences 2. Issuing agencies are generally authorized to finance projects falling within their scope of study only. 3. These agencies have some criteria for determining what appropriate projects are. THEREFORE: 4. Any projects funded by an agency as a science (e.g. NSF) are science projects reflecting scientific work (except for method or instrumentation projects). The challenge, then, is to find any researcher working on an AI project funded by a science-supportive agency. If only it were all this easy... Tony Wilkie