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