Xref: utzoo sci.philosophy.tech:651 comp.ai:1991 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!mit-amt!bc From: bc@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (bill coderre) Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai Subject: Re: Who else isn't a science? Message-ID: <2705@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> Date: 5 Jul 88 18:09:24 GMT References: <11387@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <2663@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <11605@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Reply-To: bc@media-lab.media.mit.edu.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (bill coderre) Organization: MIT Media Lab, Cambridge MA Lines: 31 I am going to wrap up this discussion here and now, since I am not interested in semantic arguments or even philosophical ones. I'm sorry to be rude. I have a thesis to finish as well, due in three weeks. First, the claim was made that there is little or no research in AI which counts as Science, in a specific interpretation. This statement is incorrect. For example, the reasearch that I an my immediate colleagues are doing is "REAL" Science, since we model REAL animals, make very REALISTIC behavior, and have REAL ethologists as critics of our work. Next, the claim was made that synthesis as an approach to AI has not panned out as Science. Well, wrong again. There's plenty of such. Then I am told that few AI people understand the Philosophy of Science. Well, gee. Lots of my colleagues have taken courses in such. Most are merely interested in the fundamentals, and have taken survey courses, but some fraction adopt a philosophical approach to AI. If I was a better AI hacker, I would just append a list of references to document my claims. Unfortunately, my references are a mess, so let me point you at The Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence (J Wiley and Sons), which is generally excellent, and although lacking specific articles on AI as a Science (I think, I didn't find any on a quick glance), there are plenty of references concering the more central philosophical issues to AI. Highly recommended. (Incidentally, there's plenty of stuff in there on the basic approaches to and results from AI research, so if you're a pragmatic engineer, you'll enjoy it too.) Enough. No more followups from me.