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.