Rauschelbach@HIS-PHOENIX-MULTICS.ARPA.UUCP (07/07/87)
I normally only observe this discussion, but Don Norman's pomposity struck a nerve. The first objection I have is to his statement that mathematics and philosophy are not sciences "in the normal interpretation of the word." The Webster's definition (a fairly normal interpretation) is: "accumulated knowledge systematized and formulated with reference to the discovery of general truths or the operation of general laws." This certainly applies to both. The next problem is his statement that AI people think they're scientists. He seemed to believe that it was a science until Nils Nilsson told him the obvious. AI, like it's name implies, is a product, not a phenomenon, not an occurence of nature to be described. The problem is the creation of a product, an engineering problem. The preservation of theory is far from an engineer's mind. The engineer uses theory to describe possible solutions. If an engineer comes across a possible solution that has not been addressed by theory, s/he may get his hands a little dirty before the "scientists" take control of it. It seems to me that much of the talk in this discussion is of a hypothetical nature, one of the elements of THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD he was defending. This is a good place for that portion of the method, as well as statement of the problem. The experimentation is left to the psychologists, neurologists, etc. I see no one but scientists claiming to be scientists, and I hear AI people shouting, "Yeah, but how do you code it?" or "What doohickey will do that?" Implementation of theory. I have also read discussion of the testing of implementation. Come to think of it, engineering also fits the definition of science. Both things, implementation and theory have been and should be discussed here. If they intermingle, this can only be healthy, even if somewhat confusing. I hope we can both get down off our respective high horses now. Paul Rauschelbach Honeywell Bull P.O. Box 8000, M/S K55, Phoenix, AZ 85006 (602) 862-3650 pbr%pco@BCO-MULTICS.ARPA Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are mine, and not endorsed by Honeywell Bull.