Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!orc!inews!iwarp.intel.com!psueea!eecs!erich
From: erich@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Erich Boleyn)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Cyc
Keywords: a short reference
Message-ID: <3273@psueea.UUCP>
Date: 23 Aug 90 04:47:12 GMT
References: <1713@drjur.tubopal.UUCP>
Sender: news@psueea.UUCP
Reply-To: erich@eecs.ee.pdx.edu (Erich Boleyn)
Distribution: comp.ai
Organization: Portland State University, Portland, OR
Lines: 27

In article <1713@drjur.tubopal.UUCP> seim@tubopal.UUCP (Kai Seim) writes:
>i have to say, that i'm bored by the discussion about Cyc. The first
...[reference to the book that everyone keeps on mentioning deleted]...
>talk, e.g. about "representation" without discussing the philosophical
>background. That's unacceptable, i think.

   What do you mean by the philosophical background?  Do you mean the
Reasoning behind the decisions made about the representation language?

   The main reason that I'm asking is that I have serious doubts about the
applicability of modern philosophy to AI.  I don't think that the assumptions
that most philosophy takes are very useful, or even very valid, outside of
a VERY specialized domain.

>Greetings, Kai

   (Well, Hello to you to...  ;-)

>Kai Seim

Regards,
	Erich

   ___--Erich S. Boleyn--___  CSNET/INTERNET:  erich@cs.pdx.edu
  {Portland State University}     ARPANET:     erich%cs.pdx.edu@relay.cs.net
       "A year spent in           BITNET:      a0eb@psuorvm.bitnet
      artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God"