Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!pacbell.com!sire
From: sire@PacBell.COM (Sheldon Rothenburg)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Cyc
Summary: CYC & PHILOSOPHY
Keywords: a short reference
Message-ID: <1990Aug24.160223.9265@PacBell.COM>
Date: 24 Aug 90 16:02:23 GMT
References: <1713@drjur.tubopal.UUCP>
Sender: news@PacBell.COM
Distribution: comp.ai
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Lines: 31

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. 
> i found a book:
> Building Large Knowledge-Based Systems -
> Representation and Inference in the Cyc Project.
> Douglas B. Lenat
> R.V. Guha
> 
> I only took a short look, but i would say, that i will not read it. They
> talk, e.g. about "representation" without discussing the philosophical
> background. That's unacceptable, i think.
>
Sorry about your boredom. I don't feel the same way as you do about the
unacceptability of discussion of representation without philosophy.

At the risk of pre-empting Guha and Lenat, who may be reading this, Lenat
has spoken about the literature of ontology and representation. Some
great thinkers have made these topics their life's work and have not
reached conclusive answers to the dilemmas of the discipline yet. Should
AI wait for universal concurrence of the philosophical community to 
work on its issues?

Engineers, by nature, build things to prove concepts, even where the
domain's requirements are not yet certain or cast in stone.
 
I find their ambition laudable and their books and reports fascinating.

Shelley
 P.S. You can find philosophical discussion of these topics elsewhere
with little difficulty.