Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.10 $; site uiucdcsp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucdcsp!bsmith
From: bsmith@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU
Newsgroups: net.ai
Subject: Re: "self-styled philosophers"
Message-ID: <3500010@uiucdcsp>
Date: Sun, 2-Mar-86 21:17:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcsp.3500010
Posted: Sun Mar  2 21:17:00 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Mar-86 05:06:20 EST
References: <3189@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #R:umcp-cs.UUCP:3189:uiucdcsp:3500010:000:1302
Nf-From: uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU!bsmith    Mar  2 20:17:00 1986


William James once wrote that all great theories go through three
distinct stages:  first, everyone claims the theory is simply wrong,
and not worth taking seriously.  Second, people start saying that,
maybe it's true, but it's trivial.  And third, people are heard to
say that not only is it true and important, but they thought of it
first.

Here at the University of Illinois, it seems to be de rigeur
to laugh and deride Dreyfuss whenever his name comes up.  I am
convinced the majority of these people have never read any of
Dreyfuss' work--however, this is unimportant to them (clearly I don't
mean everyone here).  There are also those who spend a great deal of
time and effort rejecting everything Dreyfuss says.  For example,
recently Dr. Buchanan (of Stanford) gave a lecture here.  He purported
to be answering Dreyfuss, but in the great majority of cases agreed
with him (always saying something like, "Well, maybe it's true, but
who cares?").  It seems to me that, if Dreyfuss is so unimportant, it
is very strange indeed that so many people get so offended by
everything he says and does.  Perhaps AI researchers ought to be less
sensitive and start encouraging this sort of interdisciplinary
activity.  Perhaps then AI will move forward and finally live up to
its promise.

Barry Smith