Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!caip!clyde!watmath!watnot!watdragon!rggoebel
From: rggoebel@watdragon.UUCP (Randy Goebel LPAIG)
Newsgroups: net.ai,net.cog-eng
Subject: Re: transition from AI to Cognitive Science (was: Re: Notes on AAAI '86)
Message-ID: <1350@watdragon.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 7-Sep-86 12:46:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdrago.1350
Posted: Sun Sep  7 12:46:51 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 7-Sep-86 22:59:51 EDT
References: <959@hounx.UUCP> <963@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU> <7602@tekecs.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 17
Xref: mnetor net.ai:1116 net.cog-eng:269

Mike Sellers from Tektronix in Wilsonville, Oregon writes:

| Inordinate amounts of hype have long been a problem in AI; the only difference
| now is that there is actually a small something there (i.e. knowldege based 
| systems), so the hype is rising to truly unbelievable heights.  I don't know
| that AI is returning to its roots in computer science, probably there is just
| more emphasis on the area(s) where something actually *works* right now.

I would like to remind all that don't know or have forgotten that the notion
of a rational artifact as digitial computer does have its roots in
computing, but the more general notion of intelligent artifact has concerned
scientists and philosophers much longer than the lifetime of the digital
computer.  John Haugeland's book ``AI: the very idea'' would be good reading
for those who aren't aware that there is a pre-Dartmouth history of ``AI.''

Randy Goebel
U. of Waterloo