Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!ames-pioneer.arpa!eugene
From: eugene@ames-pioneer.arpa.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
Subject: Re: AIList V5 #201 - Philosophy of Science, AI Paradigms
Message-ID: <8708282004.AA21360@ames-pioneer.arpa>
Date: Fri, 28-Aug-87 16:04:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: ames-pio.8708282004.AA21360
Posted: Fri Aug 28 16:04:19 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Sep-87 06:14:31 EDT
References: <556829438.star@h.gp.cs.cmu.edu>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 15
Approved: ailist@stripe.sri.com

In article <556829438.star@h.gp.cs.cmu.edu> Spencer Star wrote:
>In V5 #201 Andrew Jenning suggests that AI is empirical research when a
>programmer writes a program because we have some definite criteria:
>either the program works or it does not.  Unfortunately, this view is
>rather widespread.  Also, it is wrong.

It fact, it was a rather well known AI researcher who reinforced this
view.  I liked Stan Steb's posting just before this one which took a
more forward looking view [I had minor disagreements, but who cares].
What AI SHOULD be: more concern with the empirical, more experimental in
the traditional sense of the word, let's at least give these reviewers
and Don Norman a positive nod, and try to improve the WAY we do our
work, as well as try to improve our work.

--eugene