Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!mit-eddie!bu-cs!cd
From: cd@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Clarence K. Din)
Newsgroups: comp.edu
Subject: Re: What is Computer Science?
Message-ID: <16250@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Date: Fri, 20-Nov-87 01:43:42 EST
Article-I.D.: bu-cs.16250
Posted: Fri Nov 20 01:43:42 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Nov-87 10:43:34 EST
References: <933@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> <450@ra.rice.edu>
Reply-To: cd@bu-cs.UUCP (Clarence K. Din)
Organization: Boston Univ. CS Dept.
Lines: 59

In article <450@ra.rice.edu> retrac@rice.edu (John Carter) writes:
>
>    You seem to be confusing Computer Science and Computer Engineering!
>The study of computer science is NOT the process of learning how these piles
>of silicon and metal work physically.  Computer science is the study of the
>fundamental abstractions and practices that are used with computers.

     How true!  However, at some universities, particularly Boston
University, the once separate CS and CE departments are now attempting to
intermingle.  What this means is the CS major won't be able to graduate without
knowing AT LEAST a fundamental knowledge of circuit design and the CE major
likewise with programming.

     Mr. Carter certainly has some valid views of what CS is.  A science
is just what it implies: taking knowledge and using it to gain or develop
new insights... and, hence, new knowledge.  Let me add to Mr. Carter's
already well-made argument... writing compilers and computer languages
IS a science because the basic principles underlying language design are
being applied to produce an end product (ie. a compiler).  Of course, the
design of new languages is a science (explained by my first statement), 
but so is the study of past knowledge.  Where would the world's greatest
minds be if they had no knowledge of the fundamentals of their specialty?

>The theoretical work in even the "pure"
>sciences is done by people with PhD's - this is also true in Computer
>Science.

Not entirely true.  There do exist individuals at the BA/BS level doing
serious scientific research.  One does not need a PhD to delve into
research.  I believe the PhD is merely an indication that an individual
is capable of doing research without excessive supervision.

>    To summarize, I think that developing new ideas/practices for languages,
>communications, algorithms, models, etc., etc. in computer science is just
>as much "science" as what is considered science in biology, chemistry and
>physics.  I don't think there have to be physical phenomena involved to
>constitute science.  I agree that most people coming out with an
>undergraduate degree in CS from most schools are more "programmers" that
>"scientists", though I don't see how this affects the basic argument that CS
>is a science.

     Sure, they're programmers, but EXPERT programmers.  Lots of CS people
are REALLY INTO CS.  But let's take this thought a little further... a vast
number of CS people are creative.  Many have expressed their creativity
through projects in their courses or on their own (ie. computer graphics or
algorithm design).  An example... weighing all of the potential
possibilities when designing a new algorithm.

     What are my views as to what CS is?  It's both an art and a science.
A CS education has many advantages as well as faults... but so does everything
else.

  *****************************
 ***     Clarence K. Din     ***
  *****************************
 ***  Boston University       ***
 ***  Computer Science Dept.  ***
 ***  cd@bu-cs.buacca.bu.edu  ***
  *****************************