Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!XEROX.COM!hayes.pa From: hayes.pa@XEROX.COM Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest Subject: Methodology Message-ID: <871230-121119-1472@Xerox> Date: 30 Dec 87 20:10:00 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 16 Approved: ailist@kl.sri.com Im sure this is not going to convince Mike Sellers, but his comments suggest an obvious response. Of course its true that >the problem for most active researchers is one of scale: you cannot >possibly hope to create a program that models human cognitive >processing, and you have to get *something* running, so you set your >sights a little lower The issue is whether one feels that the best approach to understanding human cognition is to approximate it by looking at parts of it, as in `classical AI', or by looking at the behavior > of a flatworm or a sea slug Personally, I put my money on the former. Pat Hayes