Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!aero!venera.isi.edu!smoliar
From: smoliar@vaxa.isi.edu (Stephen Smoliar)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Free Will & Self-Awareness
Keywords: Look, this is basic scientific method we're on about
Message-ID: <5569@venera.isi.edu>
Date: 24 May 88 03:41:30 GMT
References: <1029@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <4134@super.upenn.edu> <3200014@uiucdcsm> <1484@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <5100@pucc.Princeton.EDU> <1099@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <5474@venera.isi.edu> <1173@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Sender: news@venera.isi.edu
Organization: USC-Information Sciences Institute
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!aero!venera.isi.edu!smoliar
From: smoliar@vaxa.isi.edu (Stephen Smoliar)
Newsgroups: comp.ai
Subject: Re: Free Will & Self-Awareness
Keywords: Look, this is basic scientific method we're on about
Message-ID: <5569@venera.isi.edu>
Date: 24 May 88 03:41:30 GMT
References: <1029@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <4134@super.upenn.edu> <3200014@uiucdcsm> <1484@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <5100@pucc.Princeton.EDU> <1099@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <5474@venera.isi.edu> <1173@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Sender: news@venera.isi.edu
Lines: 23

In article <1173@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> gilbert@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Gilbert
Cockton) writes:
>  No-one in AI seems to be concerned
>with the truth question, and that's serious where academic study is
>concerned.  I'm not saying AI researchers are to BLAME, but they certainly
>are easy TO blame.  The lack of concern is DISTASTEFUL.  As is the pursuit of
>areas of enquiry in arrogant self-imposed ignorance of other relevant and
>available knowledge.  As far as academic values are concerned, it is
>distasteful to ignore established bodies of knowledge, techniques, concepts
>and arguments.  It is distasteful in its lack of humility and the arrogance
>that
>a mathematically or technically trained person can wade in, uninformed and
>hope to have any insight about problems when their understanding is so
>obviously
>inadequate when compared to the best traditions available in real disciplines.
>I cite 4 years reading of comp.ai.digest seminar abstracts as evidence.
>
Now that Gilbert Cockton has revealed the source of his knowledge of artificial
intelligence, I must say that I agree whole-heartedly with those who have
suggested that the discussion be moved to a "softer" forum, such as a "talk"
newsgroup.  Readers who sample this newsgroup only occasionally might think
that he was writing from a position of actual experience in artificial
intelligence, and that would be a dangerous confusion!