Xref: utzoo comp.ai:2703 talk.philosophy.misc:1621
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!mcnc!ece-csc!ncrcae!ncrlnk!uunet!mcvax!ukc!strath-cs!glasgow!jack
From: jack@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence and Intelligence
Message-ID: <1958@crete.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>
Date: 25 Nov 88 11:25:35 GMT
References: <484@soleil.UUCP> <88Nov15.170837est.707@neat.ai.toronto.edu> <42021@linus.UUCP>
Reply-To: jack@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin)
Organization: COMANDOS Project, Glesga Yoonie, Unthank
Lines: 22
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Keywords:


bwk@mbunix (Kort) wrote:
> In mathematical circles, proof by analogy is emerging as an interesting
> research frontier.  Saul Kripke has done seminal work in modal reasoning
> and intuitionist logic, which formalize these ideas.

I find this utterly unintelligible.  What has intuitionistic logic got to do
with analogy?  What specific work of Kripke's are you talking about?

[ To anticipate one likely question: if anyone wants to know what modal and
  intuitionistic logics are and what Kripke's contributed to them, read the
  relevant articles in the Handbook of Philosophical Logic.  I am not very
  interested in debating people who haven't read some exposition like that. ]

I am not saying there can't be a logic of analogy - though I have no idea what
shape it would take.

-- 
ARPA: jack%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk       USENET: jack@cs.glasgow.uucp
JANET:jack@uk.ac.glasgow.cs      useBANGnet: ...mcvax!ukc!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!jack
Mail: Jack Campin, Computing Science Dept., Glasgow Univ., 17 Lilybank Gardens,
      Glasgow G12 8QQ, SCOTLAND     work 041 339 8855 x 6045; home 041 556 1878