To wit: (Shaw, 2003) "In1968IwasinvitedtolectureattheCaliforniaInstituteofTechnology(CalTech) on the application of abstract machine theory to cognitive psychology—my unique forte at the time. Cal Tech, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and Car- negie Mellon University were each home to one of three fledgling computational philosophies and therefore were struggling for hegemony in the new field. My host explained to me how Cal Tech’s philosophy differed from its two competitors: Imagine you are given a contract to develop a computer application for playing chess as expertly as possible. Depending on your venue, there are three strategies you might consider: the simulation approach under development at Carnegie Mellon (by Simon and Newell), the artificial intelligence approach being promoted at MIT, or, finally, the synergistic approach favored here at Cal Tech. He went on to explain that at Carnegie Mellon the computer model would likely take the form of a program designed to simulate the play of a Russian grand- master on the assumption that human experts have insights and competencies that a machine did not but might be programmed to emulate. By contrast, if you were at MIT, you might instead apply AI techniques to try to build a program that played the best game of chess possible, whether or not it did so as humans do—all that matters is that it play brilliantly. At Cal Tech the computational philosophy differed from those of the other two universities. The aim was not to simulate human experts, or even to create artificial experts, but to treat the computer as a tool designed to serve the purposes of hu- man agents rather than to be a stand-alone device capable of autonomous goal-di- rected activities."
Posted on: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:10:06 +0000