WEIZEN.REV[PUB,JMC] - www.SailDart.org

perm filename WEIZEN.REV[PUB,JMC] blob sn#291637 filedate 1977-06-27 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00008 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source
C00013 00003	
C00020 00004	
C00026 00005	.item←0
C00033 00006	
C00058 00007	
C00068 00008	
C00081 ENDMK
C⊗;
.require "memo.pub[let,jmc]" source;
.cb AN UNREASONABLE BOOK
.skip 2
.begin indent  0;
Joseph Weizenbaum, %2Computer Power and Human Reason%1, W. H. Freeman Co.,
San Francisco 1975
.end;

	This moralistic and incoherent book uses computer science and
technology as  an illustration to support the  view promoted by Lewis
Mumford, Theodore Roszak, and Jacques Ellul, that science has  led to
an  immoral view of  man  and  the world.
I am frightened by its arguments that  certain research should not be
done if it is based on or might result in an "obscene" picture of the
world and man.  Worse yet, the book's  notion of "obscenity" is vague
enough to admit arbitrary interpretations by activist bureaucrats.

.cb IT'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HE REALLY BELIEVES ...

	Weizenbaum's style  involves making extreme  statements which
are  later qualified by contradictory  statements.  Therefore, almost
any quotation is out  of context, making it difficult  to
summarize his contentions accurately.

	The following passages illustrate the difficulty:	

	%2"In  1935,   Michael  Polanyi"%1,   [British  chemist   and
philosopher of science,  was told by] %2"Nicolai Bukharin, one of the
leading theoreticians  of  the Russian  Communist party,  ...  [that]
'under socialism the  conception of science pursued for  its own sake
would  disappear, for the interests of scientists would spontaneously
turn to the problems of  the current Five Year Plan.'  Polanyi sensed
then  that  'the  scientific  outlook  appeared to  have  produced  a
mechanical conception of man and history in which there was no  place
for  science  itself.'  And  further  that  'this  conception  denied
altogether any intrinsic power to thought and thus denied any grounds
for claiming freedom  of thought.'"%1 -  from page  1.  Well$  that≥f~∃G1KCdA∃]←kO vA/K%uK]E¬kZAM¬m←ef↓MeKK⊃←ZA←_AiQ←UOQhA¬]HAg
SK]G∀AC]H↓Sf~∃]←eeS∃HACE=khAi!eKCiLAi↑AQQKZ\A¬kh↓←\Aa¬OJ@dXjXAo∀AQCm∀~∀~∀∀dE'G%K]iSMifAo!↑AG←9iS]k∀Ai↑AAeCii1JA←\↓CE←kP@OW]=oYKI≥JAM←HASif↓←o\~)gCWJ≤@AS\↓←eIKHAi↑@↓KqaY=ShAi!Ch@AMY←OC8AM←d↓iQKSH@AgK1L[gKImS]N↓K]If4∃QCm∀AIKi¬GQKH↓gGSK9GJ@A¬]HAW9←oYK⊃OJAMI←ZAC9r@AG=]iCGPAoSi AiQJAeKC0~∃o←IYHD\∀b@A⊃∃eJA/∃SuK]	CkZ@↓gKK[LAi↑@↓EJAC≥CS]gP@AakIJAgG%K]GJ0@AR]∀\~∃e∃gKCe
PA[←QSmCi∃HAg←1KYrA	rAGkIS←gSQr\@A]JACYM↑AQCYJ~∀~(JdE/%iPAM∃nAKq
KaiS=]fXAQQKeJ↓QCmJ↓EKK\↓]↑@AIKgkYQfXAMI←ZA←YKdAi]K]ir4∃sKCIfA←L↓CeiS→SGSC0@AS]QKYYS≥K]GJ↓eKgK¬eGPX↓iQCh↓QCmJ↓M←k]⊂AiQK%dAoCd~∃S]Q↑@AS9IkgiIr@@A≥K]Ke¬YYr@A←d@↓S]i↑@AiQ∀@AG←5akiKH@@AS9IkgiIr@@A%\~∃a¬eiSGUYCdD∀b\@@@ZAa¬OJ@@Hdr@AQQSf@↓COCS8AgkO≥KgifAiQCP@AS]⊃kgie%CX~∃IKgkYQfACe∀A]KG∃ggCedAi↑AYCYSI¬iJAg
SK]G∀\~∀~(JdE'
SK]G∀Aae←5SgKH↓[C\AA←oKd8@A¬kPACfAM↑A←MQK\AQ¬aaK]LAoQK8AaK←AYJ~∃¬eJAg∃IkGK⊂AErAAe←[SMKfA←_Aa←o∃d@\\8AiQJ↓aeSG∀ACGiUCYYr↓aCSH↓Sf~∃MKemSQkIJA¬]HAS5a←iK9GJDJD\@A)!SfASLAMe←4AiQJ↓E←←V↓UCGW∃h\@AAeKgk5CEYr4∃iQJ↓akEY%gQKd↓eKOCIIfASPACfA∧AO←←⊂Agk[5CerA=LAiQ∀AE←←,OfA[¬S\Aa=S]h\4∀~∀JHE∩Ao%YXXA%\AoQ¬hAM←1Y←of0Aier↓i↑A[¬S]iC%\AiQ∀Aa←g%iS←\↓iQCh↓iQKe∀~∃Sf↓]←iQ%]NAoI←]NA]SiPAYSKoS9NA[C8ACfA¬\AS]→←e[CQS←\AAe←GKMg←d@!←d~∃%]IKK⊂ACfA¬]siQ%]NAK1gJRA9←dAo%iPACQiK[aQS]NAQ↑Ak]⊃Kegi¬]HAQ%ZAMe=Z~∃i!ChAa∃egaK
iSmJ0Aae←YSIS]≤XAQ←]KmKd0AiQCPAoJA9KmKd↓CGhA¬fAiQ=kOP@4∃C]r↓gS]O1JAaKIgaKGQSmJA
C\AG=[aeK!K]HAQQJAo!←YJA5C\\D∀b@ZAACOJ@Dh`\~)/JAG¬\AGKIiCS]1rAYSYJAoSQPAiQ¬hXAEUh~∀~(JdE≥=hA←]1rAQCLA←kd↓k]E←U]IKH↓MKKI%]NA←8@AgG%K]GJ↓GCkg∃HAkf↓i↑AE∃G←[J4∃IKa∃]IK]P@A←\↓ShX@↓EkhX↓Cf@A!CaaK9f@Ao%iPA[¬]r@A=iQKd↓IekOL@AiC-K\AS8~∃S]
eKCg%]NAI=gCOKLXAgG%K]GJ↓QCfA	KK\A≥eCIk¬YYrA
←]mKIiKHA%]i↑@↓BAgY=n~∃C
iS]N↓a←Sg=\D\JD@ZAa¬OJ@bL\@A)!KgJA¬eJAcUCYSM%KHAEd~∀~∀∀dE∩A¬eOkJ↓M←d@↓iQJAICiS←9CXAkMJ@A←_AgGS∃]GJA¬]HAi∃GQ]←1←OrXA]←h↓M←d~)SifA5sgiS→SGCi%←\XA1KhAC1←]JA%ifAC	C]I←9[K]hλJb\@4AaCO∀@djl4∀~∃∪8AeKM∃eK]G∀Ai↑AQQJAaI←a←g¬XAM←HAB@A5←eCi=eSkZ↓←\AG∃eiCS8AKqa∃eS[K9if~∃]SiPAIKG←[	S]C]PA	≥αAEKG¬kgJAQQKrA5SOQh↓EJAI¬]OKe=kfXA]J~∃Q¬mJ@JHE)QK%efASLAGKeQCS]YdABAgQK`AS8AiQJ↓eSOQPAISe∃GiS←8X@AC9HAiQ∃Sd~∃%]SiS¬iSmJ↓SfAi<AEJA¬aaYCUIKH\A'iS1XX@A=]JA[¬rACg,XAoQdAI↑AQQKrA→KKX~)iQKrAQCm∀Ai↑A≥SmJA∧AeKCM←\@A→←dAo!ChAi!KrAe∃G←[[∃]H@A¬hACY0}@A∪LA]←h4∃iQJ↓←mKeISIS]≤A←EY%OCiS=\A←\↓[K\X↓S]GYUIS]N↓[K\A=LAgG%K]GJ0Ai↑A∃qK[aP~∃YS→JASiMKYLA→e←Z@↓iQJA5CI]KMfA←L↓ieKCQS]NA∃mKesQQS]NACfA¬\A←E)KGhX↓B~∃gUMMSG%K]hAIKCg←8XAC]⊂A←]J↓iQCh↓I←Kf↓]←hA∃mK\A!CmJAQ↑AEJ↓ga←W∃\}@A]Qr~∃⊃←KfA%hAQCYJAi↑↓EJAKaaYCS9KH}@↓∪hAo=kYH@↓CaaK¬dAiQ¬hAKm∃\AiQ∀A]←E1Kgh~)CGifA←LAQQJA[=ghAo∃YX[[∃C]S]≤@AaK=aYJA¬eJAa=Sg←]∃H@AEdAiQJ↓G←ee=gSmJ4∃GYS5CiJ@↓←L@AYCYkKL@A←LA←kdAiS[∀\DJbA∪f@↓/KSu∃]ECk4@@AC≥CS]gP@ACY0~∃KqAKeS[∃]iCXAES←1←OrA=d@AKYK\AC1X@AKaaKeS5K]ifAoSi A	≥α|@@A∩Ao←k1H~∃Q∃gSiCQJ@Ai<@AG←9GYkI∀Ag↑@↓Me←ZAiQSLAck←QJv@A!JA[Cd@AgCd@AiQ∀AISe∃Gh~∃=aa←g%iJAg=[KoQ∃eJAK1gJ\~)/KSu∃]ECk4OfAO=CXA←_AOKiQS]NA1S]Kf↓←LAe∃gKCe
PACE¬]I←]∃HAoSQQ←kh↓KmK\4∃QCm%]NAi<AOSm∀ABAe∃Cg←\↓gKK[LAk]Y%WKYr↓i↑AE∀ACGQ%KmKH↓KqGKAhAS\4∃C\A¬i[←gAQKeJ↓iQCh↓G←[E%]KfAAkEYSAQsgQKeSB↓C]HA	keKCUGeCi%FAa←]Kd\~))QSf↓QCfA!CaaK9KHAk9IKdA
←]ISQS←]f↓←LAe∃YSOS=kfAK9iQkg%CgZA¬]HAS8~∃≥CiRA∂KI[C]r0AS\AMiCYS9SghAIkggS∧AC]H↓S\Ai!JAπQ%]BA←_AiQJEπkYQkeCX4∃%Km=YkiS=\D\@↓≠←gh↓YSWK1rASh↓o←\OPAQCaAK\AS8Aβ[KISGB\4∀~∀JHE)Q←MJAoQ<AW]←\AoQ↑↓C]HA]QChAQQKrA¬eJAI<@A]←PA]KK⊂Ai↑A¬gVAo!ChAi!Kr~∃MQ←kY⊂@AI↑8DJb@4AaCO∀@dnf8@@A→∃hA[JACggUeJAi!JAeK¬IKd@↓iQCh↓iQKe∀ASf~)]←iQ%]N@A%\@Ai!J@AE=←V@AQQCh@↓←MMKIf@AC9r@Ao¬r@Ai<@AS]QKeae∃h@Ai!Sf~∃A←[a←MSir\A∩Ai¬WJASPACfA¬]←iQ∃dAaY∃BAi↑↓EJAMIKJA←_AiQJ↓E←]I¬OJ~∃=LAQCYS]NAQ↑AOSYJAeK¬g←]f↓M←dA!SfAI∃]k]G%CiS←9f\~∀4∀@@AQQJA[∃]CGJ↓←L@AMkGPA≥eC]I%Y←ck∃]hAaIKGKaQfASfAiQCPAiQKd~∃eKEkSeJ↓BAae%KgiQ=←HAi<ACaa1rAiQ∃ZAi↑↓aCei%GkYCHAGCg∃fXAC9HAo←UYH[E∀~∃ae%Kgif↓ckSG-YrAGIsgiC1YSuJ↓Ce←k9HAC]dAa←i∃]iSC0AGK]QKdA←_Aa←o∃d\~∃∧AG←e=YYCedA←LAQQSfA%fAiQ¬hAaK=aYJA
C\AE∀ACii¬GWKH↓M←dA]QChAQQKrA¬eJ~∃ICiQKHAiQC8AM←danything specific they have done.  The April 1976
issue of ⊗Ms. has a poignant illustration of this in an article about
"trashing".

%2"An individual is dehumanized whenever he is treated as less than a
whole  person"%1. -  page 266.    This is  also  subject to  priestly
interpretation as in the encounter group movement.

%2"The first kind %1[of computer application]%2 I would call simply
obscene.  These are ones whose very contemplation ought to give rise
to feelings of disgust in every civilized person.  The proposal I
have mentioned, that an animal's visual system and brain be coupled
to computers, is an example.  It represents an attack on life itself.
One must wonder what must have happened to the proposers' perception
of life, hence to their perceptions of themselves as part of the
continuum of life, that they can even think of such a thing, let alone
advocated it"%1.  No argument is offered that might be answered,
and no attempt is made to define criteria of acceptability.  I think
Weizenbaum and the scientists who have praised the book may be
surprised atsome of the repressive uses to which the book will be
put.  However, they will be able to point to passages in the book
with quite contrary sentiments, so the rep@IKggS=\Ao←8OhAE∀AiQK%dAMCUYhL~(_@~∀9π∧A¬U(A⊃I
O&A∧A)%2↓β(A'U≠≠β%%5∪≥∞h~∀]SQK[>`l~∀∪βL@AiQ∃gB@A%]G←]MSgiK9h@Aa¬ggCO∃f@Ag!←nX@↓Sh@A%g\OhAKCgd@Ai↑4∃IKi∃e[S]∀@A/K%uK]E¬kZOf↓a←gSQS←\XAEkh↓iQJA→←YY←]S]N@↓gKKZ↓i↑@A	JAiQ∀~∃E←=VOfA5CS\AA←S]iLt~∀~(]ED@λF\Aπ=[aki∃efAG¬]]←h↓EJA[¬IJAi<@AeK¬g←\AUgKMk1YrAC	←khA!k[C\↓CMMC%ef\D4∃)QSL@ASf↓gkaa=eiKH↓ErAcU←iS]≤@A←m∃e←ai%[Sgi%FAae∃ISGi%←]fA	rAG←5akiKH~∃gG%K]iSMifAC9H@AO%mS]N↓KqC[AYKf@↓←LA]=\[mKIECX@↓Qk[C8@AG←5[k]S
CiS←8\~∃⊃=oKmKHX@A/∃SuK]	CkZA⊃←Kg\≥h@A]¬[JAC9r@AgAKGSM%FAiCMV@Ai!ChAG=[aki∃ef~∃
C]]←P@AGCIerA←UhX@A	KGCkMJ@AQ∀AoSg!Kf@@∀dEi↑↓Cm←S⊂@AiQ∀Ak]]∃GKgg¬erX~)S]iKI[S]C	YJXA¬]HAk1iS[CQKYr@↓giKe%YJAKaKeGSMJA←L↓[CWS9N@AB↓GCiC1←OkJ4∃←LA]QCh@↓G←[aUiKef↓oSYX↓C]HA]SYX@↓]←hA	JACE1JAi↑↓I↑X@↓KSiQ∃dAQKIJAC]⊂~∃]←\A←dA∃mKdD∀b\@A%hASf↓CYg↑↓giCi∃HAiQ¬hAQk5C\AC9HA[C
QS]J↓eKCg=]S]N4∃CeJ↓S]G←5aCeC	YJAC9HAiQ¬hAiQ∀AgK]M←erA∃qaKe%K]GJ↓←LAB↓Qk[C8ASf~)KggK9iSCX↓M←dA!k[C\↓eKCg=]S]N8~∀~∀9ED@D\A)Q∃eJ@A¬eJAi¬gWfAQQCh@↓G←[aUiKef↓gQ←k1HA]←PAEJ@↓ae←OIC[[K⊂Ai↑A⊃↑\D~(~∃'←5JACe∀@AiCMWfA/∃SuK]	CkZ@↓iQS]-fAgQ=kYI\≥hAEJAI←]∀ACh@↓CYX@4~∃aKIQCaf↓M←dAA←YSi%GCXAIKCg←9f\@A=]JA[¬rAck¬eeKX↓oSiP↓QSf@↓a←YSQSGfX↓C]H~)∩AI↑0@AEkPA←Em%←kgYdAG←[AkiKeL@AgQ=kYI\≥hAI↑↓oQCh↓gQ←k1I\OhAEJA⊃←]J\4∃⊃←o∃mKdX↓/KSu∃]ECk4ACYg<A←EU∃GifAQ↑AG←5akiKHAQ←←-kafAQ↑AC]%[CXA	eCS]L~∃C]⊂AG←[AkiKd↓G←]IUGiKH↓agsG!SCie%F@AS9iKem%Kof\AβfAQ↑AiQ∀@AM←I[KdX↓∩~∃G=kYI\≥hAiK1X@Ao!KiQKHAQJA%fAC\↓C]iR5mSmSMKGiS=]Sgh0@AEkPAQJAMKK[f↓i↑~∃!CmJA¬IISi%←]CX↓eKCg=]fAM=dAGC1YS]N↓iQKZE←Eg
K]JD8@A)Q∀A←EU∃GiS←8Ai↑~)G←[aUiKef↓I←S]≤@AageGQSCQeSFA%]iKeYSKof↓CYg↑AQCf↓B@AG=[a←]∃]hAE∃s←]H4∃iQJAG←]YSGiS=\AiQ¬h@Ai!KrAo=kYH@↓]KGKMgCeS1rAI↑↓Sh@A	CIYr8@@A)!kfAQ∀~∃gCefX@JHE/QCPAGC\↓iQJAAgsGQ%CieSMhOfA%[COJ↓←LAQ%fAaCQSK]h↓EJ@A]QK\A!J~∃g∃KfAQ%[gKY_XACf↓BAiQ∃eCaSMhXA]=hACf↓C\AK9OCOK⊂AQk[¬\AEK%]NAC
iS]N↓Cf~∃∧@AQK¬YKdX↓Ekh@↓CfAC8AS]M=e[Ci%←\@AAe←GKMg←dA→←YY←]S]NAIkYKf0AKiF8}DJb4∃)QSL@AgK∃[f@A1SWJ@AiQJAeK]¬SggC9GJ@A∃eB@AIKYSO%←kf@A←EU∃GiS←9f@Ai<~∃ISMgKGi%]NAi!J@AQU[C\A	←IrAQQChA
C[J@↓k`Ao!K\Ag
SK]G∀@AeKYSmKH8@Am∃\~∃i!JA!←AKfAKYK]ik¬YYrA
←]mS9GKHAQQK[g∃YmKf↓iQCh↓eKOCIIS]N↓iQJA	←Ir@↓Cf~∃∧A[CG!S]J@↓M←dAMGSK]QSMSFA←dA5KISG¬X@AaUea←g∃fAoCLAckSQJ@AG=[aCi%EYJ~)oSiPAeKO¬eIS]≤ASh@↓CfAi!JAiK5aYJ@↓←LAi!J@Ag=kX\@↓%KGK9iYr@↓iQKr↓QCmJ4∃iCW∃\AiQ∀AgC[∀AmSK\A←L@↓gikIeS]NA5K]iC0A[KG!C]Sg5fAM←HAgGS∃]iSM%F@A←H~∃ageGQSCQeSFAAkea←MKf\~(~∀]Eλ@DF\↓'GSK9GJ@A!CfAY∃HAaK=aYJAQ↑AB@↓oe←]≤AmSK\A←LAQQJAo=eYH@↓C]HA=LAYS→J\D~(~∃)Q∀@AmS∃nASf↓GQCe¬GiKe%uKHA¬fA[K
QC]SMiSFXAC]H↓iQJA∃qC[a1JA←L4∃GY←
Wo←e,ASfA≥SmK\8@@@Q%hAgK∃[fAgQeC]O∀@AM←HABAG=[aki∃dAgG%K]iSMh@Ai<~∃OSYJAiQ%f@AKaC[aY∀XAEK
CkgJAiQJ↓CImC9GJA←_@AiQ∀AG←[AkiKdA[←I∃XA←m∃d~∃←1IKd@↓[KGQ¬]Sgi%FA[←⊃KYfA%f@Ai!ChAG=[aki∃efAG¬\@AC9HAGY=GWo←IVAGC8Oh~∃5CWJA⊃KGSg%←]f\$Aβaa¬eK]i1rAC]¬YsgSL@A←L↓BAYSYS]NAMsgiK4@ACf↓G←[a=gKH~)←LAS9iKeC
iS]NAaCeQfAeCQQKdAQQC\AQeKCi%]NASP@ACf↓C\Ak9C]CYeuKHA]Q←YJ4∃SfA	CHL~(~∀]Eλ@DF\↓'GSK9GJASLA]←h↓iQJAM←YJA=dAKm∃\A[C%\Ag←UeGJA=LAeK1SCEY∀AOK]∃eCXA-]←oY∃IOJ\λ~∀~∃!←oKm∃dX@A!JAI←∃g\Oh4∃ae←A←gJA¬]r@A=iQKd↓g←ke
KfA←_@AW]=oYKI≥JA←dAgCr↓oQChAiQJ↓YS[SQf@A←_~∃gG%K]iS→SFAW9←oYK⊃OJ@A%fAKq
Kah@↓i↑AG!CeCGQKeSu∀AGKeQCS\@↓iQ←k≥QifA¬f~∀E=EgGK9JD\~(~∀]Eλ@DF\↓πKei¬S\Aa∃←aYJAC]H↓S]gi%ikiS=]fACIJACiQCGWK⊂\D~∀4∃)QKMJ@AS9GYkI∀AiQJ4∃	Ka¬ei[K9h@A←_@E	K→K]gJλ@QgSRX@JI!gsG!←Y←Od@A)←⊃CrJb0AiQJJe≥K\A3←e,~∃)S5KfJb↓	CiB↓¬C]V0@AG←5akYg%mJAG=[aki∃d@AaI←OeC5[Kef0A↔K]9KiP@↓π←YEdX~∃≠¬emS\A≠S]MWrX@↓%←OKH@A'G!C]VXAβYY∃\A≥K]KYXXA⊃Ke	Keh@↓'S[←8X@A∀9.\~∃→←eeKMiKdX↓IoCIHA
e∃IWS\0@A∧]_\A'W%]]Kd0A/CeIK\A≠
πkYY=GP@@!k]iS0AQJ~)oCfA=YHRX↓→CaY¬GJAC9HA→K%E]St8~∀~∀9ED@D\AπKIiCS\↓a←YSQSGCX↓C]HAM←GSC0AmSK]fACe∀AiCW∃\AM←HAOeC9iKH\λ~∀~∀%)QJAYSKnAQQChAT]&\AA←YSGdAS\AYSKi]¬ZAoCL@E[kIIKe←UfDASLAkgK⊂~∃i↑↓gkaa=ehAC8ACii¬GVA←8@EY←≥SGCY%irD@!CfA←Aa←gK⊂Ai↑@	eCiS=]CYSQrDR~)C]HAQQJAm%KnA←_AgGS∃]GJA¬fAB@	gY←n↓CGiS9NAa←%g←\D8@A)Q∀AaQe¬gJ~∀∀dE∪h↓[CrA	JAiQ¬hAiQ∀AaK←AYJOf↓GkYi%mCiK⊂AC]H↓MS]C1YrAC⊃ISGi%mJ~∃!k]OKHAM←d↓aeSm¬iJACUi←[←	SYKf8\\DJD@Q`\L`RA[¬WKfAAgsGQ=Y←OS
CXX~)g←GS=Y←OS
CXXAA←YSi%GCXXAC]H↓iKGQ9←Y←O%GCXAAeKgk5aiS←9fACY0AS\~)←]JAAQeCg∀\@A'%[SYCIYrX@∀dE≠K8AG←k1HAS]MiKCH↓GQ←←MJAi↑↓QCmJ↓iekYd~∃gC→JACkQ←[←E%YKfX↓IKGK9hAiK1KmSg%←\XA⊃KGK]PAQ←kMS]NA→←dAKYKes←9JX~∃=dAG←5M←ei¬EYJX↓gCMJ0AC]H↓oSIK1rAISMieSEUiKHA5CgfAQeC]gA←eiCQS←\\λJb~∃AeKgk5KfAo%IJAC≥eKK[∃]hAC	←khA]QChAQQKgJ↓iQS]≥fACe∀XAoQ¬hASf4∃iKG!]←Y←≥SGCY1rAMK¬gSEY∀XAoQ¬hAiQ∀AKMM∃GifA=LAGQ¬]OKH↓a←YS
SKfA]←kYH4∃EJX↓C]HA]QChA¬GiSm%iSKf↓CS[K⊂AChA
QC]O%]NAa∃←aYJ≥fAiCMiJACIJ~∃a∃e[SgMSEYJ↓M←dA≥←mKe9[K]iL\~∀_~∀]
DA)⊃∀A→∪iαA1¬≠!→
4∀~∀∪AKeQCAfAiQ∀A[←gPAS]i∃eKgi%]NAa¬ehA←_AiQJAE←←,ASfAQQJAC
G←k]P~∃←LAQSfA←o\Aae←≥eCZ@↓→∪5∧@AiQ¬h@Aa¬e←IS∃f@A%=OKeS¬\@A]=\[ISIKGiSYJ~∃aMsGQ←QQKeCArAC]⊂AQSfAC]K
I←iC0ACGG=k]hA=L@AQ=nAg←5JAaK=aYJ@↓CgGe%EJ~∃%]iKY1SOK]
J@AC9HAaKIg←]C1Sir@↓i↑ASP\@@A%\@A[dA←aS9S←\XAShA%f@AcUSiJ~)]CikICX@A→←dAa∃←aYJ↓oQ↑@↓I←\OPAk]I∃egiC9HAiQ∀A]←i%←\@A=LACY≥←eSi!ZAi↑4∃S[C≥S]JAQQCh@↓B@AG=[aki∃dAG←5akiKL@AC]¬Y←O←UgYrAQ↑@Ai!J@Ao¬rAB@↓Qk[C8~∃eK¬g←]f8@@A)!SfAY∃CIfAQ↑@Ai!JASI∃BAiQ¬h@AC
GkeCQJAG←5akiCQS←\A∃]iCS1f~∃G=eeKGPAeKCM←]S] and even to the idea that computer malfunctions are
analogous to human  neuroses and psychoses.  Actually,  programming a
computer  to  draw  interesting  conclusions  from  premises is  very
difficult and only limited success  has been attained.  However,  the
effect  of these  natural  misconceptions  shouldn't be  exaggerated;
people readily  understand the truth when it is explained, especially
when it applies to a matter that concerns them.   In particular, when
an  executive excuses a  mistake by  saying that he  placed excessive
faith in a computer, a certain skepticism is called for.

	Colby's (1973) study  is interesting in this  connection, but
the interpretation below  is mine.  Colby had psychiatrists interview
patients over a teletype line  and also had them interview his  PARRY
program that simulates a paranoid.  Other psychiatrists were asked to
decide  from the transcripts whether the interview  was with a man or
with a program, and they  did no better than chance.   However, since
PARRY is incapable of the simplest causal reasoning, if you ask, "How
do you know the people following you are Mafia" and get a reply  that
they look like Italians, this must be a man not PARRY.  Curiously, it
is  easier  to  imitate (well  enough  to  fool  a psychiatrist)  the
emotional side of  a man than  his intellectual  side.  Probably  the
subjects expected the machine to  have more logical ability, and this
expectation  contributed to  their mistakes.   Alas, random selection
from the directory of the Association for Computing  Machinery did no
better.

	It seems to me that ELIZA and PARRY show only that people,
including psychiatrists, often have to draw conclusions on slight
evidence, and are therefore easily fooled.  If I am right, two
sentences of instruction would allow them to do better.

	In his 1966 paper on ELIZA (cited as 1965),
Weizenbaum writes,

%2"One goal  for  an augmented  ELIZA program  is thus  a system  which
already has access to a store of information about some aspect of the
real world  and which, by  means of  conversational interaction  with
people, can reveal both what it  knows, i.e. behave as an information
retrieval  system,  and where  its  knowledge  ends and  needs  to be
augmented.  Hopefully the augmentation of its knowledge  will also be
a  direct  consequence  of  its  conversational experience.    It  is
precisely the prospect that  such a program  will converse with  many
people and learn something from each of them  which leads to the hope
that  it will  prove an  interesting  and even  useful conversational
partner."%1  Too bad he didn't successfully pursue this goal; no-one
else has.  I think success would have required a better
understanding of formalization than is exhibited in the book.
.item←0;

.CB WHAT DOES HE SAY ABOUT COMPUTERS?

	While  Weizenbaum's  main  conclusions   concern  science  in
general  and are moralistic in  character, some of  his remarks about
computer science and AI are worthy of comment.

	#.  He  concludes  that since  a  computer  cannot  have  the
experience  of a man,  it cannot understand  a man.   There are three
points to  be  made  in reply.    First, humans  share  each  other's
experiences  and those  of  machines  or animals  only  to a  limited
extent.   In  particular, men  and women have  different experiences.
Nevertheless, it  is  common in  literature for  a  good writer  to
show greater  understanding of the experience of  the opposite sex
than a poorer writer of that sex.   Second, the notion of experience  is
poorly understood; if we understood it better,  we could reason about
whether  a machine  could have  a  simulated or  vicarious experience
normally confined to humans.  Third, what we mean by understanding is
poorly  understood, so  we don't  yet know  how to  define whether  a
machine understands something or not.

	#. Like his  predecessor critics of  artificial intelligence,
Taube, Dreyfus and Lighthill,
Weizenbaum is  impatient, implying that if  the problem hasn't been
solved in twenty  years, it is time to give up.   Genetics took about  a
century to go from Mendel to the genetic code for proteins, and still
has  a long way to  go before we will  fully understand the genetics
and evolution of intelligence and behavior.   Artificial intelligence
may be just as difficult.   My current answer to the question of when
machines will  reach  human-level  intelligence  is  that  a  precise
calculation shows that  we are between  1.7 and 3.1 Einsteins  and .3
Manhattan Projects away from the goal.  However, the current research
is producing the information on which the Einstein will  base himself
and is producing useful capabilities all the time.

	#. The book confuses computer simulation of a phenomenon with
its  formalization  in logic.    A  simulation is  only  one  kind of
formalization and not often the most useful - even to a computer.  In
the  first place,  logical  and mathematical  formalizations can  use
partial  information about  a system  insufficient for  a simulation.
Thus the law of conservation  of energy tells us much  about possible
energy conversion  systems before we define  even one of  them.  Even
when a  simulation program  is  available, other  formalizations  are
necessary even to make good use of the simulation.  This review isn't
the  place for  a  full explanation  of the  relations  between these
concepts.

	Like %2Punch%1's  famous curate's  egg, the  book is good  in
parts.  Thus it raises the following interesting issues:

.item←0;
	#. What would it mean for a computer  to hope or be desperate
for  love?   Answers  to  these  questions depend  on  being  able to
formalize (not simulate) the phenomena in question.  My guess is that
adding a  notion of hope to  an axiomatization of belief  and wanting
might not  be difficult.  The study of %2propositional attitudes%1 in
philosophical logic points in that direction.

	#.  Do  differences  in experience  make  human  and  machine
intelligence necessarily  so different that it  is meaningless to ask
whether a machine can be more intelligent than a machine?  My opinion
is that comparison  will turn out to be meaningful.   After all, most
people have  not doubt that humans are more intelligent than turkeys.
Weizenbaum's examples  of  the dependence  of  human intelligence  on
sensory  abilities  seem  even  refutable,  because we  recognize  no
fundamental difference  in  humanness  in  people  who  are  severely
handicapped sensorily, e.g. the deaf, dumb and blind or paraplegics.


α.cb IN DEFENSE OF THE UNJUSTLY ATTACKED - SOME OF WHOM ARE INNOCENT

	Here are  defenses of Weizenbaum's targets.  They are not
guaranteed to entirely suit the defendees.

	Weizenbaum's conjecture thatthe  Defense Department supports
speech recognition research in order to be able to snoop on telephone
conversations is  biased,  baseless, false,  and seems  motivated  by
political malice.    The committee  of scientists  that proposed  the
project  advanced   quite  different  considerations,  and  the  high
officials who made the final  decisions are not ogres.  Anyway  their
other responsibilities leave them no time for complicated and devious
considerations.  I put this one first, because I think the failure of
many scientists to defend the Defense Department against attacks they
know are unjustified, is  unjust in itself, and furthermore has harmed
the country.

	Weizenbaum doubts that computer speech  recognition will have
cost-effective  applications beyond snooping  on phone conversations.
He also says,  %2"There is no question  in my mind  that there is  no
pressing human problem  that will be more easily  solved because such
machines  exist"%1.  I worry  more about whether  the programs can be
made to  work before  the sponsor loses  patience.   Once they  work,
costs will come down.   Winograd pointed out to me that many possible
household applications of computers may not be feasible without  some
computer speech recognition.   One needs  to think %3both%1 about  how to
solve  recognized   problems %3and%1 about  opportunities  to  put  new
technological possibilities  to  good use.    The telephone  was  not
invented by  a committee  considering already identified  problems of
communication.

	Referring  to  %2Psychology Today%1  as  a  cafeteria  simply
excites  the  snobbery of  those  who would  like  to  consider their
psychological knowledge to be above the  popular level.  So far as  I
know, professional and academic psychologists welcome the opportunity
offered  by %2Psychology  Today%1 to  explain their  ideas to  a wide
public.  They might even buy a cut-down version  of Weizenbaum's book
if  he asks  them nicely.    Hmm, they  might even  buy  this review.

	Weizenbaum  has  invented  a %2New  York  Times  Data  Bank%1
different  from  the  one  operated  by  the %2New  York  Times%1 - and
possibly better.  The real one stores abstracts written by humans and
doesn't us@∀AiQJ↓iCaKLAS]i∃]IKH↓M←dAQsaKg∃iiS]≤A[CG!S]Kf8@Aβf↓BAeKMkYh~)iQJ@↓kgKd↓QCfA¬GGKgLA←]YdAi↑A¬Egie¬Gif@↓C]HA
C]]←PAgKCIGPA←8AMKCQkeKf4∃←LAQQJ@AMi←eS∃b@Ai!K[gK1mKfX↓R]J\AQJA%b@ACPAiQJA[Ke
r@A←_AoQCP@AiQ∀~∃CEMieCGQ←efAQQ←kO!hAoCLAS[a=e`∪πw!βπQπ##∃β&K7∃8hP4(&/≠';≥αβ∂?7π+S↔Iα↓βCK};Kπ7~↓βπMαβCOg≡C?S#/∪πC'∨#M1↓αβπM↓∧≠?3Hh+CK␈β?O↔ ¬Bαπ⎇}Vf",Rεn},⊗bα
≤bεOD∧π>␈]LBε∨↑,Rπε]}εf*d∧α¬.lmw↔π]l↔&.O∃@hV=⎇Wπ∂LZ"π≡=_Vv≡T
↔≡r}@λ∞↑λ≥≠d∧~=∧;Yλ
\>8Y$∞~→(∞∞}8z
≤=≤Z.>≤hλ≡Y;InA"Y:.M→<KAQA"B)∀_9|L\(λ∃m≡~λλ	];\zo∀~;@∧|Z=
≤z>Z-lh≥~Tλ≤Y-N8⎇_-ly(≠l@⊂⊂0y≥εA:4→wy4y]9P⊂:≠P⊂22]2v7xλ⊂37i≠pv⊂*~2wy4YyW⊂⊂λ⊂#rw\3rP⊂⊂4y5t≠s3∪yH37y6XvεE:~2wy<H;pyP≤97q0X6<P;\7w3Vλ1:z~2P9t≠zv27	z⊂40]2P12Yw⊂⊂1\4z4aZ⎇2r⊂→7yεE≥9<tw→W⊂⊂*~2P89≠q62vH⊂9rr[yP;2\<P24Y34qz[:⊂:7H6rV⊂_w2⊂⊂∩P40{→P6pr→P77FB9tsw~s4qp[:⊂⊂8≤7sy2\yP⊂4[⊂⊂92\x7w2~w3P⊂≥7P⊂0H⊂1t0[62w3YP⊂39≠vP⊂ \:4:yβE%wr\z62yλ:7P:→v6⊂4≠{P0P_wvx:]2y⊂8≤7sy0[P6tsZ:⊂6pZrP⊂7\⊂2{2[⊂92q[sw4⎇→FE57ZryW⊂λ(2y4_x9P9[vrP9→pr2yλ7s⊂:~4yP9→{4r{H6tst≥⊂40{→P6wy→P9zqXryyWβEεE∧U42y2H⊂4yPλ0P;t≠v2P⊂_t0x:→y⊂⊂0]:0quZw3P⊂λ1wvx≥v9t{→P⊂1w[x:z2\εE89≠sy0v[ry9Qλ7y⊂⊃~0qur\9Q↔⊂λ*44yH6|z4~qpv⊂_2pyzλ64{2\P4w⊂≥42P1[vx:z→yεE6_q7y0]7y<Vλ4yP0[⊂2|8→y:⊂7[⊂0v6λ:42P~w9P0[2⊂7z]9P7sλ⊂:42H:4vrKyt0y~w3FE≤|yz2[V⊂2v_q7y0]2yP:~2P:4[rVyt_y4w3H⊂9|y]2vP;Zz4⊂0\1pw2H32pz≥y2yP≥40zεB42P7→{2y⊂λ27qz[rw:9K⊂0w2λ4yP0[;p|yH1t0w→tw3P≥42P9↑yz2vH12s7\2P42H2{2wβE34|→yP:4→P1:s\P4w⊂≥42P8≤2{4w]yP;2\9tww⊂⊂ v≠⊂:42\rP;4XryP2↑4yz⊗λ1:z⊂∩FE1p[∪z⊂:~4w5P≠s⊂0w≡P4w2~{4r:Xv⊂;t≠P1wvX4w2yH:42vK⊂0w2λ82wx≠2P3r[2y0v≠<FE7]z3y7]P:42[W⊂⊂⊂⊂yP⊂0H⊂60q≠y0z7\<P24\2qz7\⊗⊂⊂$H⊂40{→P:7Pλ897z→qz⊂⊂≥42FE~w:2y→yz9P≠s⊂82[x62P≥t7P8≤7sy0[P7w6≡P80y≥⊂⊂:4[rP0sXtw9zλ:2w2→w1tr\P:7FB7{2yqwvx≠4qpz→P⊂:4→P30qZv4z4YyW⊂⊂λ(2wx≠2P⊂;Z7P⊂9\2w2⊂_v6⊂⊂≥42tyλ:4vrCE897Yy0vvZw3P0[2⊂;t≠P2|1Z0w3rH⊂4w3≠y6pz~ww⊂1≡P;wy→⊂7s⊂≠wzz4λ⊂9wvYz4vr\FE40]2P:7H12P⊂≤92yyYr⊂:7H6purH897x→y⊂⊂;\4z2z\9W⊂⊂∃42P7]42y⊂λ9tr2H7s⊂:~2FE4\yzrPλ4yP:~0z⊂;YP⊂89≠s2yy[y9P7Y⊂1wv\:z2yλ9qtr[1rP⊂≤wvrz~vryP≠7yrP≠zyεE_q4v4]<P:7H;y4z→P⊂0q]:pv⊂_wvx:]2y⊂8≤7sy0[yP⊂:~97zsZ⊂60qZP7s⊂λ890q]4qrFB0w2⊂→w;<Pλ<wzw→ry⊂8→wx62H;t7P_pw⊂⊂≤x2w2λ3:v6λ:4vrH⊂4w⊂≥42P6_q7y0]7y<WβE*42H842w≠vrw7[⊂4yPλ;rv6λ5w7{[⊂4w⊂λ7z42\⊂9qtYw1ryH0w2⊂λ4w⊂7]42y⊂λ4:vp[εE0q]4{4z~ryWεBεE∧kYt⎇2w_0zvP_z:0qZyP:4→P,pv→P⊂1w[x:z2\⊂64w→ztyz⊂)7sYy⊂)qZ0w5VβE0yP→7v67]yP⊗P≥42P4[72y⊂≤zwz2\P0y2H397vH)qt0[5]⊂⊂	Y⊃+t_z⊂4yH1ww:≤4q:z→r⊂⊂;Z2w⊂4]⊂4yFB0yyr\:2r⊂≥40z⊂	z42y→P⊂2|~yz9P_P1ww_rx::Xv⊂10\rP:4_z⊂⊂4\P4w:→y64w→zpv⊗βE7w:≠P;t4Xt⊂⊂6~w3zt\z4qP≤z9:q]:y2yH4w⊂0H3t{2[⊂⊂60[3zpsYP6pxλ2:y4[3P:4→FE:w→2y9z_w24w→P897XryyP_w2⊂⊂≠zz⊂7Y⊂;t4Xt⊂⊂9]qt⊂9]9:qz≥y2yP_y2P⊂_y2pz→rεE2≥y4w3H3rw2\0z4w[⊂-wsλ64w3]tyz4XP:z:→y0w1YynS←Hthing at all.  For
the  term 'conceptual base'  could perfectly well be  replaced by the
word 'something'.    And who  could  argue with  that  so-transformed
statement?"%1  Weizenbaum goes  on to  say that  the  real scientific
problem "remains as  untouched as ever".   On the  next page he  says
that unless the "Schank-like scheme"  understood the sentence %2"Will
you  come to dinner with  me this evening?"%1 to  mean %2"a shy young
man's desperate  longing for  love%1,  then the  sense in  which  the
system "understands"  is "about as weak  as the sense in  which ELIZA
"understood"".  This good example raises interesting issues and seems
to call for  some distinctions.   Full understanding of the  sentence
indeed results in knowing about  the young man's desire for love, but
it would seem that there is a useful lesser level of understanding in
which the machine would know  only that he would like her  to come to
dinner.

	Contrast  Weizenbaum's demanding,
more-human-than-thou attitude to  Schank and Winograd
with his respectful and even obsequious attitude to Chomsky.  We have
%2"The linguist's first task is therefore to write grammars, that is,
sets  of   rules,  of  particular  languages,   grammars  capable  of
characterizing all and only the grammatically admissible sentences of
those languages, and then to postulate principles  from which crucial
features of all such grammars can be deduced.  That set of principles
would then constitute a universal grammar.  Chomsky's hypothesis  is,
to put  it another way,  that the rules  of such a  universal grammar
would  constitute  a  kind  of  projective  description of  important
aspects of the human mind."%1  There is nothing here demanding
that the universal  grammar take into account the  young man's desire
for love.  As far as I can see, Chomsky is just as much a rationalist
as we artificial intelligentsia.

	Chomsky's goal of a universal grammar and  Schank's goal of a
conceptual base  are similar, except that  Schank's ideas are further
developed, and  the  performance of  his  students' programs  can  be
compared with  reality.  I  think they wilL require  drastic revision
and  may not be on the  right track at all, bu@P@AiQ∃\A∩A¬ZAakIgkS]≤AB~∃ICiQKHAISM→KeK]P@AYS9JA←LAeKgα+πK∂Bβ∂?;≡+K;'v9β#?:↓βS=π∪↔CK/≠↔;QαβS#∀hSπON→β≠π∨#@~πM↔"ε≥dεNwL]FfN|]g"α,VNvt
W/∨D
6v␈t⊗⊗␈↑Dπ&FT∞v␈⊗LEbα∧←⊃PVNL\∩εO4∧π&z∧∞7&∂.@λ∧\[{$∧→<∩.>→;;mMy}(∧∞X=~↑Hλ≥
;Hλn[{(∧
_;Yn\9y+↓Q\Y9l≡Y~;Lt≥~→-≡H≠~-l⎇:<nM8h≤L↑≤Y<l]]_=
≥{H_.4≤y8m⎇Y_<O∃HλU

<h_.∞≤[x,=β"Z≡h≤∀M}Y9λ∧~9YM≤⎇;≥¬D~_<d=≥≤L≤⎇→9∧Y=h∧∞≤X8nM=~;ml<\k∧;Yλ
<h≠\λ≥≠aQYY=d{{<∞↑→<H∞∞[y|L≥<kλ.=λ∩$∞⎇~;
D≥~~-mh~=∧}h≤Z,⎇≥C!!"B5l]>Y;L,=;(≡≤≤[nl<h≠ld≥~→$λz≠{.=}(λ∞<z≠{mD|h~≡9z≥∂∀_=≥
≡≥9→!Q]≠⎇l≡Y≤h
<z_;M5λ∃z-my|X,D_;Y∧
⎇~→.$⊂2(,<y9∧
_;Yn\9y(∞,<y8.,z→<N5Hλ∪ma"\_,|(&εEλ~→$∧≤⎇_.L<kλ∧VH[8-o(≠~-l⎇:<nNkλλm|H→/;<≠Uλ∪[l≥(λ⊂m
{<zo∃β"XL]~9=LT≥~_.Dλ→;M}9zλ∞M~;Zm≥Yhλ≤[⎇=∧
_;Yn\9y(∞,;8:-nhλ≥
t_Y(∧≠{Y$∞≠c"M|x⎇<∂∀λ≥~](≥<l\];≠∂∀→[|D∂9=λ∀≠~=∞M→(λ∞⎇~;→%D_;Y∧∞~_=∧;↑(\Y[|ND≥≠c!,{{]L↑]λλ∞M→:<D∧≤≤Y.<;]λ∧∞~→;n-9<h∧
;]≠d∧_{{.∞=→<D∧≠;y]≤hλ∞⎇⎇;→¬Dλ~9AQX=≥]<≥→,D_↑(∞M→(≤]|≠→$Y<⎇∧∧≤=8-M9Z9,Eλ_Y$(→~.l<\z-⎇H→\M⎇(≥~T≠8:-a"]_.=kHλ∧λ;Yλ∧∞~→>$∞Z9z∞M≡(λ∞<9(λ
mh≤≠m≥]λλ∞Mhλ≤n;Y~-lh_;O∀λ≠yD∧≥~→-≡C"Y-l<Yz,↑h≤⎇∞\≡:;Lt≥~→$∞{|Zd
yH≥
(~_,=y<\edI,#!!"B5

<h_N-;Y|d∞~→(=_<≥↑H≠{D∧λX{m↑≥;≤m≡Y(_m⎇<≥=↑H≤≤M||X;-\<\hAQX;~,≡hλλM8zy..hHλ
≥]≠h∧(λ≤m<\→.$λ→[l><kH∧∧λ⊂z
⎇<z}$}hλ≠≡→<⎇∧∧_[{m1"I,J,9[→,>~;{N4λ≠{D	_;Yn\9y)&∀λ≠8-<<hλ
mhλ≤L\Y<Y-ly(λ∞Mhλ≥
(λ≥m}Zhλ
|C"Um≥[y|L≤λ∀l=_;ZeDλ⊂z≡[Z8-5λ∃z-M|kλλ-x\[ntλ≠|D
z;≠
≤;(∃m⎇y≤h∧∞≠h≠L≥9#"M⎇[≡(∧(→Y.t≠yH∞M≠|y$∧≥z≠d
_=Y$→=Y-M|→9∧∧≠_<L|(_{m↑≥=→.$≤}<nL;<h∞M_=β!.{|Zd∞z=~∧
X=≥.,;λ≠≥Y⎇8,|(_;LDλ≥z
t≥|Z.L(≤_.<\h
⎇H≥~Tλ≤y-\;]~,>h≠yAQ[X=∞↑X;λ∧
_;Yn\9y+D∧∃~→$∧_8⎇∞\;λ≡-};Yh∧{{<∞↑→<H∞∞[y|L≥;9<N4λ≥z
t_x;
A"]~]<y;∞l<h~≤zy<N4λ_;LDλ≥z
tλ_{m\(_{
}y<⎇∧∧≥≠h∧
99=
≥Yhλ
|:>Y-lX=;$}c"Y↑x|Z.∞~;{D≠{InDλ≥|M≡→(≤≡→<\d
{Hλ
l=≥<L≥λ≠_-l⎇89lUHλλ
=h~=∧∞y9;.1"]~≡λ≥~T~_8m<<\h∞⎇≠|y$∞{|Zd
Y99∧
[⎇λ,(≤⎇∞\~99∧<Y(
⎇;[yn,9λ
<z_;M5β"Y.EHλ_-EHλλ∞⎇≠h_.,(λ≤∞-yY<n=|\h∧;Yλ∞<;Z;n$λ≤xm≤;]~.>≤kH∧∧∃~→$λz≠{.=}#"N<z≠{mD≠8>$∧_Y(∧;8X.,<|y,D_↑(∧∞~→(l8⎇λ∧∞~_=∧∧~=λ
<hλ
⎇[≡(∧∞Y8y-n≠≡#!,<\Z.l9λ_.D≥~→$∧_{{L=≥<z-⎇H≥~≡λ≥~T≤y;,≥]~8n4≠yH∧
X=≥.,;λ≠≥Y⎇8,|(~<aQ[;|LTλ→]-l_;9-n_;λ∞M_;H∧
=≤h∞?;]_/¬λλ≥m
;→(λ→(_X.<9λλ∞,<y8.,z→<N4~_=LQ"XY,]H≤≥..⎇:;Lt≥~~.4≠~;LT→[|DZ9]\;H≡,\<\kAQC"B*M→(≠n↑≤z9T≠x\l↑]Y<D∞z≠⎇-Lλ_Y$=x<LT≥~_.D≥≠h∞={9(←≥→;ND≥~~.1"Z<d∧_(≤
≥≠≠⎇dZ9z∞Dλ≥z.M~;H	UR+U¬dλλ⊂m
{<zo∀_;Y∧∧∩_;
L(_<LT≠[⎇∧∧≥≠h,#"Y
≡{≠y|9λ→N-{(λ	UR+U¬dλ_;LD≠Y:.M→<H∧
<hλ	];\zo∀(≥m
|y(∧∞⎇≥9]]≤h∧
_=Y!Q\~;ml9<Y,Dλ≥~T⊂2(∧<≤≤M|8zλ∞Mhλ≠L≡≥<X-Dλ≠_-l⎇89lUHλλ
<z_;M4~<h∧∞=:=Q"\y,><Y(≡λ⊗8-L+Hλ
|:>Y-lX=;$;≤{d
_<h∞L;]<LUHλ∩
}y=Y.%λ≤{m\(_<n=<⎇_-nβ"\∞-yY<n=|\z
≡≤h~-d≠~;L}:<⎇
≤|h≠,∨(_Y$=λ≤nL:y+∧<|→,=8;≠∂∀_=λ	UR+U¬a"C"A_;≠→-dλ∪Y.|;≠λ≥Yλλ	<XY..λλ∀m≥;{H∧<Y(>Z=~,=>Y9∧∧→[|D∧_Y:-lc"[nl<[|∞M;:<nM8h_-lλ_<LT_{{N=9→<L\λ≠;n,;≠≡$→9Y,>~=Y$[|H≡≥→;.∞~;Yd∞≠c"LL<x|M≤Y(~∞]8;\d<h→
≤YY<L]Xy+.,9≥8m≥Yhλ
\8z~-l<kH∧
z;;md|h≥M≤=hλ∞M_=β!.~→(
∞;8;D
<h_$∞z;<
L(≤}.>→;(∧
;H_${{<
L>λ→-nZ<[mm9;]∧
<h≤m≥Y{→,D≠⎇=↓QY[|D∧_=≥≤zkH∧	;H≠/∀≠|~-m;{K∧∧≥~→/∀≥y<LT≠⎇Y.-|≥~-]<⎇~,5λ_Y,<=<y$∞~→:.!"Qt
4≠;y]λ≠{D∧≥z~,=λ≥~←(≤≥.Dλ≥~]<H_L↑≤h≥l≡{I⎇∧∧→{{lD→;[n\zH∧∧∪8>,,#"SL↑y;≠∧}h_⎇..Y;]∧∧,\≤M|≥8⎇
≥{Hλ∞?<⎇→-T≠;y]≤i,$∞z;≠∧∞{|Zd∧≠⎇=∧Y=≥↑KC"H≡h≥≠d∧≥z→.M→<H
∞;8;D
9;]≥λ≤⎇∞.8⎇≥.,(≥z-Mλλ→.l;]≥,≥≠≡(∞N<[H
}=λ≥
t_Y#!.z;<
L+λ∩$∞X8z-M_=→$]=⊂~w1v4[2P:7H:42P≥4r{P≥40z it will turn out to
be One of the mostcomplex biological phenomena.

	I  regard Forrester's  models  as  incapabhe of  taking  into
acCount qualitative changes,  and the world models they have built as
defective even  In their  own terhfXAEKG¬kgJ@↓iQKr↓YKCm∀A←kh4∃gCiUeCiS=\[←L5IK@7∞s⊃β↔4∧f.∨N4π&F≡@λ<9[[nD_Y(M<x{nl<Y9∧↑(_n↑]Y+,m=≥~-lc"X.4≠≠{Lt_<h∀λ≤}.L;(~.∀≤X=U;yK,←≤_;N=;{H
M;:=\Hλ∧	;|Y-}Y<C∧	(→≠md⎇β"L≤xy<∞D~~<d∧_{_-≥(≥~≡λ~~.4≠;y]≤h_.,(λ_L↑≥→<D∞⎇:=\λ≥~≥H≥~T≥;X-≤→9β!-:;Y∧
;HλM≥]→<N∞Y=~-lhλ~
}h≤{l=8;λ∧∞}<⎇]<h_L]_=Y$%λ_].Dλ∃y-∨Y;XL≡;)|aQ\x<L<<{(∧
{Hλ∞9y(∧∧M
D∧~<h∧∞;X{mnZ;Xm≥YkH∧∧λλ∩Tλ≤=-}→<h∧λ[|\L↑⎇→<EA"HVlL<z<L≤[→(∧
;y→.4≠yH∧Y:_.m;|H
|Hλ≥
(≤{l=8;λ∧∞}<⎇]7(	&.y9;$∧≥≠h,#"\
}|z8ML(≠{MO(~9D∞y(~≡Y(_${{y∧∞;Y→..⎇_;LM;Yh
|Hλ≥
(≤}.>→;(O;X;-≤|c"L≥Yλ_.,(≥z-M~;Yd∞≠h→-l≥<Y$∞~→(∞<;→K,M<xz.
~;Y$;Yλ∞∞Y<|n↑Y<h∞M_=
↑<⎇β!,8x{m↑_;↑$∞~→(L<z<L≤[→(∧
;y→$$,+H∧
y:>L]XX=-Tλ_{m]9;]∞5λ	,D*~→<LTλ~<aQ];Y
}8]→,M≡(≤m⎇9(~-n→<\∞,=_=
≥{H≠ld≥~→$∧≥{|LNh	|o≡⎇→;$t_;Y∧∧y≡;L≥:8|dq"]z
≤zλ≥m};→λ
L;Yλ∀_Y;M≤{H≠,\;Z;Lt≥≠h∞Mvation"%1.  Sorry, but
it looks ok to  me provided one  is suitably critical of  Forrester's
proposed social  goals and  the possibility  of making  the necessary
assumptions and putting them into his models.

	Skinner's behaviorism that refuses to assign reality to
people's internal state seems wrong to me, but we can't call him
immoral for trying to convince us of what he thinks is true.

	Weizenbaum quotes Edward Fredkin, former  director of Project
MAC,  and the late  Warren McCulloch  of M.I.T. without  giving their
names. pp. 241 and  240.  Perhaps he thinks  a few puzzles will  make
the  book more  interesting,  and this  is so.    Fredkin's plea  for
research in automatic programming seems to overestimate the extent to
which our society  currently relies on  computers for decisions.   It
also  overestimates  the  ability  of  the faculty  of  a  particular
university to control the uses to  which technology will be put,  and
it underestimates the difficulty of making knowledge based systems of
practical  use.  Weizenbaum is  correct in pointing  out that Fredkin
doesn't mention the  existence of genuine  conflicts in society,  but
only the new left sloganeering elsewhere  in the book gives a hint as
to what he thinks they are and how he proposes to resolve them.

	As  for the quotation from (McCulloch  1956), Minsky tells me¬
"this is a brave attempt to find a dignified  sense of freedom within
the  psychological determinism morass".   Probably  this can  be done
better now,  but Weizenbaum  wrongly  implies that  McCulloch's  1956
effort is to his moral discredit.

	Finally, Weizenbaum  attributes to me  two statements  - both
from  oral presentations  - which I  cannot verify.   One of  them is
%2"The only  reason we  have not  yet succeeded  in simulating  every
aspect of the real world is  that we have been lacking a sufficiently
powerful  logical calculus.   I am  working on  that problem"%1.  This
statement doesn't express  my present opinion  or my opinion in  1973
when I am alleged to have expressed it in a debate, and no-one has
been able to find it in the video-tape of the debate.

	We can't simulate  "every aspect of the real  world", because
the initial state  information is never available, the laws of motion
are imperfectly known, and the calculations for a simulation  are too
extensive.   Moreover,  simulation  wouldn't  necessarily answer  our
questions.   Instead, we must find out how to represent in the memory
of a computer the information  about the real world that  is actually
available to a machine or organism with given sensory capability, and
also how to  represent a  means of drawing  those useful  conclusions
about the effects of courses of action that can be correctly inferred
from  the attainable information.   Having  a %2sufficiently powerful
logical calculus%1 is an important part of this problem - but  one of
the easier parts.

[%3Note added September 1976%1 - This statement has
been quoted in a large fraction of the reviews of Weizenbaum's book
(e.g. in %2Datamation%1 and %2Nature%1) as an example of the arrogance
of the "artificial intelligentsia".  Weizenbaum firmly insisted that
he heard it in the Lighthill debate and cited his notes as corroboration,
but later admitted (in %2Datamation%1) after reviewing the tape that he
didn't, but claimed I must have said it in some other debate.  I am
confident I didn't say it, because it contradicts views I have held
and repeatedly stated since 1959.  My present conjecture is that
Weizenbaum heard me say something on the importance of formalization,
couldn't quite remember what, and quoted "what McCarthy must have said"
based on his own misunderstanding of the relation between computer
modeling and formalization.  (His two chapters on computers show no
awareness of the difference between declarative and procedural
knowledge or of the discussions in the AI literature of their
respective roles).  Needless to say, the repeated citation by reviewers
of a pompous statement that I never made and which is in opposition to
the view that I think represents my major contribution to AI -
is very offensive].

	The second quotation from me is the rhetorical question, %2"What
do judges know that we cannot tell a computer"%1.  I'll stand on that
if we make it "eventually tell" and especially if we require that it
be something that one human can reliably teach another.

α.cb A SUMMARY OF POLEMICAL SINC

	The speculative sections of the book contain numerous dubious
little  theories, such as this one about the dehumanizing effect of
of the invention of the clock:  %2"The clock  had created literallq  a new
reality; and thatis what I meant when I said earlier that  the trick
man turned that prepared the scene for the rise of modern science was
nothing less  than the transformation of nature and of his perception
of reality.   It  is important  to  realize that  this newly  created
reality was and remains an impoverished version of the older one, for
it rests on a rejection of  those direct experiences that formed  the
basis for, and  indeed constituted the  old reality.  The  feeling of
hunger was rejected as a stimulus for eating; instead one ate when an
abstract model had achieved a certain state, i.e. when the hand  of a
clock   pointed  to   certain  marks   on  the   clock's  face   (the
anthropomorphism  here is highly significant  too), and similarly for
signals for sleep and rising, and so on."%1

	This idealization  of primitive  life is simply  thoughtless.
Like  modern man,  primitive man  ate  when the  food was  ready, and
primitive man  probably had  to start  preparing it  even further  in
advance.   Like  modern man,  primitive man  lived in  families whose
members are  no more likely to become hungry all at once than are the
members of a present family.

	I get the feeling that in toppling  this microtheory I am not
playing  the  game;  the  theory  is  intended  only  to  provide  an
atmosphere, and like the reader of a novel, I am supposed  to suspend
disbelief.   But the  contention that  science has  driven us  from a
psychological Garden of Eden depends heavily on such word pictures.

	By the way, I  recall from my last sabbatical  at M.I.T. that
the %2feeling of  hunger%1 is more often the %2direct social stimulus
for eating%1 for the  "hackers" deplored in  Chapter 4 than it  could
have  been for  primitive man.   Often on a  crisp New  England
night, even  as the clock strikes three, I hear them call to one
angther,  messages  flash  on  the  screens,  a  flock  of  hackers
magicallq  gathers,  and   the  whole  p@%Gike∃gckJACgg∃[EYrAekg!Kf~∃
QCii∃eS]N↓←MLAQ↑AπQ%]Ci←]\\~∀4∀]Si∃[>`v4∀~∀∪$AMS]⊂AiQJ↓E←←VAgkEMiC]I¬eHACLABAa%KGJA=L@Aa=YK[S
CXAoISiS]≤~∃S\↓iQJA→←YY←]S]NAIKgaK
ift~(~∀∩F8A)QJACki!←dAQ¬fAMC%YKH@↓i↑Ao=eV@A=khAQ%fA←o8~∃a←MSiS←9fA←\↓iQJA%ggkKLAQJA⊃SgGkMgKf\A≠CW%]NAC8AKqiIK[JAMiCiK5K]hA%\~∃←9JAaY¬GJAC9HABA
←]ie¬ISGi=er@AMiCiK5K]hA%\AC]=iQKd↓SfA]<@Agk	giSiUiJ~∃→←d@AQesS]≤@Ai↑AiCW∀@ACY0@AiQ∀AMCGQ←ef@↓S]i↑ACGG=k]h@↓C]H@↓eKCG @AB~)G←]g%IKeK⊂Aa←g%iS←\8@A+]MkgaS
S←kf↓eKCI∃efAG¬\AG←5JACo¬rAoSQPABA≥eKCh4∃mCe%KirA=LAmS∃ofXA¬]HAi!JAE←=VAGC8AEJAUgKHAQ↑AgkAa←eh↓G←]iICISGQ←er~)a←gSQS←]f8~∀~∀$F\A)!JAG←5akiKHAYS]≥kSgiL@@ZA]S]←OICHXAMGQC],XAKh8ACX\@ZACIJ~∃I∃]SOe¬iKH@ACf@↓QCGW∃ef@A¬]H@A
←[ak1gSmJ@AG←5akiKH@Aae=OeC[5Kef@↓Er~∃%]]kK9I↑\~(~∀∩F8A∨]J↓o←kY⊂@AYS-JAi↑AW]←\A[←e∀@Aae∃GSgK1rAoQ¬hAES=Y←OS
CX@A¬]H~∃AgsGQ=Y←OS
CX@@↓KqaKIS[K]Qf@AC9H@@A
←[akQKd@A¬aaYS
CiS←9f@@A!J@AM%]If~)CGGKAiCEY∀\@A%∃mSKo∃efAQ¬mJAC1eKCIdAIeC]\ABAYCeSKQrA←L↓G←]G1kgS←9fA←\4∃iQSLAa←S9h\~∀4∀∩F\↓)QJAQKe[fECki!K]iSDX@E=EgGK9JDX@↓C]H@	IKQk5C]Su¬iS←\↓CeJ~)kgKHACf@↓GYkEL\@@AQQSfA%f@Ao!Ch@A5CiQK5CiSG%C]f@↓GCYX@Eae=←LAEd~∃S]QS[SI¬iS←\λ\~∀~(∩F\AQQJAE=←VAK9G←ke¬OKf@↓BAg]=EEKedAiQCPAQCf↓]↑@A9KKHAQ↑ACe≥kJ~∃→←dASQfAa←%]h@A=LAmS∃nAEkPA[Ke∃YrAkQiKef↓G←IJ↓o←eILXA←\↓QKCe%]NAo!SGP~)iQJA¬kISK9GJASL@AgkAa←gK⊂ACaa1CkHA=dAQSMf@ACLAiQJ↓GCgJA[Cr↓EJ\@A)QJ4∀Je≥∃n@A'
SK]i%ghJbAeKm%KoKdAGKeQCS]Yd@AgC1SmCi∃f@AS8@A[←Mh@A←_@AiQ∀~∃S]QK]IK⊂AaYC
Kf\~(~∀∩F8A
S]¬YYrXAoQK8A[←e¬YSuS9NASfAE←i AmKQ∃[K]h↓C]H@↓mCOk∀XASh4∃S]m%iKf@↓CkiQ=eSiCISC\@↓CEkg∀@AKSQQKd@↓ErAKaSgiS9N@ACUiQ←e%ir@A=dAEr↓]Kn~)a←YSQSGCX↓[←mK5K]if8@A∪[¬OS]J0@ASL↓s←jA
C\X@↓iQCh↓iQSf↓E←←V↓oKeJAiQJ4∃ESE1JA←L↓g←[J↓EkeK¬kGeC
rXAJ9N\@A¬\A∨M→SGJA=LA)K
Q]←Y=OrAβMgKgg5K]hX4∃iQCPACGcUSeKHAa←o∃dA←m∃dAiQ∀AG←[AkiS]≤A←dAMGSK]QSMSF↓CGiSYSiSKLA←LA∧~∃k]%mKeg%irXAMiCiJ0@A←d↓G←k]Qer\@A'kaA←gJ@↓/KSu∃]ECk4OfAg1←GC]L@AoKIJ~∃G=[ES]∃HAoSQP@JeQQJAEUeKCk
eCiS@AKi!SFJb↓iQChαβ#?3'→βS#∂!βπ;JβCK?⊗c↔44V≠π9β⊗)βO?g3↔⊃β↔I↓β¬εcπ]β6{K'&#';≥π≠?7↔&C';≥αβπ;⊃ε	βW⊗+πW∂⊗∂e↓ε{_4+.∨↔Iαβg?Wv9β3π?K↔KMαβS=↓ε+;≠?⊗≠∃↓βO!9↓↓¬β?OS.cπS∃αβ≠GK&C↔I↓ε	↓β[∞;W∀4R)J#Wn;∃↓¬∪↔O↔∂∪∂!α∞≠Q∃Eαβπ;⊃ε	↓↓π+3'~β';S/∪↔OQ∩↓β?K>;'k∂#'?9π;'S hS7?K*β↔π∨/⊃↓βg␈+;≥↓εcπ←g/∪M↓β∨+';≥αβS=β>+Q↓βW+∪∨↔~↓βS=αβ3↔∨O≠3πS*↓β;↔8h+';&+KCK/#πS'}sMβ?2↓βS#*απ∂Qr↓α?;*↓β∂πrβO↔∃ε	β3π⊗{KπS␈∪e↓βv+↔∪'v9β7?⊗(4+3∂;g↔K~βS#πrβO∂'.sS'O'→↓βπv!β¬αG+7π;*αK↔O.K∂!ααπ∪7Ns'OS⊗S?Iε≠πCπ⊗c∀4+}1β≠?⊗∪'∪∪Ns≥β?∩βK↔G.KK';:βπ37␈≠QβπwKS#'v984(hP&%β≡+∃β;zβ↔['&+;∂∃π##πQ¬;↔'k.sπWjβ≠?K≡+↔MβFKMβ←␈∪-β.K;≥β/≠↔⊂4VK9βSFKM↓β>emβF)β∪?/≠9∨Qπ+O∃β&C∃↓βεCKπO*↓∃K3∞KOO↔Rβ';;␈3↔I∃
β←#'≡Aβ'LhSS#∃αβ←?Wf!7∃αβO∂'.s∂∃↓ε∪WK↔∂+∂Kπ";M↓β∞sπ3??+∃↓β}1↓βSF)↓↓β.≠?;?nKOQ∨_h)∃Kf'OO/Qβ≠πO∪∃∃Ebβπ;⊃εC∃β;/3↔Iβ/≠↔Mβ&C∃β'v#↔≠'vKS∃βεCKπO*↓'Qπ≠#?Wf 4+*↓β∪↔≡K∪↔⊃∩β←#'≡Aβ'Mε	β∂?nk?9↓ε+cCK/≠O'?rβ?→β&C∃β/∪↔πW∨∪πS'~β↔S#N→84*F{←↔[/⊃1β#*↓β#π~β∂↔K&';3J↓β∨'6+9β#O→β≠↔fc?]↓ε≠?7C/#↔Iβ≤≠'↔;&KOSMαβπP4Vc↔πO"βO?7*βK↔π≡{9βSzβ←?K↔Iβπ␈+QβC␈#↔;SN1βSO∪π;;Jp4(4Ph*3↔"β7∃β≡{;∂3.#∃βSFKMβO.≠S'?rβ←'SBβ¬βG.{SπSN{9β≠⊗{5απv#K↔]∧!9α←FKS∃0hSS#∃ε3'KO βCK↔≤¬⊗&.nDε}2λ=w⊗v]MB¬.m≡f/↔=≡GJb∞Mε∂"∞<V.o4↔πεM≤6∞⊗LTπ&xQ.FF*∞∞&/≡]nBπ≡≡NV∂&≥⎇bαj
mw"ε⎇mGJε≥dε≡}↑∞W&/$∞6≡N]l6*b.W"ε≥N6xh-≥bε⊗≥⎇F}?∃dαjα$V$Nr≥Fbε]|F/⊗d
εO∨M}'Jb
≥g&/,lW⊗.l<Rπ>≡Mαπ≡=≤Vv≡T
⊗ph.Mε*π>↑πε␈<\BεNnLW⊗/>Dε}2∞,VfN⎇≥vrb
mrεn≡NF/∩

w:ε=⎇g≡≡≤]g&N}↑2π∨\=hV≥nF/⊗l↑&.v<Tεn∂∀
ε∂6T&..eDεF∂4∞&/∨]NF."
≥bπ&Tε&O,↑7"ε↑m⊗g~-w&B∞MphW,]FN>≥⎇bε∞lDπ&z∞<6N.l<Rbε≥lBεNnl↔⊗N≤-GKZ≥f"b
⎇bπ&Tε␈&↑"εF≥lB`h,≥Fbπ]nG⊗∞]\Vff\Dπ≡≡≤]g&Nm≤2εNnlW∨&≤|↔&N⎇eBεvt
V∂'L↑"εF}tε&∞l|W⊗␈↑1PW&t∞&.f≤⎇⊗}r∞=vn*
|bεON4π∨&≤|W~ε←∀εF∂lTπ≡.]\V"εm}"π&Tπ&N\Tπ&z,R`h-↔~ε≥nf∂⊗≤≤&gJ∞,W∨.NLV"ε≥dπ&FT
εN>↑7"ε⎇⎇v"ε-}FBε|dπ⊗.M≤vN}d⊗v Q-v2π<=⊗.v<T"+
d∧¬∨..>FO'↑LR↓6]}&∞f≡O∩ε6}$↓7⊗]M⊗>N⎇dε∞vD∞FF*∞↔⊗∞MLV`h-≡2ε≡L\↔∩r∧λg⊗∞m=GJb∞Mε*εl\V⊗f]lW∨~
|bπ&Tπ⊗.≤>FN}d∞Fzε≡NF∞≡>4ε}pQ.6≡N]nFN6≤4ε7⊗\\F}j∞⎇w↔⊗≤↑2εnT
V␈⊗T∞FF∞d∞FF*∞>G⊗.l}FBε|dπ&FT↔'&≤=7~pQ `h%h4∩¬yλ∃"¬yz%∀LZ4α∧)zU"∧9yU¬-HZ%~∧~(R¬<~*$uHXCxh!⊃PPL}.Vn⊗M≥f:ε≤-w/"
|VOV]l&∂.T}2εn≡>F∞↑↑4ε∞vD
V␈⊗≥M↔VNlqPVO4∧εv␈D∧ε.v}\vBr∧∧α∧>]nVNvT∞v␈↔-≤W~α∞∞&}o∞LV"α∞Mε*α-v}ZD∧ε∞vD
V∞w⊃Q'ε.}
F*π=↔⊗*∞Mε.jd∧∧F/,Tε∂⊗T∞FF*|Vw.≥lRε≡⎇l6/⊗n4π&F≡Dα∧J<⊗ph-≤F.wM≤gJα≥f"πMRαε}
⊗vN⎇n2αε|dε}vT∧ε≡}↑∞W&/$∧π≡≡≤]g&O>Dε∞⊗}↑BαπMVO⊂Q.&/≡⎇NW&N⎇g"¬>≡BεO4∞FF*L⊗v>↑$π&F≡Dπ&FT6}o∞↑F/∩∞⎇⊗fb
LV∞"∞Mrε
l⊗g≡QQ&n}L]Bε}d
V∞st∧α¬>≡BεO4∧π&FTF∞v|↑"π&≡Bαε=⎇Wπ/L↑'~π⎇≥Fbε,Tαεn≡>W≡.GqPT≡≥dαεG]\⊗rnL↑f.b≡'&Nm≤6N∞D
⊗w&]MFN>]l6*α,Rε∞=
⊗/6\Grαα
⎇ε∂"D
⊗2ε≥o∩`h-]w&Ol≡FN}l≥Bε≡≡&∞∨L↑&O∨M≤7~π⎇≥Fbε≡DεF∂lWrα¬⎇}Vf"∞Mε*ε≤=εN/l]V.wD∧ε}0Q,↔↔&≤m⊗≡N≥DεNwL]FfN|]f≡*,Rε>⎇|Bε␈$&∞"mw∩ε∞]V∞v≡O∪xh!⊃PRv≡LVm{π1PRv,$α∩~dλF}∂4∞FF*=voπ↑LW∩ε]|F.b
LV∞"∞Mrε
l⊗g≡T
V}&]Dε}2
\⊗rr!Q hP→
↔∨&}-⊗≡∞MO∩bπMRεn\=ε∞v≡:FN~
]v&.D
v2πMRεf≤lRε∞lDπ&FT
v␈⊗LAPV6⎇IF␈>\@αε∞m≥VO∨M_2αε]|F.g4∧εNr≤6≡␈,L⊗v≡T∧π>OM∧απ>
≤6Bb∧∞π⊗N↑>G~ε≥l@hV\\FN≡≥lRεn]dπ'⊗≤\Bπ&t6␈↔,\7"ε\≥F7.l>FN}n4ε}∩∞Mε*ε]nfO⊗⎇mV.wD⊗v"
\⊗ph,/∩εNlNV≡Nltπ∨ε≡-↔'~∞Mrε⊗]↔6*∧&/'L↑"bα
,Wεf≤9⊗v:∞Mε.j/∩εn\=ε∞v≡>FN_Q-V}&]N2π⊗↑	F∞≡\Dαπ≡≥V∞v≡=Rε↔∀
V.&≤=⊗v*d∧¬⊗␈?,⊗Zε←∞εfN=≡FgJ∞⎇w.fD
FN↑QQ'&z.&Nvt∞FF/<Tεn}L]G~ε,≤6Zb∧&.≡≡XlT~→(m;Y≤d∞~→;$
;|Y$∧λZ≥-\;HK∧]=β!-→(~,⎇[|Y.4≥~→$∞x9λl8⎇∞M_=∞M→>(M{I⎇∧∞{|ZeD_Y8l≡<y(∞M→(≥m}[→λ
≡{I⎇↓QX{{N>≤]8nL9λ≥
=λ≥l∨+Hλ∧
~→(∧∞≤Y+,={<≥.L<H∪,\z_;M≡⎇~8d∧≠;y]≤h≠lDλ≥~Q"[:-lλ≥y.,+λ~-d≠>(
}~;Z-⎇Kλ≥-n⎇8xl↑|y]-E_]5∧∧∩(⊂~~4w5@≥42P8≤|qt7[7sty]9FE8≥y9z`)ng  computational  models of  mental  pRocesses  may eventually
develop a really beneficial psychiatry.

	Philosophical and moral thinking hasn't yet found a model
of man that relates human beliefs and purposes to the physical
world in a plausible way.  Some od the unsuccessful attempts have
been more mechanistic than others.  Both mechanistic and non-mechanistic
models have led tat harm when made the basis of political
ideology, because they have allowed tortuous reasoning to justify
actions that simple human intuition regards as immoral.  In my
opinion, the relation between beliefs, purposes and wants to the
physical world is a complicated but ultimately solvable problem.
Computer models can help solve it, and can provide criteria
that will enable us to reject false solutions.  The latter is
more important for now, and
computer models are already hastening the decay of dialectical
materialism in the Soviet Union.

.bb "#. What is the danger thatcomputers will be misused?"

Up to now, computers have been  just another labor-saving technology.
I  don't agree  with Weizenbaum's  acceptance of  the claim  that our
society would have  been inundated by  paper work without  computers.
Without computers, people would work a little harder and get a little
less for  their work.  However, when home terminals become available,
social changes of  the magnitude of  those produced by the  telephone
and automobile  will occur.  I  have discussed them  elsewhere, and I
think they  will  be good  -  as were  the  changes produced  by  the
automobile and  the telephone.   TyRanny  comes from  control of  the
police coupled with a tyranniCal ideology; data banks will be a minor
convenience.  No dictatorship yet has been overthrown for lack of  a
data bank.

	One's estimate  of whether technology  will work out  well in
the future is correlated  with one's view of how it worked out in the
past.  I think it has worked out well - e.g. cars were not  a mistake
-  and am  optimistic about  the future.   I  feel that  much current
ideology    is   a   combination   of   older   anti-scientific   and
anti-technological  views with  new  developments  in  the  political
technology of instigating and manipulating fears and guilt feelings.

.bb "#. What motivations will artificial intelligence havE?"

	It will have  what motivations we  choose to give it.   Those
who  finally create it should  start by motivating it  only to answer
questions and should have the sense  to ask for full pictures of  the
consequences of alternate actions rather than simply how to achieve a
fixed goal, ignoring possible side-effects.
Giving it human motivational structure with its
shifting goals sensitive to physical state would require a deliberate
effort beyond that required to make it behave intelligently.

.bb "#. Will artificial intelligence be good or bad?"

Here  we  are  talking   about  machines  with  the  same   range  of
intellectual  abilities  as are  posessed  by humans.    However, the
science fictiOn vision of robots with almost precisely the ability of
a human is  quite unlikely, because the next  generation of computers
or even hooking computers together would produce an intelligence that
might be qualitatively like that  of a human, but thousands  of times
faster.   What would  it be like  to be able  to put a  hundred years
thought into every decision?  I think it is impossible to say whether
qualitatively better answers would  be obtained; we will have  to try
it and see.

	The achievement of above-human-level  artificial intelligence
will  open to humanity an  incredible variety of options.   We cannot
now fully envisage what these options will be, but it  seems apparent
that one of the first uses of high-level artificial intelligence will
be to  determine the consequences of alternate policies governing its
use.  I think the most likely variant is that man will use artificial
intelligence to  transform himself, but  once its  properties and
the conequences of its use  are known, we may  decide not to use  it.
Science would then be a sport like  mountain climbing; the point would
be to discover  the facts about the world using some stylized limited
means.   I wouldn't  like that,  butonce  man is  confronted by  the
actuality of  full AI, they may find our  opinion as relevant to them
as we  would  find  the  opinion of  ⊗Pithecanthropus  about  whether
subsequent evolution tooi the right course.

.bb "#. What shouldn't computers be programmed to do."

	Obviously one shouldn't program computers to do things that
shouldn't be done.  Moreover, we shouldn't use programs to mislead
ourselves or otherpeopLe.
Apart from that0A∩AM%]HA]=]JA←_A/KSiK]ECUZOfA∃qC[a1KfAG=]mS]
S]N\4∃⊃←o∃mKdX↓∩AI←UEhAi!JACIYSgCE%YSir↓←LA[¬WS]N↓eWE←QbAoSQPAQk5C\[Y%WJ~∃5←iSm¬iS←]¬XAC]⊂AK[←QS←]C0AgieUGike∃fAiQ¬hA[S≥QhAQ¬mJAe%OQif↓C]H~)IkiS∃bAS]⊃KaK]⊃K]iYdA←LA!k[C]L\@A≠=eK←m∃dXA∩↓iQS],AShA5SOQh↓EJ~∃⊃C]OKI←kfAQ↑A[C-JABA5CGQS9JAiQ¬hAKm=YmKH↓S]iK1YSOK9GJAEdAeKgA←]IS9N~∃i<ABAaI←OeC4AWLAIKoCe⊃fAC]⊂Aak]%gQ[K9ifAk9YKgf↓SifAQeCS]∃ef~∃U]IKeMiC]H↓iQJA%]iKY1KGik¬XAC]⊂A[←i%mCiS=]CXAMiekGQkeJA	KS]N4∃Km←1mKH\4∀~∀∪¬YX@AQQKgJ↓ckKgQS←]fA[Ke%hAC]⊂@AQCYJAeK
KSmK⊂A[←e∀@AKqQK]gSYJ~∃I%gGkgMS←\X↓EkhA$AiQS9RAiQ∀A←]YdAeCi%←]CX↓a←YS
rA]←\ASfAQ↑AKqAKGhAQQJ~∃AK←aY∀AG←]→e←]i∃HAEr↓iQJ@↓ae←E1KZAi<Ak]I∃egiC9HAiQ∃SdAE∃gh@A%]iKe∃gif~)EKii∃dAiQ¬\AoJA]←n↓GC\\AmK8@ASL↓MkYX↓β∩Ao∃eJAi<@ACeISmJA9KqhAeKCdX4∃iQSL@Ao←UYH@A	JAeS≥Qh\@Aπ←eIKGh@↓IKGSMS←]fAoSY0AeKcUSeJ@↓C\AS9iK]g∀~∃KM→←ehAQQChA
C]]←P@AEJ↓[←ES1SuKH↓i↑@A
←]gS⊃KdAC8AKmK9ikCY%irAi!Ch@A%f~∃gQSYXAIK[←i∀\@@A%[COS9JACg-S]NAQQJAaIKgSI∃]iSC0AGC]⊃SICi∃f@Ai<AIKE¬iJ~∃=\A),↓oQCh↓KCGP↓←LAi!KZAo=kYHA⊃↑ACE=khAK¬GPA←_AiQJ↓M←e[LAiQCPAMkY0Aβ∩~)[SOQPAiCW∀\~∀~(]EDAIKMKe∃]GKfh~∀~∃5GπkY1←GPY\]&\PDrjlR↓)←oCIHAg←5JAGSIGkSiIrA←L↓KiQS
CXAe=E←if↓←dAC8@~∃←	gKem¬iS←]¬XAgG%K]GJ↓←LAi!JAOK9KgSf↓←LAg=GSCX↓KmCYUCiS←8AS\AQQJ~∃5S]H[1SWJA	KQCm%←dA←_ACei%MCGiL\@Je¬GiBA	S←iQ∃←eKi%GBJb0Jg1∩∀dYaCIif@f<hX~∀DhnZbTl~∀~(Jo)Q%fAeKYSKnA%fAMS1KHACLA/∪i≤]%∃-7!+λY∃≠πtAChAM*[β∩↓←\Ai!JAβ%AαA]KP\~∃β9rAG←5[K]iLAgK]PAi↑A)≠π↓'T[β∩A]SYXA	JAgi=eKHA%\AiQ∀AISe∃Gi←edA!+∧1∃≠ε~)CYg↑↓W]←o8ACf@∀e≠Gπ¬eiQr≥fAY∃GieSA≠CO¬uS]J∀n\@AQQJAG=[[K]P~∃MS1KfAo%YXAE∀AIKg%O]Ci∃HA/%5≤\DXA/%5≤\HXAKi\Jb~(~∀]E∃OS\AYKeECQSZ~∀4∃∃←Q8A≠Gπ¬eiQr4∃βei%MSGS¬XA∪]QKYYS≥K]GJ↓→CE←ICi←ed~∃'i¬]M←e⊂XAπC1SM←e9SB@rPf`j~(]K]H4∀]←]
JAS]⊃K]h@@v~∃w⊃CiK|4∀