/LMAR=0/XLINE=3/FONT#0=BAXL30/FONT#1=BAXM30/FONT#2=BAXB30/FONT#3=SUB/FONT#4=SUP/FONT#5=BASL35/FONT#6=NGR25/FONT#7=MATH30/FONT#8=FIX25/FONT#9=GRK30



␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ∧|AN UNREASONABLE BOOK



␈↓ ↓H␈↓Joseph␈α∂Weizenbaum,␈α∞␈↓↓Computer␈α∂Power␈α∞and␈α∂Human␈α∞Reason␈↓,␈α∂W.␈α∞H.␈α∂Freeman␈α∞Co.,␈α∂San␈α∞Francisco
␈↓ ↓H␈↓1975

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

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ βαIT'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HE REALLY BELIEVES ...

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum's␈α⊃style␈α⊃ involves␈α⊃making␈α∩extreme␈α⊃ statements␈α⊃which␈α⊃are␈α⊃ later␈α∩qualified␈α⊃by
␈↓ ↓H␈↓contradictory␈α
 statements.␈α
 Therefore,␈α
almost␈α
any␈α
quotation␈α
is␈α
out␈α
 of␈α
context,␈α
making␈α
it␈α
difficult
␈↓ ↓H␈↓to summarize his contentions accurately.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_The following passages illustrate the difficulty:

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_␈↓↓"In␈α∞ 1935,␈α∞  Michael␈α∞ Polanyi"␈↓,␈α∞  [British␈α∞ chemist␈α∞  and␈α∞philosopher␈α∞of␈α∞science,␈α∞ was␈α∞told
␈↓ ↓H␈↓by]␈α
␈↓↓"Nicolai␈α
Bukharin,␈α
one␈α∞of␈α
the␈α
leading␈α
theoreticians␈α∞ of␈α
 the␈α
Russian␈α
 Communist␈α∞party,␈α
 ...
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓[that]␈α
'under␈αsocialism␈α
the␈α
 conception␈αof␈α
science␈α
pursued␈αfor␈α
 its␈α
own␈αsake␈α
would␈α
 disappear,␈αfor
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓the␈α
interests␈αof␈α
scientists␈αwould␈α
spontaneously␈α
turn␈αto␈α
the␈αproblems␈α
of␈α
 the␈αcurrent␈α
Five␈αYear␈α
Plan.'
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓Polanyi␈α⊃sensed␈α⊃then␈α⊃ that␈α⊃ 'the␈α⊃ scientific␈α⊂ outlook␈α⊃ appeared␈α⊃to␈α⊃ have␈α⊃ produced␈α⊃ a␈α⊂mechanical
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓conception␈αof␈αman␈αand␈αhistory␈αin␈αwhich␈αthere␈αwas␈αno␈α place␈αfor␈α science␈α itself.'␈α And␈α further␈α
 that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓'this␈α conception␈α denied␈αaltogether␈αany␈αintrinsic␈αpower␈αto␈αthought␈αand␈αthus␈αdenied␈αany␈αgrounds␈α
for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓claiming␈α
freedom␈α of␈α
thought.'"␈↓␈α
-␈α from␈α
page␈α 1.␈α
 Well,␈α
 that's␈αclear␈α
enough;␈α
Weizenbaum␈αfavors
␈↓ ↓H␈↓freedom of thought and science and is worried about threats to them.  But on page 265, we have

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"Scientists␈αwho␈α
continue␈αto␈αprattle␈α
on␈αabout␈α
'knowledge␈αfor␈αits␈α
own␈αsake'␈α in␈α
order␈αto␈α
 exploit␈αthat
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓slogan␈αfor␈αtheir␈α self-serving␈αends␈αhave␈αdetached␈αscience␈α and␈αknowledge␈αfrom␈αany␈α contact␈αwith␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓real␈αworld".␈↓␈α Here␈αWeizenbaum␈α seems␈αto␈α
 be␈αagainst␈α pure␈αscience,␈α i.e.␈α research␈αmotivated␈α
solely
␈↓ ↓H␈↓by curiosity.  We also have

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"With␈αfew␈αexceptions,␈αthere␈αhave␈αbeen␈αno␈α results,␈αfrom␈αover␈αtwenty␈αyears␈αof␈αartificial␈α intelligence
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓research,␈α
that␈αhave␈α
found␈αtheir␈α
way␈αinto␈α
 industry␈α  generally␈α
  or␈α into␈α
  the␈α
 computer␈α  industry
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓in␈α∩particular"␈↓.␈α∩   -␈α∪page␈α∩ 229␈α∩ This␈α∪ again␈α∩suggests␈α∩ that␈α∪ industrial␈α∩results␈α∩are␈α∪necessary␈α∩to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓validate science.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"Science␈α∞promised␈α∞man␈α∞power.␈α∞ But␈α
as␈α∞so␈α∞often␈α∞happens␈α∞when␈α
people␈α∞are␈α∞seduced␈α∞by␈α∞promises␈α
of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓power␈α⊃...␈α⊂the␈α⊃price␈α⊃actually␈α⊂paid␈α⊃is␈α⊂servitude␈α⊃and␈α⊃impotence"␈↓.␈α⊂ This␈α⊃is␈α⊂from␈α⊃the␈α⊃book␈α⊂jacket.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Presumably the publisher regards it as a good summary of the book's main point.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"I␈αwill,␈α
in␈αwhat␈αfollows,␈α
try␈αto␈αmaintain␈α
the␈αposition␈αthat␈α
there␈αis␈αnothing␈α
wrong␈αwith␈αviewing␈α
man
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓as␈α∂an␈α∞information␈α∂processor␈α∞(or␈α∂indeed␈α∂as␈α∞anything␈α∂else)␈α∞nor␈α∂with␈α∞attempting␈α∂to␈α∂understand␈α∞him
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 91


␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓from␈αthat␈αperspective,␈αproviding,␈αhowever,␈αthat␈αwe␈αnever␈αact␈αas␈αthough␈αany␈αsingle␈αperspective␈αcan
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓comprehend the whole man."␈↓ - page 140.  We can certainly live with that, but

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"Not␈α∞only␈α∞has␈α
our␈α∞unbounded␈α∞feeding␈α
on␈α∞ science␈α∞caused␈α
us␈α∞to␈α∞become␈α
dependent␈α∞ on␈α∞it,␈α∞ but,␈α
as
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓happens␈α∀ with␈α∃many␈α∀ other␈α∃drugs␈α∀ taken␈α∀in␈α∃increasing␈α∀dosages,␈α∃science␈α∀has␈α∃been␈α∀gradually
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓converted into  a slow acting poison".␈↓ - page 13.  These are qualified by

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"I␈α∞argue␈α∞for␈α∂ the␈α∞rational␈α∞use␈α∂ of␈α∞science␈α∞and␈α∂technology,␈α∞ not␈α∞for␈α∂its␈α∞mystification,␈α∞let␈α∂alone␈α∞its
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓abandonment"␈↓. - page 256

␈↓ ↓H␈↓In␈α∞reference␈α∞to␈α∞the␈α∂proposal␈α∞for␈α∞a␈α∞ moratorium␈α∂on␈α∞certain␈α∞experiments␈α∞with␈α∂recombinant␈α∞DNA
␈↓ ↓H␈↓because␈αthey␈αmight␈αbe␈αdangerous,␈αwe␈αhave␈α␈↓↓"Theirs␈αis␈αcertainly␈αa␈αstep␈αin␈αthe␈αright␈αdirection,␈α and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓their␈α∂initiative␈α∂is␈α∂to␈α∂be␈α∂applauded.␈α∂ Still,␈α∂ one␈α∂may␈α∂ask,␈α∂why␈α∂do␈α∂they␈α∂feel␈α∂they␈α∂ have␈α∂to␈α∂give␈α∞a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓reason␈α for␈αwhat␈αthey␈αrecommend␈α
 at␈αall?␈α Is␈αnot␈αthe␈α
overriding␈αobligation␈αon␈αmen,␈αincluding␈αmen␈α
of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓science,␈α∞to␈α∞exempt␈α∞life␈α∞itself␈α
from␈α∞ the␈α∞madness␈α∞of␈α∞treating␈α
everything␈α∞ as␈α∞an␈α∞object,␈α∞a␈α
sufficient
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓reason,␈αand␈αone␈αthat␈αdoes␈αnot␈αeven␈αhave␈αto␈αbe␈αspoken?␈α Why␈αdoes␈αit␈αhave␈αto␈αbe␈αexplained?␈α It␈αwould
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓appear␈α
that␈α
even␈α
the␈α
noblest␈α
acts␈α
 of␈αthe␈α
most␈α
well-meaning␈α
 people␈α
are␈α
poisoned␈α
 by␈α
the␈αcorrosive
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓climate␈α
 of␈α
 values␈α
 of␈α
 our␈α
 time."␈↓␈α Is␈α
 Weizenbaum␈α
  against␈α
 all␈α
experimental␈α
 biology␈α
or␈α even
␈↓ ↓H␈↓all␈α
 experiments␈α with␈α
DNA?␈α  I␈α
 would␈αhesitate␈α
 to␈α conclude␈α
so␈α from␈α
 this␈αquote;␈α
 he␈α
may␈α say
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the direct opposite somewhere else.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"Those␈α
who␈α∞know␈α
who␈α∞and␈α
what␈α∞they␈α
are␈α∞do␈α
 not␈α∞need␈α
to␈α∞ask␈α
what␈α∞they␈α
should␈α∞ do."␈↓␈α
-␈α∞page␈α
273.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Let␈α
me␈α
 assure␈α
the␈α
reader␈α
 that␈α
there␈α
is␈α
nothing␈α
 in␈α
 the␈α
 book␈α
 that␈α
 offers␈α
 any␈α
 way␈α
 to␈α
 interpret
␈↓ ↓H␈↓this␈α
pomposity.␈α  The␈α
menace␈αof␈α
 such␈αgrandiloquent␈α
precepts␈α
is␈α that␈α
they␈αrequire␈α
a␈αpriesthood␈α
to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓apply␈α
them␈α
to␈α
particular␈α
cases,␈α
and␈α
would-be␈α
priests␈α
quickly␈α
crystallize␈α
around␈α
any␈α
potential␈α
center
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈α∞power.␈α∞ A␈α
corollary␈α∞of␈α∞this␈α∞is␈α
that␈α∞people␈α∞can␈α
be␈α∞attacked␈α∞for␈α∞what␈α
they␈α∞are␈α∞rather␈α∞than␈α
for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓anything␈α
specific␈αthey␈α
have␈α
done.␈α The␈α
April␈α1976␈α
issue␈α
of␈α␈↓↓Ms.␈↓␈α
has␈α
a␈αpoignant␈α
illustration␈αof␈α
this
␈↓ ↓H␈↓in an article about "trashing".

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

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"The␈αfirst␈α
kind␈α␈↓[of␈α
computer␈αapplication]␈↓↓␈α
I␈αwould␈α
call␈αsimply␈α
obscene.␈α These␈α
are␈αones␈α
whose␈αvery
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓contemplation␈α∞ought␈α∞to␈α∂give␈α∞rise␈α∞to␈α∞feelings␈α∂of␈α∞disgust␈α∞in␈α∞every␈α∂civilized␈α∞person.␈α∞ The␈α∂proposal␈α∞I
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓have␈αmentioned,␈αthat␈α
an␈αanimal's␈αvisual␈αsystem␈α
and␈αbrain␈αbe␈αcoupled␈α
to␈αcomputers,␈αis␈αan␈α
example.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓It␈α
represents␈αan␈α
attack␈αon␈α
life␈αitself.␈α
 One␈α
must␈αwonder␈α
what␈αmust␈α
have␈αhappened␈α
to␈αthe␈α
proposers'
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓perception␈α
of␈α
life,␈α
hence␈α
to␈α
their␈α
perceptions␈α
of␈α
themselves␈α
as␈α
part␈α
of␈α
the␈α
continuum␈α
of␈α∞life,␈α
that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓they␈αcan␈α
even␈αthink␈αof␈α
such␈αa␈α
thing,␈αlet␈αalone␈α
advocated␈αit"␈↓.␈α
 No␈αargument␈αis␈α
offered␈αthat␈αmight␈α
be
␈↓ ↓H␈↓answered,␈α
and␈αno␈α
attempt␈α
is␈αmade␈α
to␈α
define␈αcriteria␈α
of␈α
acceptability.␈α I␈α
think␈α
Weizenbaum␈αand␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓scientists␈α
who␈αhave␈α
praised␈αthe␈α
book␈αmay␈α
be␈αsurprised␈α
at␈αsome␈α
of␈αthe␈α
repressive␈αuses␈α
to␈αwhich␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓book␈αwill␈αbe␈αput.␈α However,␈αthey␈αwill␈αbe␈αable␈αto␈αpoint␈αto␈αpassages␈αin␈αthe␈αbook␈αwith␈αquite␈α
contrary
␈↓ ↓H␈↓sentiments, so the repression won't be their fault.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ∧∨BUT HERE'S A TRY AT SUMMARIZING:

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_As␈α
 these␈α inconsistent␈α
 passages␈α show,␈α
 it␈α isn't␈α
 easy␈α to␈α
determine␈α Weizenbaum's␈α
position,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓but the following  seem to  be the book's main points:
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 92


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α1. Computers cannot be made to  reason usefully about human affairs.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓This␈α∩ is␈α∩supported␈α∩by␈α∩quoting␈α∩ overoptimistic␈α∩predictions␈α∩by␈α∩computer␈α∩scientists␈α∩and␈α⊃ giving
␈↓ ↓H␈↓examples␈α⊂ of␈α⊂non-verbal␈α⊂ human␈α⊂ communication.␈α⊂ However,␈α⊂ Weizenbaum␈α⊂doesn't␈α⊃ name␈α⊂any
␈↓ ↓H␈↓specific␈α∞task␈α∞ that␈α∞computers␈α∞cannot␈α∞ carry␈α∞out,␈α∞ because␈α∞ he␈α∞wishes␈α∞ ␈↓↓"to␈α∞avoid␈α∞ the␈α
unnecessary,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓interminable,␈α
and␈α∞ultimately␈α
 sterile␈α∞exercise␈α
of␈α∞making␈α
 a␈α∞catalogue␈α
of␈α∞what␈α
 computers␈α∞will␈α
and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓will␈α
 not␈α
be␈α∞able␈α
to␈α
do,␈α
 either␈α∞here␈α
and␈α
now␈α
or␈α∞ever"␈↓.␈α
 It␈α
is␈α
also␈α∞stated␈α
that␈α
human␈α∞and␈α
machine
␈↓ ↓H␈↓reasoning␈α
are␈α
incomparable␈α∞and␈α
that␈α
the␈α∞sensory␈α
experience␈α
of␈α
a␈α∞human␈α
is␈α
essential␈α∞for␈α
human
␈↓ ↓H␈↓reasoning.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α2. There  are tasks that  computers should not be  programmed to do.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓Some␈α
are␈α
 tasks␈αWeizenbaum␈α
 thinks␈α
shouldn't␈α
be␈α done␈α
at␈α
 all␈α
-␈αmostly␈α
for␈α
new␈α
left␈αreasons.␈α
 One
␈↓ ↓H␈↓may␈α
quarrel␈α∞with␈α
his␈α
 politics,␈α∞and␈α
I␈α
do,␈α∞ but␈α
obviously␈α
computers␈α∞ shouldn't␈α
do␈α∞what␈α
shouldn't
␈↓ ↓H␈↓be␈α
done.␈α
 However,␈α
Weizenbaum␈α
also␈α
objects␈α
to␈α
computer␈α
hookups␈α
to␈α
animal␈α
brains␈αand␈α
computer
␈↓ ↓H␈↓conducted␈α⊃psychiatric␈α∩ interviews.␈α⊃ As␈α⊃to␈α∩the␈α⊃ former,␈α⊃I␈α∩couldn't␈α⊃tell␈α⊃ whether␈α∩he␈α⊃is␈α∩an␈α⊃anti-
␈↓ ↓H␈↓vivisectionist,␈α but␈αhe␈αseems␈αto␈αhave␈αadditional␈αreasons␈αfor␈αcalling␈αthem␈α"obscene".␈α The␈αobjection
␈↓ ↓H␈↓to␈α∂computers␈α∂doing␈α∂ psychiatric␈α∂interviews␈α∂also␈α∂ has␈α∂a␈α∂ component␈α∂beyond␈α∂the␈α⊂ conviction␈α∂that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓they␈α∂would␈α∞ necessarily␈α∂do␈α∂it␈α∞ badly.␈α∂  Thus␈α∞he␈α∂says,␈α∂␈↓↓"What␈α∞can␈α∂the␈α∞psychiatrist's␈α∂image␈α∂of␈α∞his
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓patient␈α∂be␈α∂ when␈α∂he␈α∂sees␈α∂himself,␈α∂as␈α∂a␈α⊂therapist,␈α∂not␈α∂as␈α∂an␈α∂engaged␈α∂human␈α∂being␈α∂acting␈α⊂as␈α∂a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓healer,␈α
but␈α
 as␈α
an␈α
information␈α
 processor␈αfollowing␈α
rules,␈α
etc.?"␈↓␈α
This␈α
 seems␈α
 like␈α  the␈α
 renaissance
␈↓ ↓H␈↓era␈α∞ religious␈α∞  objections␈α∞ to␈α∞dissecting␈α∞the␈α∞ human␈α∞body␈α∞that␈α∞came␈α∞ up␈α∞when␈α∞science␈α∞ revived.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Even␈α⊂the␈α⊃Popes␈α⊂eventually␈α⊃convinced␈α⊂themselves␈α⊃that␈α⊂regarding␈α⊃the␈α⊂body␈α⊃ as␈α⊂a␈α⊃machine␈α⊂ for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓scientific␈α∂ or␈α∞medical␈α∂ purposes␈α∞was␈α∂quite␈α∞ compatible␈α∂with␈α∞ regarding␈α∂it␈α∞ as␈α∂the␈α∞temple␈α∂ of␈α∞the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓soul.␈α Recently␈α
 they␈αhave␈αtaken␈α
the␈αsame␈αview␈α
of␈α studying␈αmental␈α
mechanisms␈αfor␈α
scientific␈α or
␈↓ ↓H␈↓psychiatric purposes.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α3. Science  has led people to a  wrong view of the world  and of life.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓The␈α∂ view␈α∂is␈α∂characterized␈α∂as␈α∂mechanistic,␈α∂ and␈α∞the␈α∂example␈α∂of␈α∂clockwork␈α∂is␈α∂given.␈α∂  (It␈α∞seems
␈↓ ↓H␈↓strange␈α∞ for␈α∞a␈α∞computer␈α∂scientist␈α∞ to␈α∞give␈α∞this␈α∞ example,␈α∂because␈α∞ the␈α∞advance␈α∞of␈α∂ the␈α∞computer
␈↓ ↓H␈↓model␈αover␈α
older␈α mechanistic␈α
models␈αis␈α
 that␈αcomputers␈α
can␈α and␈α
clockwork␈αcan't␈αmake␈α
decisions.)
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Apparently␈αanalysis␈α
 of␈αa␈α
living␈αsystem␈α
 as␈αcomposed␈αof␈α
interacting␈α parts␈α
rather␈αthan␈α
treating␈αit
␈↓ ↓H␈↓as an unanalyzed whole is bad.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α4. Science is not the sole or even main source of reliable general knowledge.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓However,␈α∩ he␈α∩doesn't␈α⊃propose␈α∩any␈α∩ other␈α∩sources␈α⊃of␈α∩ knowledge␈α∩or␈α⊃ say␈α∩what␈α∩ the␈α∩limits␈α⊃ of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓scientific knowledge  is except  to characterize certain  thoughts as "obscene".


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α5. Certain people  and institutions are attacked.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓These␈α
 include␈α
the␈α
Department␈α
 of␈α
"Defense"␈α(sic),␈α
␈↓↓Psychology␈α
 Today␈↓,␈α
the␈α
␈↓↓New␈α
York␈α
Times␈↓␈αData
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Bank,␈α∂ compulsive␈α∂computer␈α∂ programmers,␈α∞Kenneth␈α∂ Colby,␈α∂Marvin␈α∂ Minsky,␈α∂ Roger␈α∞ Schank,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 93


␈↓ ↓H␈↓Allen␈α↔Newell,␈α↔ Herbert␈α↔ Simon,␈α↔ J.W.␈α↔ Forrester,␈α↔Edward␈α↔Fredkin,␈α↔ B.F.␈α↔Skinner,␈α↔Warren
␈↓ ↓H␈↓McCulloch  (until he was old), Laplace and Leibniz.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α6. Certain political and social views are taken for granted.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_The␈α∂view␈α∂that␈α∂U.S.␈α∂policy␈α∞in␈α∂Vietnam␈α∂was␈α∂"murderous"␈α∂is␈α∞used␈α∂to␈α∂support␈α∂an␈α∂attack␈α∞on
␈↓ ↓H␈↓"logicality"␈α∞(as␈α∞opposed␈α
to␈α∞"rationality")␈α∞and␈α∞the␈α
view␈α∞of␈α∞science␈α∞as␈α
a␈α∞"slow␈α∞acting␈α∞poison".␈α
 The
␈↓ ↓H␈↓phrase␈α_␈↓↓"It␈α_may␈α_be␈α↔that␈α_the␈α_people's␈α_cultivated␈α↔and␈α_finally␈α_addictive␈α_hunger␈α_for␈α↔private
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓automobiles..."␈↓␈α∞(p.30)␈α
makes␈α∞psychological,␈α
sociological,␈α∞political,␈α
 and␈α∞technological␈α
presumptions
␈↓ ↓H␈↓all␈α⊂in␈α⊂one␈α⊂phrase.␈α⊂ Similarly,␈α⊂␈↓↓"Men␈α⊂could␈α⊂instead␈α⊂choose␈α⊂to␈α⊂have␈α⊂truly␈α⊂safe␈α⊃automobiles,␈α⊂decent
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓television,␈α⊗decent␈α⊗housing␈α⊗for␈α⊗everyone,␈α⊗or␈α⊗comfortable,␈α⊗safe,␈α⊗and␈α⊗widely␈α⊗distributed␈α⊗mass
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓transportation."␈↓␈α∂presumes␈α⊂wide␈α∂agreement␈α⊂about␈α∂what␈α⊂these␈α∂things␈α⊂are,␈α∂what␈α⊂is␈α∂technologically
␈↓ ↓H␈↓feasible,␈α∂what␈α∂the␈α∂effects␈α∂of␈α∂changed␈α∂policies␈α∞would␈α∂be,␈α∂and␈α∂what␈α∂activities␈α∂aimed␈α∂at␈α∞changing
␈↓ ↓H␈↓people's taste are permissible for governments.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ¬%THE ELIZA EXAMPLE

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Perhaps␈α
the␈α
most␈α
interesting␈α
part␈α
of␈α
the␈α book␈α
is␈α
the␈α
account␈α
of␈α
 his␈α
 own␈α program␈α
 ELIZA
␈↓ ↓H␈↓that␈α
 parodies␈α
 Rogerian␈α
 non-directive␈α
psychotherapy␈α∞and␈α
his␈α
 anecdotal␈α
account␈α
of␈α∞ how␈α
some
␈↓ ↓H␈↓people␈α
 ascribe␈α
intelligence␈α
 and␈α
personality␈α
 to␈α
it.␈α
  In␈α
 my␈α
opinion,␈α
 it␈α
is␈α
 quite␈α
natural␈α
 for␈α
people
␈↓ ↓H␈↓who␈α↔ don't␈α↔understand␈α↔the␈α↔notion␈α↔ of␈α↔algorithm␈α↔to␈α↔imagine␈α↔that␈α↔ a␈α↔ computer␈α⊗computes
␈↓ ↓H␈↓analogously␈α
to␈α
 the␈α
 way␈α
a␈α
 human␈α
reasons.␈α
  This␈α
leads␈α
to␈α
 the␈α
idea␈α
that␈α
 accurate␈α
computation
␈↓ ↓H␈↓entails␈α
correct␈α
reasoning␈αand␈α
even␈α
to␈αthe␈α
idea␈α
that␈α
computer␈αmalfunctions␈α
are␈α
analogous␈αto␈α
human
␈↓ ↓H␈↓neuroses␈α∂and␈α∞psychoses.␈α∂ Actually,␈α∞ programming␈α∂a␈α∞computer␈α∂ to␈α∞ draw␈α∂ interesting␈α∞ conclusions
␈↓ ↓H␈↓from␈α premises␈αis␈α very␈αdifficult␈αand␈αonly␈αlimited␈αsuccess␈α has␈αbeen␈αattained.␈α However,␈α the␈αeffect
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈αthese␈α natural␈α misconceptions␈α shouldn't␈αbe␈α exaggerated;␈αpeople␈αreadily␈α understand␈αthe␈αtruth
␈↓ ↓H␈↓when␈α∞it␈α∞is␈α∞explained,␈α∂especially␈α∞when␈α∞it␈α∞applies␈α∞to␈α∂a␈α∞matter␈α∞that␈α∞concerns␈α∞them.␈α∂  In␈α∞particular,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓when␈αan␈α executive␈αexcuses␈αa␈α mistake␈αby␈α saying␈αthat␈αhe␈α placed␈αexcessive␈αfaith␈αin␈αa␈αcomputer,␈αa
␈↓ ↓H␈↓certain skepticism is called for.

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

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_It␈α∂seems␈α⊂to␈α∂me␈α⊂that␈α∂ELIZA␈α⊂and␈α∂PARRY␈α⊂show␈α∂only␈α⊂that␈α∂people,␈α⊂including␈α∂psychiatrists,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓often␈αhave␈αto␈αdraw␈αconclusions␈αon␈αslight␈αevidence,␈αand␈αare␈αtherefore␈αeasily␈αfooled.␈α If␈αI␈αam␈αright,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓two sentences of instruction would allow them to do better.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_In his 1966 paper on ELIZA (cited as 1965), Weizenbaum writes,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 94


␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓↓"One␈α
goal␈α∞ for␈α
 an␈α∞augmented␈α
 ELIZA␈α∞program␈α
 is␈α
thus␈α∞ a␈α
system␈α∞ which␈α
already␈α∞has␈α
access␈α∞to␈α
a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓store␈α
of␈α
information␈α∞about␈α
some␈α
aspect␈α
of␈α∞the␈α
real␈α
world␈α
 and␈α∞which,␈α
by␈α
 means␈α∞of␈α
 conversational
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓interaction␈α∞ with␈α∞people,␈α∞can␈α
reveal␈α∞both␈α∞what␈α∞it␈α∞ knows,␈α
i.e.␈α∞behave␈α∞as␈α∞an␈α∞information␈α
retrieval
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓system,␈α→ and␈α_where␈α→ its␈α_ knowledge␈α→ ends␈α_and␈α→ needs␈α_ to␈α→be␈α_augmented.␈α→ Hopefully␈α_the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓augmentation␈αof␈α
its␈αknowledge␈α will␈α
also␈αbe␈α
a␈α direct␈α consequence␈α
 of␈α its␈α conversational␈α
experience.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓It␈α⊃ is␈α⊃precisely␈α⊃the␈α⊃prospect␈α⊂that␈α⊃ such␈α⊃a␈α⊃program␈α⊃ will␈α⊂converse␈α⊃with␈α⊃ many␈α⊃people␈α⊃and␈α⊂learn
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓something␈αfrom␈αeach␈αof␈αthem␈α which␈αleads␈αto␈αthe␈αhope␈αthat␈α it␈αwill␈α prove␈αan␈α interesting␈α and␈αeven
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓useful␈α
conversational␈α
partner."␈↓␈α
 Too␈α
bad␈α
he␈α
didn't␈α
successfully␈α
pursue␈α
this␈α
goal;␈α
no-one␈α
else␈αhas.␈α
 I
␈↓ ↓H␈↓think␈α
success␈α∞would␈α
have␈α
required␈α∞a␈α
better␈α∞understanding␈α
of␈α
formalization␈α∞than␈α
is␈α∞exhibited␈α
in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the book.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ∧βWHAT DOES HE SAY ABOUT COMPUTERS?

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

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_1.␈α⊂ He␈α⊂ concludes␈α⊂ that␈α⊃since␈α⊂ a␈α⊂ computer␈α⊂ cannot␈α⊂ have␈α⊃ the␈α⊂experience␈α⊂ of␈α⊂a␈α⊃man,␈α⊂ it
␈↓ ↓H␈↓cannot␈α
understand␈α a␈α
man.␈α  There␈α
are␈α
three␈αpoints␈α
to␈α be␈α
 made␈α
 in␈αreply.␈α
   First,␈αhumans␈α
 share
␈↓ ↓H␈↓each␈α∂ other's␈α∂experiences␈α∂ and␈α∂those␈α∂ of␈α∂ machines␈α∂ or␈α∂animals␈α∂ only␈α∂ to␈α∂a␈α∂ limited␈α⊂extent.␈α∂  In
␈↓ ↓H␈↓particular,␈α⊗men␈α∃ and␈α⊗women␈α⊗have␈α∃ different␈α⊗experiences.␈α⊗ Nevertheless,␈α∃it␈α⊗ is␈α⊗ common␈α∃in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓literature␈α
for␈α
 a␈α
 good␈α
writer␈α
 to␈α∞show␈α
greater␈α
 understanding␈α
of␈α
the␈α
experience␈α
of␈α∞ the␈α
opposite
␈↓ ↓H␈↓sex␈α
than␈αa␈α
poorer␈αwriter␈α
of␈αthat␈α
sex.␈α  Second,␈α
the␈αnotion␈α
of␈αexperience␈α
 is␈αpoorly␈α
understood;␈αif
␈↓ ↓H␈↓we␈αunderstood␈αit␈αbetter,␈α we␈αcould␈αreason␈αabout␈αwhether␈α a␈αmachine␈α could␈αhave␈α a␈α simulated␈αor
␈↓ ↓H␈↓vicarious␈α∞experience␈α∂normally␈α∞confined␈α∂to␈α∞humans.␈α∞ Third,␈α∂what␈α∞we␈α∂mean␈α∞by␈α∂understanding␈α∞is
␈↓ ↓H␈↓poorly␈α⊃ understood,␈α⊃so␈α⊃ we␈α⊃don't␈α⊃ yet␈α⊃know␈α⊃ how␈α⊃to␈α⊃ define␈α⊃whether␈α⊃ a␈α⊃machine␈α⊂understands
␈↓ ↓H␈↓something or not.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_2.␈α∩Like␈α∩his␈α∩ predecessor␈α∩critics␈α∩of␈α∩ artificial␈α∩intelligence,␈α∩Taube,␈α∩Dreyfus␈α∩and␈α∩Lighthill,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Weizenbaum␈αis␈α impatient,␈αimplying␈αthat␈αif␈α the␈αproblem␈αhasn't␈αbeen␈αsolved␈αin␈αtwenty␈α years,␈αit␈αis
␈↓ ↓H␈↓time␈α⊂to␈α⊂give␈α⊂up.␈α⊂  Genetics␈α⊂took␈α⊂about␈α⊂ a␈α⊂century␈α⊂to␈α⊂go␈α⊂from␈α⊂Mendel␈α⊂to␈α⊂the␈α⊂genetic␈α⊂code␈α⊂for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓proteins,␈α⊃and␈α⊃still␈α∩has␈α⊃ a␈α⊃long␈α∩way␈α⊃to␈α⊃ go␈α∩before␈α⊃we␈α⊃will␈α∩ fully␈α⊃understand␈α⊃the␈α∩genetics␈α⊃and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓evolution␈α∩of␈α⊃intelligence␈α∩and␈α⊃behavior.␈α∩  Artificial␈α⊃intelligence␈α∩may␈α⊃be␈α∩just␈α⊃as␈α∩difficult.␈α⊃  My
␈↓ ↓H␈↓current␈α
answer␈α
to␈αthe␈α
question␈α
of␈αwhen␈α
machines␈α
will␈α
 reach␈α human-level␈α
 intelligence␈α
 is␈α that␈α
 a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓precise␈αcalculation␈αshows␈αthat␈α we␈αare␈αbetween␈α 1.7␈αand␈α3.1␈αEinsteins␈α and␈α.3␈αManhattan␈αProjects
␈↓ ↓H␈↓away␈α∞from␈α
the␈α∞goal.␈α
 However,␈α∞the␈α∞current␈α
research␈α∞is␈α
producing␈α∞the␈α
information␈α∞on␈α∞which␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Einstein will  base himself and is producing useful capabilities all the time.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_3.␈α⊂The␈α⊂book␈α⊂confuses␈α⊂computer␈α⊂simulation␈α⊂of␈α⊂a␈α⊂phenomenon␈α⊂with␈α⊂its␈α⊂ formalization␈α∂ in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓logic.␈α   A␈α simulation␈α
is␈α only␈α one␈α
 kind␈αof␈αformalization␈αand␈α
not␈αoften␈αthe␈α
most␈αuseful␈α-␈αeven␈α
to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a␈α∀computer.␈α∪ In␈α∀the␈α∪ first␈α∀place,␈α∪ logical␈α∀ and␈α∪mathematical␈α∀ formalizations␈α∪can␈α∀ use␈α∪partial
␈↓ ↓H␈↓information␈α⊂about␈α∂ a␈α⊂system␈α∂ insufficient␈α⊂for␈α∂ a␈α⊂simulation.␈α∂ Thus␈α⊂the␈α∂law␈α⊂of␈α⊂conservation␈α∂ of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓energy␈α∂tells␈α∞us␈α∂much␈α∞ about␈α∂possible␈α∞energy␈α∂conversion␈α∞ systems␈α∂before␈α∞we␈α∂define␈α∞ even␈α∂one␈α∞of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓them.␈α Even␈αwhen␈αa␈α simulation␈αprogram␈α is␈α available,␈αother␈α formalizations␈α are␈αnecessary␈αeven
␈↓ ↓H␈↓to␈αmake␈α
good␈αuse␈α
of␈αthe␈αsimulation.␈α
 This␈αreview␈α
isn't␈αthe␈α place␈α
for␈α a␈α
 full␈αexplanation␈α
 of␈αthe
␈↓ ↓H␈↓relations  between these concepts.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Like␈α
␈↓↓Punch␈↓'s␈α famous␈α
curate's␈α egg,␈α
the␈α book␈α
is␈αgood␈α
 in␈αparts.␈α
 Thus␈αit␈α
raises␈αthe␈α
following
␈↓ ↓H␈↓interesting issues:
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 95


␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_1.␈α∞What␈α∞would␈α∞it␈α
mean␈α∞for␈α∞a␈α∞computer␈α
 to␈α∞hope␈α∞or␈α∞be␈α
desperate␈α∞for␈α∞ love?␈α∞  Answers␈α
 to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓these␈α
 questions␈α
depend␈α
 on␈α
 being␈α
 able␈α
to␈α
formalize␈α
(not␈α
simulate)␈α
the␈α
phenomena␈α
in␈α
question.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓My␈αguess␈α
is␈αthat␈αadding␈α
a␈α notion␈αof␈α
hope␈αto␈α an␈α
axiomatization␈αof␈αbelief␈α
 and␈αwanting␈αmight␈α
not
␈↓ ↓H␈↓be difficult.  The study of ␈↓↓propositional attitudes␈↓ in philosophical logic points in that direction.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_2.␈α
 Do␈α
 differences␈α in␈α
experience␈α
 make␈α
 human␈α and␈α
 machine␈α
intelligence␈α
necessarily␈α so
␈↓ ↓H␈↓different␈α
that␈α
it␈α is␈α
meaningless␈α
to␈αask␈α
whether␈α
a␈αmachine␈α
can␈α
be␈αmore␈α
intelligent␈α
than␈αa␈α
machine?
␈↓ ↓H␈↓My␈αopinion␈αis␈αthat␈αcomparison␈α will␈αturn␈αout␈αto␈αbe␈αmeaningful.␈α  After␈αall,␈αmost␈αpeople␈αhave␈α not
␈↓ ↓H␈↓doubt␈α_that␈α_humans␈α_are␈α_more␈α_intelligent␈α_than␈α_turkeys.␈α_ Weizenbaum's␈α_examples␈α_ of␈α_ the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓dependence␈α⊃ of␈α∩ human␈α⊃intelligence␈α∩ on␈α⊃sensory␈α∩ abilities␈α⊃ seem␈α∩ even␈α⊃ refutable,␈α∩ because␈α⊃we
␈↓ ↓H␈↓recognize␈α no␈αfundamental␈α
difference␈α in␈α humanness␈α in␈α
 people␈α who␈α are␈α severely␈α
handicapped
␈↓ ↓H␈↓sensorily, e.g. the deaf, dumb and blind or paraplegics.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ↓oIN DEFENSE OF THE UNJUSTLY ATTACKED - SOME OF WHOM ARE INNOCENT

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Here␈α
are␈α
 defenses␈α
of␈α∞Weizenbaum's␈α
targets.␈α
 They␈α
are␈α∞not␈α
guaranteed␈α
to␈α
entirely␈α∞suit␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓defendees.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum's␈α_conjecture␈α_that␈α_the␈α_ Defense␈α_Department␈α_supports␈α→speech␈α_recognition
␈↓ ↓H␈↓research␈α
in␈αorder␈α
to␈α
be␈αable␈α
to␈αsnoop␈α
on␈α
telephone␈αconversations␈α
is␈α biased,␈α
 baseless,␈α
false,␈α and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓seems␈α∞ motivated␈α∞ by␈α
political␈α∞malice.␈α∞   The␈α
committee␈α∞ of␈α∞scientists␈α
 that␈α∞proposed␈α∞ the␈α
project
␈↓ ↓H␈↓advanced␈α
  quite␈α different␈α
 considerations,␈α and␈α
 the␈α
 high␈αofficials␈α
who␈αmade␈α
the␈αfinal␈α
 decisions
␈↓ ↓H␈↓are␈α∩not␈α⊃ogres.␈α∩ Anyway␈α∩ their␈α⊃other␈α∩responsibilities␈α⊃leave␈α∩them␈α∩no␈α⊃time␈α∩for␈α∩complicated␈α⊃and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓devious␈α⊂considerations.␈α⊃ I␈α⊂put␈α⊂this␈α⊃one␈α⊂first,␈α⊂because␈α⊃I␈α⊂think␈α⊂the␈α⊃failure␈α⊂of␈α⊂many␈α⊃scientists␈α⊂to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓defend␈αthe␈αDefense␈αDepartment␈αagainst␈αattacks␈αthey␈αknow␈αare␈αunjustified,␈αis␈α unjust␈αin␈αitself,␈αand
␈↓ ↓H␈↓furthermore has harmed the country.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum␈αdoubts␈αthat␈α
computer␈αspeech␈α recognition␈α
will␈αhave␈αcost-effective␈α
 applications
␈↓ ↓H␈↓beyond␈αsnooping␈α on␈αphone␈αconversations.␈α He␈αalso␈αsays,␈α ␈↓↓"There␈αis␈αno␈αquestion␈α in␈αmy␈αmind␈α that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓there␈αis␈α no␈αpressing␈αhuman␈αproblem␈α that␈αwill␈αbe␈αmore␈αeasily␈α solved␈αbecause␈αsuch␈αmachines␈α exist"␈↓.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓I␈α⊂worry␈α⊃ more␈α⊂about␈α⊂whether␈α⊃ the␈α⊂programs␈α⊂can␈α⊃be␈α⊂made␈α⊂to␈α⊃ work␈α⊂before␈α⊂ the␈α⊃sponsor␈α⊂loses
␈↓ ↓H␈↓patience.␈α⊃  Once␈α⊂they␈α⊃ work,␈α⊂costs␈α⊃will␈α⊃come␈α⊂down.␈α⊃  Winograd␈α⊂pointed␈α⊃out␈α⊂to␈α⊃me␈α⊃that␈α⊂many
␈↓ ↓H␈↓possible␈αhousehold␈αapplications␈αof␈αcomputers␈αmay␈αnot␈αbe␈αfeasible␈αwithout␈α some␈αcomputer␈αspeech
␈↓ ↓H␈↓recognition.␈α∂  One␈α∂needs␈α∞ to␈α∂think␈α∂␈↓αboth␈↓␈α∞about␈α∂ how␈α∂to␈α∞solve␈α∂ recognized␈α∂  problems␈α∂␈↓αand␈↓␈α∞about
␈↓ ↓H␈↓opportunities␈α∂ to␈α∂ put␈α∂ new␈α∂technological␈α∂possibilities␈α∂ to␈α∂ good␈α∂use.␈α∂   The␈α∂telephone␈α∂ was␈α∂ not
␈↓ ↓H␈↓invented by  a committee  considering already identified  problems of communication.

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

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum␈α∂ has␈α∂ invented␈α∞ a␈α∂␈↓↓New␈α∂ York␈α∞ Times␈α∂ Data␈α∂ Bank␈↓␈α∞different␈α∂ from␈α∂ the␈α∞ one
␈↓ ↓H␈↓operated␈α
 by␈α
 the␈α
␈↓↓New␈α
 York␈α
 Times␈↓␈α
-␈α
and␈α
possibly␈α
better.␈α
 The␈α
real␈α
one␈α
stores␈α
abstracts␈α
written␈α
by
␈↓ ↓H␈↓humans␈α∞and␈α∞doesn't␈α∞use␈α∞the␈α
tapes␈α∞intended␈α∞for␈α∞typesetting␈α∞machines.␈α
 As␈α∞a␈α∞result␈α∞the␈α∞ user␈α
has
␈↓ ↓H␈↓access␈αonly␈α
to␈αabstracts␈α and␈α
cannot␈αsearch␈αon␈α
features␈αof␈αthe␈α
 stories␈α themselves,␈αi.e.␈α
 he␈αis␈α at␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓mercy  of what  the abstractors thought was important at the time.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 96


␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Using␈α
 computer␈α  programs␈α
 as␈α
 psychotherapists,␈α  as␈α
 Colby␈α
proposed,␈α would␈α
be␈αmoral␈α
 if
␈↓ ↓H␈↓it␈α
 would␈αcure␈α
people.␈α
  Unfortunately,␈αcomputer␈α
science␈α
isn't␈αup␈α
to␈α
 it,␈αand␈α
maybe␈αthe␈α
psychiatrists
␈↓ ↓H␈↓aren't either.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_I␈α∂agree␈α∞ with␈α∂ Minsky␈α∂in␈α∞ criticizing␈α∂the␈α∞ reluctance␈α∂of␈α∂ art␈α∞theorists␈α∂ to␈α∂ develop␈α∞ formal
␈↓ ↓H␈↓theories.␈α∂   George␈α∂ Birkhoff's␈α∂formal␈α∂theory␈α⊂was␈α∂probably␈α∂wrong,␈α∂but␈α∂he␈α∂shouldn't␈α⊂have␈α∂been
␈↓ ↓H␈↓criticized␈α
for␈α
trying.␈α∞ The␈α
problem␈α
 seems␈α
very␈α∞difficult␈α
to␈α
me,␈α
and␈α∞ I␈α
have␈α
made␈α∞no␈α
significant
␈↓ ↓H␈↓progress␈α in␈α responding␈α to␈α a␈α challenge␈α from␈α Arthur␈αKoestler␈αto␈αtell␈αhow␈αa␈αcomputer␈αprogram
␈↓ ↓H␈↓might␈α⊂make␈α⊂ or␈α⊃even␈α⊂recognize␈α⊂jokes.␈α⊃ Perhaps␈α⊂some␈α⊂reader␈α⊂of␈α⊃this␈α⊂review␈α⊂might␈α⊃have␈α⊂more
␈↓ ↓H␈↓success.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_There␈α
 is␈α
 a␈α
whole␈α∞ chapter␈α
 attacking␈α
 "compulsive␈α
 computer␈α
programmers"␈α∞or␈α
"hackers".
␈↓ ↓H␈↓This␈αmythical␈αbeast␈αlives␈αin␈αthe␈αcomputer␈αlaboratory,␈αis␈αan␈αexpert␈αon␈αall␈αthe␈αins␈αand␈αouts␈αof␈α the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓time-sharing␈α∪system,␈α∩elaborates␈α∪the␈α∩time-sharing␈α∪ system␈α∩with␈α∪arcane␈α∩features␈α∪that␈α∪he␈α∩never
␈↓ ↓H␈↓documents,␈α⊂and␈α⊂is␈α∂always␈α⊂changing␈α⊂the␈α⊂system␈α∂before␈α⊂he␈α⊂even␈α⊂fixes␈α∂the␈α⊂bugs␈α⊂in␈α⊂the␈α∂previous
␈↓ ↓H␈↓version.␈α All␈αthese␈αvices␈αexist,␈αbut␈αI␈αcan't␈αthink␈αof␈αany␈αindividual␈αwho␈αcombines␈αthem,␈αand␈αpeople
␈↓ ↓H␈↓generally␈α
outgrow␈α
them.␈α∞  As␈α
 a␈α
 laboratory␈α∞director,␈α
 I␈α
 have␈α
to␈α∞ protect␈α
 the␈α
interests␈α∞of␈α
people
␈↓ ↓H␈↓who␈α
program␈α∞only␈α
part␈α∞ time␈α
against␈α
tendencies␈α∞to␈α
over-complicate␈α∞ the␈α
facilities.␈α∞  People␈α
 who
␈↓ ↓H␈↓spend␈αall␈α their␈αtime␈αprogramming␈αand␈αwho␈αexchange␈α information␈αby␈αword␈αof␈αmouth␈α sometimes
␈↓ ↓H␈↓have␈αto␈αbe␈α pressed␈αto␈αmake␈αproper␈α writeups.␈α
 The␈αother␈α side␈αof␈αthe␈αissue␈α is␈αthat␈αwe␈α
 professors
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈αcomputer␈αscience␈α sometimes␈αlose␈αour␈α
ability␈αto␈αwrite␈α actual␈αcomputer␈αprograms␈α
 through␈αlack
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈α∀ practice␈α∀and␈α∀envy␈α∀ younger␈α∀people␈α∀who␈α∀can␈α∀ spend␈α∀full␈α∀time␈α∀ in␈α∀the␈α∀laboratory.␈α∪ The
␈↓ ↓H␈↓phenomenon is  well known in  other sciences and  in other  human activities.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum␈α⊃attacks␈α⊃the␈α⊃Yale␈α⊂ computer␈α⊃linguist,␈α⊃Roger␈α⊃Schank,␈α⊂as␈α⊃follows␈α⊃-␈α⊃the␈α⊂inner
␈↓ ↓H␈↓quotes␈αare␈αfrom␈αSchank:␈α ␈↓↓"What␈αis␈αcontributed␈α when␈αit␈αis␈αasserted␈αthat␈α'there␈α exists␈αa␈αconceptual
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓base␈α
that␈α
 is␈α
interlingual,␈α∞onto␈α
which␈α
 linguistic␈α
structures␈α
in␈α∞a␈α
given␈α
 language␈α
map␈α∞during␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓understanding␈α∪process␈α∪and␈α∀ out␈α∪of␈α∪which␈α∪ such␈α∀structures␈α∪are␈α∪ created␈α∪during␈α∀generation␈α∪[of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓linguistic␈α
utterances]'?␈α∞  Nothing␈α
at␈α
all.␈α∞ For␈α
the␈α∞ term␈α
'conceptual␈α
base'␈α∞ could␈α
perfectly␈α∞well␈α
be
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓replaced␈αby␈αthe␈αword␈α'something'.␈α   And␈αwho␈α could␈α argue␈αwith␈α that␈α so-transformed␈αstatement?"␈↓
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Weizenbaum␈α
goes␈α
 on␈α
to␈α
 say␈α
that␈α
 the␈α
 real␈α
scientific␈α
problem␈α
"remains␈α
as␈α
 untouched␈α∞as␈α
ever".
␈↓ ↓H␈↓On␈α
the␈α next␈α
page␈α
he␈α says␈α
that␈α
unless␈αthe␈α
"Schank-like␈α
scheme"␈α understood␈α
the␈α
sentence␈α␈↓↓"Will
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓you␈α∞ come␈α
to␈α∞dinner␈α
with␈α∞ me␈α
this␈α∞evening?"␈↓␈α
to␈α∞ mean␈α
␈↓↓"a␈α∞shy␈α
young␈α∞man's␈α
desperate␈α∞ longing␈α
for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓love␈↓,␈α⊂ then␈α∂the␈α⊂ sense␈α∂in␈α⊂ which␈α∂ the␈α⊂system␈α⊂"understands"␈α∂ is␈α⊂"about␈α∂as␈α⊂weak␈α∂ as␈α⊂the␈α⊂sense␈α∂in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓which␈α∞ELIZA␈α∞"understood"".␈α∞ This␈α∞good␈α∞example␈α∂raises␈α∞interesting␈α∞issues␈α∞and␈α∞seems␈α∞to␈α∂call␈α∞for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓some␈α⊃distinctions.␈α⊃  Full␈α⊃understanding␈α⊃of␈α⊃the␈α⊂ sentence␈α⊃indeed␈α⊃results␈α⊃in␈α⊃knowing␈α⊃about␈α⊂ the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓young␈αman's␈αdesire␈αfor␈αlove,␈αbut␈αit␈αwould␈αseem␈αthat␈αthere␈αis␈αa␈αuseful␈αlesser␈αlevel␈αof␈αunderstanding
␈↓ ↓H␈↓in which the machine would know  only that he would like her  to come to dinner.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Contrast␈α⊗ Weizenbaum's␈α⊗demanding,␈α⊗more-human-than-thou␈α⊗attitude␈α⊗to␈α⊗ Schank␈α∃and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Winograd␈α
with␈α
his␈α
respectful␈α
and␈α
even␈α
obsequious␈α
attitude␈α
to␈α
Chomsky.␈α
 We␈α
have␈α␈↓↓"The␈α
linguist's
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓first␈α⊂task␈α∂is␈α⊂therefore␈α∂to␈α⊂write␈α∂grammars,␈α⊂that␈α∂is,␈α⊂sets␈α∂ of␈α⊂  rules,␈α∂ of␈α⊂ particular␈α∂ languages,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓grammars␈α∞ capable␈α
 of␈α∞characterizing␈α
all␈α∞and␈α∞only␈α
the␈α∞grammatically␈α
admissible␈α∞sentences␈α∞of␈α
those
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓languages,␈αand␈αthen␈αto␈αpostulate␈αprinciples␈α from␈αwhich␈αcrucial␈αfeatures␈αof␈αall␈αsuch␈αgrammars␈αcan
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓be␈α∪deduced.␈α∀ That␈α∪set␈α∀of␈α∪principles␈α∪would␈α∀then␈α∪constitute␈α∀a␈α∪universal␈α∀grammar.␈α∪ Chomsky's
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓hypothesis␈α∩ is,␈α∩to␈α⊃put␈α∩ it␈α∩another␈α∩way,␈α⊃ that␈α∩the␈α∩rules␈α∩ of␈α⊃such␈α∩a␈α∩ universal␈α∩grammar␈α⊃would
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓constitute␈α a␈α kind␈α of␈α projective␈α description␈αof␈α important␈αaspects␈αof␈αthe␈αhuman␈αmind."␈↓␈α There␈αis
␈↓ ↓H␈↓nothing␈α
here␈α
demanding␈α
that␈α
the␈α
universal␈α grammar␈α
take␈α
into␈α
account␈α
the␈α
 young␈α
man's␈αdesire
␈↓ ↓H␈↓for love.  As far as I can see, Chomsky is just as much a rationalist as we artificial intelligentsia.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 97


␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Chomsky's␈α⊃goal␈α∩of␈α⊃a␈α∩universal␈α⊃grammar␈α∩and␈α⊃ Schank's␈α∩goal␈α⊃of␈α∩a␈α⊃conceptual␈α∩base␈α⊃ are
␈↓ ↓H␈↓similar,␈α
except␈αthat␈α
 Schank's␈α
ideas␈αare␈α
further␈αdeveloped,␈α
and␈α
 the␈α performance␈α
of␈α his␈α
 students'
␈↓ ↓H␈↓programs␈α
 can␈α
 be␈α
compared␈α
with␈α
 reality.␈α∞ I␈α
 think␈α
they␈α
will␈α
require␈α
 drastic␈α
revision␈α∞and␈α
 may
␈↓ ↓H␈↓not␈α∞be␈α∂on␈α∞the␈α∞ right␈α∂track␈α∞at␈α∂all,␈α∞but␈α∞ then␈α∂I␈α∞am␈α∂pursuing␈α∞a␈α∞rather␈α∂different␈α∞ line␈α∂of␈α∞ research
␈↓ ↓H␈↓concerning␈α
how␈α
 to␈α
represent␈α
 the␈α
basic␈α
facts␈α
that␈α
an␈α
intelligent␈α
 being␈α
must␈α
know␈α
about␈αthe␈α
world.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓My␈αidea␈αis␈α to␈α start␈α from␈α epistemology␈α rather␈α than␈α from␈α language,␈αregarding␈αtheir␈αlinguistic
␈↓ ↓H␈↓representation␈αas␈αsecondary.␈α
 This␈αapproach␈αhas␈αproved␈α
 difficult,␈αhas␈αattracted␈αfew␈α
 practitioners,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓and has led to few computer programs, but I still think it's right.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum␈α_approves␈α_of␈α_the␈α_Chomsky␈α_ school's␈α_haughty␈α_attitude␈α→towards␈α_Schank,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Winograd␈α∞and␈α
other␈α∞AI␈α∞based␈α
language␈α∞researchers.␈α
 On␈α∞page␈α∞184,␈α
he␈α∞ states,␈α∞␈↓↓"many␈α
linguists,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓for␈αexample,␈αNoam␈α Chomsky,␈αbelieve␈αthat␈α enough␈αthinking␈α about␈αlanguage␈αremains␈α to␈αbe␈α done
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓to␈α⊃occupy␈α⊃ them␈α⊃usefully␈α⊃for␈α⊃yet␈α⊃a␈α⊃little␈α⊃ while,␈α⊃and␈α⊃that␈α⊃any␈α⊃effort␈α⊃to␈α⊃convert␈α⊃ their␈α⊂ present
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓theories␈α into␈α computer␈α
 models␈α would,␈α if␈α
attempted␈αby␈αthe␈αpeople␈α
best␈α qualified,␈αbe␈α
a␈αdiversion
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓from␈α
the␈αmain␈α
task.␈α
  And␈α they␈α
rightly␈α see␈α
 no␈α
point␈α to␈α
 spending␈α
any␈α of␈α
 their␈αenergies␈α
studying
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓the work of the hackers."␈↓

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_This␈α∞brings␈α∞the␈α∞chapter␈α∞on␈α∞ "compulsive␈α∞computer␈α∞programmers"␈α∞alias␈α∞ "hackers"␈α∞ into␈α∞ a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓sharper␈α focus.␈α   Chomsky's␈α latest␈α book␈α␈↓↓Reflections␈α on␈αLanguage␈↓␈α makes␈α no␈α reference␈α to␈α the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓work␈α of␈αWinograd,␈αSchank,␈α Charniak,␈αWilks,␈αBobrow␈α or␈αWilliam␈αWoods␈α to␈αname␈αonly␈α a␈αfew
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈αthose␈α who␈αhave␈αdeveloped␈α large␈αcomputer␈αsystems␈αthat␈αwork␈αwith␈αnatural␈αlanguage␈αand␈α
 who
␈↓ ↓H␈↓write␈α
papers␈αon␈α
the␈α semantics␈α
of␈α
natural␈α language.␈α
 The␈α actual␈α
young␈α
 computer␈αprogrammers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓who␈αcall␈αthemselves␈α
hackers␈α and␈α who␈α
 come␈αclosest␈α to␈α
 meeting␈α Weizenbaum's␈αdescription␈α
don't
␈↓ ↓H␈↓write␈αpapers␈αon␈α natural␈αlanguage.␈α  So␈αit␈αseems␈αthat␈αthe␈αhackers␈αwhose␈αwork␈αneed␈αnot␈αbe␈αstudied
␈↓ ↓H␈↓are␈αWinograd,␈αSchank,␈αet.␈α al.␈α  who␈αare␈α professors␈α and␈αsenior␈α scientists.␈α  The␈αChomsky␈αschool
␈↓ ↓H␈↓may␈α
 be␈α
 embarassed␈αby␈α
 the␈α
fact␈α that␈α
 it␈α
has␈α only␈α
 recently␈α
arrived␈αat␈α
the␈α
 conclusion␈α
that␈αthe
␈↓ ↓H␈↓semantics␈α
of␈α
 natural␈α
language␈α
is␈α
more␈α fundamental␈α
than␈α
 its␈α
syntax,␈α
 while␈α
AI␈αbased␈α
 researchers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓have been pursuing this line for fifteen years.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_The␈α∞outside␈α∞observer␈α∞should␈α∞be␈α∞aware␈α∞that␈α∂to␈α∞some␈α∞extent␈α∞this␈α∞is␈α∞ a␈α∞pillow␈α∂fight␈α∞ within
␈↓ ↓H␈↓M.I.T.␈α∞  Chomsky␈α∞and␈α∞ Halle␈α∞are␈α∞not␈α∞ to␈α∞be␈α∞dislodged␈α∞from␈α∞ M.I.T.␈α∞ and␈α∞neither␈α∞ is␈α∂ Minsky␈α∞-
␈↓ ↓H␈↓whose␈α⊃ students␈α⊃ have␈α⊃pioneered␈α⊃ the␈α⊃AI␈α⊃ approach␈α⊃to␈α⊃ natural␈α⊃ language.␈α⊃  Schank␈α∩is␈α⊃ quite
␈↓ ↓H␈↓secure␈α⊗at␈α⊗Yale.␈α⊗ Weizenbaum␈α⊗also␈α↔has␈α⊗tenure.␈α⊗ However,␈α⊗some␈α⊗assistant␈α↔professorships␈α⊗in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓linguistics may be at stake, especially at M.I.T.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Allen␈α∀ Newell␈α∀and␈α∪ Herbert␈α∀ Simon␈α∀ are␈α∀criticized␈α∪ for␈α∀ being␈α∀overoptimistic␈α∀and␈α∪are
␈↓ ↓H␈↓considered␈αmorally␈αdefective␈αfor␈αattempting␈αto␈αdescribe␈αhumans␈αas␈αdifference-reducing␈α machines.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Simon's␈α∞view␈α∞ that␈α∞the␈α∞human␈α
is␈α∞a␈α∞simple␈α∞system␈α∞ in␈α
a␈α∞complex␈α∞environment␈α∞is␈α∞singled␈α∞out␈α
for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓attack.␈α∞ In␈α∞my␈α∞opinion,␈α
 they␈α∞were␈α∞overoptimistic,␈α∞because␈α∞their␈α
GPS␈α∞model␈α∞on␈α∞ which␈α∞they␈α
put
␈↓ ↓H␈↓their␈αbets␈αwasn't␈α good␈αenough.␈α  Maybe␈αNewell's␈αcurrent␈α␈↓↓production␈α system␈αmodels␈↓␈αwill␈αwork␈α out
␈↓ ↓H␈↓better.␈α As␈α
to␈α whether␈α
human␈αmental␈α
structure␈αwill␈α
 eventually␈αturn␈α
out␈αto␈α
be␈αsimple,␈α
I␈αvacillate
␈↓ ↓H␈↓but incline to the view that it will turn out to be one of the most complex biological phenomena.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_I␈α⊂ regard␈α⊂Forrester's␈α⊂ models␈α⊂ as␈α⊂ incapable␈α⊂of␈α⊂ taking␈α⊂ into␈α⊂account␈α⊃qualitative␈α⊂changes,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓and␈αthe␈αworld␈αmodels␈αthey␈αhave␈αbuilt␈αas␈αdefective␈αeven␈α in␈αtheir␈α own␈αterms,␈α because␈α they␈αleave
␈↓ ↓H␈↓out␈αsaturation-of-demand␈αeffects␈αthat␈αcannot␈αbe␈αdiscovered␈αby␈αcurve-fitting␈αas␈αlong␈αas␈αa␈α sytem␈α
is
␈↓ ↓H␈↓rate-of-expansion␈αlimited.␈α  Moreover,␈αI␈αdon't␈αaccept␈αhis␈α claim␈αthat␈αhis␈αmodels␈αare␈α better␈αsuited
␈↓ ↓H␈↓than␈αthe␈αunaided␈αmind␈αin␈α"interpreting␈α how␈αsocial␈α systems␈αbehave",␈αbut␈α Weizenbaum's␈αsarcasm
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 98


␈↓ ↓H␈↓on␈α page␈α
  246␈α is␈α unconvincing.␈α
    He␈α quotes␈α
 Forrester,␈α"[desirable␈α modes␈α
of␈α behavior␈αof␈α
 the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓social␈α
 system]␈α
␈↓↓seem␈α∞ to␈α
be␈α
possible␈α
only␈α∞if␈α
we␈α
have␈α
a␈α∞good␈α
understanding␈α
of␈α
 the␈α∞system␈α
dynamics
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓and␈α⊂are␈α⊃willing␈α⊂to␈α⊂endure␈α⊃the␈α⊂self-discipline␈α⊃and␈α⊂pressures␈α⊂that␈α⊃must␈α⊂accompany␈α⊃the␈α⊂desirable
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓mode"␈↓.␈α Weizenbaum␈α comments,␈α␈↓↓"There␈α is␈αundoubtedly␈αsome␈αinterpretation␈αof␈αthe␈α words␈α'system'
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓and␈α'dynamics'␈αwhich␈αwould␈αlend␈α
a␈αbenign␈αmeaning␈αto␈αthis␈α
observation"␈↓.␈α Sorry,␈αbut␈αit␈αlooks␈α
ok␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓me␈αprovided␈αone␈α
 is␈αsuitably␈αcritical␈α
of␈α Forrester's␈αproposed␈αsocial␈α
 goals␈αand␈α the␈α
possibility␈α of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓making  the necessary assumptions and putting them into his models.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Skinner's␈αbehaviorism␈αthat␈αrefuses␈αto␈αassign␈αreality␈αto␈αpeople's␈αinternal␈αstate␈αseems␈αwrong␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓me, but we can't call him immoral for trying to convince us of what he thinks is true.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Weizenbaum␈α∩quotes␈α∩Edward␈α∩Fredkin,␈α∩former␈α∪ director␈α∩of␈α∩Project␈α∩MAC,␈α∩ and␈α∪the␈α∩late
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Warren␈αMcCulloch␈α of␈αM.I.T.␈αwithout␈α giving␈αtheir␈αnames.␈αpp.␈α241␈αand␈α 240.␈α Perhaps␈αhe␈αthinks
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a␈α⊃few␈α⊃puzzles␈α∩will␈α⊃ make␈α⊃the␈α⊃ book␈α∩more␈α⊃ interesting,␈α⊃ and␈α⊃this␈α∩ is␈α⊃so.␈α⊃   Fredkin's␈α∩plea␈α⊃ for
␈↓ ↓H␈↓research␈α∀in␈α∃automatic␈α∀programming␈α∃seems␈α∀to␈α∀overestimate␈α∃the␈α∀extent␈α∃to␈α∀which␈α∃our␈α∀society
␈↓ ↓H␈↓currently␈αrelies␈αon␈α computers␈α
for␈αdecisions.␈α  It␈αalso␈α overestimates␈α
 the␈α ability␈α of␈α the␈αfaculty␈α
 of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a␈α
 particular␈αuniversity␈α
to␈αcontrol␈α
the␈αuses␈α
to␈α which␈α
technology␈αwill␈α
be␈αput,␈α
 and␈αit␈α
underestimates
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the␈α∞difficulty␈α∂of␈α∞making␈α∂knowledge␈α∞based␈α∂systems␈α∞of␈α∂practical␈α∞ use.␈α∂ Weizenbaum␈α∞is␈α∂ correct␈α∞in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓pointing␈α out␈α
that␈αFredkin␈αdoesn't␈α
mention␈αthe␈α existence␈α
of␈αgenuine␈α conflicts␈α
in␈αsociety,␈α but␈α
only
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the␈α
new␈αleft␈α
sloganeering␈α
elsewhere␈α in␈α
the␈αbook␈α
gives␈α
a␈αhint␈α
as␈αto␈α
what␈α
he␈αthinks␈α
they␈α
are␈αand
␈↓ ↓H␈↓how he proposes to resolve them.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_As␈α
 for␈αthe␈α
quotation␈αfrom␈α
(McCulloch␈α 1956),␈α
Minsky␈αtells␈α
me␈α"this␈α
is␈αa␈α
brave␈α
attempt␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓find␈αa␈αdignified␈α
 sense␈αof␈αfreedom␈α
within␈αthe␈α psychological␈α
determinism␈αmorass".␈α  Probably␈α
 this
␈↓ ↓H␈↓can␈α be␈αdone␈αbetter␈αnow,␈α but␈αWeizenbaum␈α wrongly␈α implies␈αthat␈α McCulloch's␈α 1956␈αeffort␈αis␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓his moral discredit.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Finally,␈α
Weizenbaum␈α∞ attributes␈α
to␈α∞me␈α
 two␈α
statements␈α∞ -␈α
both␈α∞from␈α
 oral␈α∞presentations␈α
 -
␈↓ ↓H␈↓which␈α⊃I␈α∩ cannot␈α⊃verify.␈α∩  One␈α⊃of␈α∩ them␈α⊃is␈α⊃␈↓↓"The␈α∩only␈α⊃ reason␈α∩we␈α⊃ have␈α∩not␈α⊃ yet␈α∩succeeded␈α⊃ in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓simulating␈α∂ every␈α∂aspect␈α∂of␈α∂the␈α∂real␈α∂world␈α⊂is␈α∂ that␈α∂we␈α∂have␈α∂been␈α∂lacking␈α∂a␈α⊂sufficiently␈α∂powerful
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓logical␈α∂calculus.␈α∞  I␈α∂am␈α∂ working␈α∞on␈α∂ that␈α∞problem."␈↓␈α∂This␈α∂statement␈α∞doesn't␈α∂express␈α∂ my␈α∞present
␈↓ ↓H␈↓opinion␈α or␈αmy␈αopinion␈αin␈α 1973␈αwhen␈αI␈αam␈αalleged␈αto␈αhave␈αexpressed␈αit␈αin␈αa␈αdebate,␈αand␈αno-one
␈↓ ↓H␈↓has been able to find it in the video-tape of the debate.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_We␈αcan't␈αsimulate␈α "every␈αaspect␈αof␈αthe␈αreal␈α world",␈αbecause␈αthe␈αinitial␈αstate␈α information␈αis
␈↓ ↓H␈↓never␈α
available,␈αthe␈α
laws␈α
of␈αmotion␈α
are␈α
imperfectly␈αknown,␈α
and␈α
the␈αcalculations␈α
for␈α
a␈αsimulation
␈↓ ↓H␈↓are␈α
too␈α
extensive.␈α
  Moreover,␈α
 simulation␈α wouldn't␈α
 necessarily␈α
answer␈α
 our␈α
questions.␈α  Instead,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓we␈αmust␈αfind␈αout␈αhow␈αto␈αrepresent␈αin␈αthe␈αmemory␈αof␈αa␈αcomputer␈αthe␈αinformation␈α about␈αthe␈αreal
␈↓ ↓H␈↓world␈αthat␈α is␈αactually␈αavailable␈αto␈αa␈αmachine␈αor␈αorganism␈αwith␈αgiven␈αsensory␈αcapability,␈αand␈αalso
␈↓ ↓H␈↓how␈α
to␈α
 represent␈α
a␈α
 means␈α
of␈α
drawing␈α
 those␈α
useful␈α
 conclusions␈α
about␈α
the␈α
effects␈α
of␈α
courses␈α
of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓action␈α∂that␈α∂can␈α⊂be␈α∂correctly␈α∂inferred␈α∂from␈α⊂ the␈α∂attainable␈α∂information.␈α∂  Having␈α⊂ a␈α∂␈↓↓sufficiently
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓powerful logical calculus␈↓ is an important part of this problem - but  one of the easier parts.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_The␈α∂second␈α∞quotation␈α∂from␈α∞me␈α∂is␈α∞the␈α∂rhetorical␈α∞question,␈α∂␈↓↓"What␈α∞do␈α∂judges␈α∞know␈α∂that␈α∞we
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓cannot␈α∂tell␈α⊂a␈α∂computer"␈↓.␈α⊂ I'll␈α∂stand␈α⊂on␈α∂that␈α⊂if␈α∂we␈α⊂make␈α∂it␈α⊂"eventually␈α∂tell"␈α⊂and␈α∂especially␈α⊂if␈α∂we
␈↓ ↓H␈↓require that it be something that one human can reliably teach another.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ 99


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ ∧EA SUMMARY OF POLEMICAL SINS

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_The␈αspeculative␈αsections␈αof␈αthe␈αbook␈αcontain␈αnumerous␈αdubious␈αlittle␈α theories,␈αsuch␈αas␈αthis
␈↓ ↓H␈↓one␈α⊂about␈α⊃the␈α⊂dehumanizing␈α⊂effect␈α⊃of␈α⊂of␈α⊂the␈α⊃invention␈α⊂of␈α⊂the␈α⊃clock:␈α⊂ ␈↓↓"The␈α⊂clock␈α⊃ had␈α⊂created
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓literally␈α
 a␈αnew␈α
reality;␈α
and␈αthat␈α
is␈α
what␈αI␈α
meant␈αwhen␈α
I␈α
said␈αearlier␈α
that␈α
 the␈αtrick␈α
man␈αturned␈α
that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓prepared␈α⊂the␈α⊂scene␈α⊂for␈α⊂the␈α⊂rise␈α⊂of␈α⊂modern␈α⊂science␈α⊂was␈α⊂nothing␈α⊂less␈α⊂ than␈α⊂the␈α⊂transformation␈α∂of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓nature␈α
and␈α
of␈α
his␈α
perception␈α
of␈α
reality.␈α
  It␈α
 is␈α
important␈α
 to␈α
 realize␈α
that␈α
 this␈α
newly␈α created␈α
reality
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓was␈αand␈αremains␈αan␈αimpoverished␈αversion␈α
of␈αthe␈αolder␈αone,␈αfor␈αit␈α
rests␈αon␈αa␈αrejection␈αof␈α those␈α
direct
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓experiences␈α∂that␈α∂formed␈α∞ the␈α∂basis␈α∂for,␈α∂and␈α∞ indeed␈α∂constituted␈α∂the␈α∞ old␈α∂reality.␈α∂ The␈α∂ feeling␈α∞of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓hunger␈α
was␈αrejected␈α
as␈αa␈α
stimulus␈αfor␈α
eating;␈αinstead␈α
one␈αate␈α
when␈αan␈α
abstract␈αmodel␈α
had␈αachieved␈α
a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓certain␈αstate,␈αi.e.␈α
when␈αthe␈αhand␈α of␈α
a␈αclock␈α  pointed␈α to␈α
  certain␈α marks␈α  on␈α the␈α
  clock's␈α face
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓(the␈α∂anthropomorphism␈α∂ here␈α∂is␈α⊂highly␈α∂significant␈α∂ too),␈α∂and␈α⊂similarly␈α∂for␈α∂signals␈α∂for␈α⊂sleep␈α∂and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓rising, and so on."␈↓

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_This␈α∞idealization␈α∞ of␈α∞primitive␈α∞ life␈α∞is␈α∞simply␈α∞ thoughtless.␈α∞ Like␈α∞ modern␈α∞man,␈α∞ primitive
␈↓ ↓H␈↓man␈α∞ ate␈α∞ when␈α∞the␈α∞ food␈α∞was␈α∞ ready,␈α∂and␈α∞primitive␈α∞man␈α∞ probably␈α∞had␈α∞ to␈α∞start␈α∂ preparing␈α∞it
␈↓ ↓H␈↓even␈αfurther␈α in␈αadvance.␈α  Like␈α modern␈αman,␈α primitive␈αman␈α lived␈αin␈α families␈αwhose␈αmembers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓are  no more likely to become hungry all at once than are the members of a present family.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_I␈αget␈αthe␈αfeeling␈α
that␈αin␈αtoppling␈α this␈α
microtheory␈αI␈αam␈αnot␈α
playing␈α the␈α game;␈α the␈α
 theory
␈↓ ↓H␈↓is␈α intended␈α only␈α to␈α provide␈α an␈αatmosphere,␈αand␈αlike␈αthe␈αreader␈αof␈αa␈αnovel,␈αI␈αam␈αsupposed␈α to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓suspend␈αdisbelief.␈α  But␈αthe␈α contention␈αthat␈α science␈αhas␈α driven␈αus␈α from␈αa␈αpsychological␈αGarden
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of Eden depends heavily on such word pictures.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_By␈αthe␈αway,␈αI␈α recall␈α
from␈αmy␈αlast␈αsabbatical␈α at␈αM.I.T.␈α
that␈αthe␈α␈↓↓feeling␈αof␈α hunger␈↓␈α
is␈αmore
␈↓ ↓H␈↓often␈αthe␈α␈↓↓direct␈αsocial␈αstimulus␈αfor␈αeating␈↓␈αfor␈αthe␈α "hackers"␈αdeplored␈αin␈α Chapter␈α4␈αthan␈αit␈α could
␈↓ ↓H␈↓have␈α been␈αfor␈α primitive␈αman.␈α
  Often␈αon␈αa␈α crisp␈αNew␈α
 England␈αnight,␈αeven␈α as␈αthe␈αclock␈α
strikes
␈↓ ↓H␈↓three,␈α∞I␈α∞hear␈α∞them␈α∞call␈α∞to␈α∞one␈α∂another,␈α∞ messages␈α∞ flash␈α∞ on␈α∞ the␈α∞ screens,␈α∞ a␈α∞ flock␈α∂ of␈α∞ hackers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓magically  gathers,  and   the  whole  picturesque  assembly  rushes chattering off to Chinatown.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_I find the book  substandard as a piece of  polemical writing in the following respects:

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_1.␈α∩The␈α∩ author␈α⊃has␈α∩failed␈α∩ to␈α∩work␈α⊃ out␈α∩his␈α∩own␈α∩positions␈α⊃on␈α∩the␈α∩issues␈α∩he␈α⊃discusses.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Making␈α∩an␈α∩extreme␈α∩statement␈α∩in␈α∩one␈α∩place␈α∩and␈α∩a␈α∩contradictory␈α∩ statement␈α∩in␈α∩another␈α∩is␈α⊃no
␈↓ ↓H␈↓substitute␈α
for␈α
 trying␈α∞ to␈α
 take␈α
 all␈α∞ the␈α
factors␈α
 into␈α
 account␈α∞ and␈α
 reach␈α
 a␈α∞considered␈α
position.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Unsuspicious␈αreaders␈αcan␈αcome␈α
away␈αwith␈αa␈αgreat␈α
variety␈αof␈αviews,␈αand␈α
the␈αbook␈αcan␈αbe␈α
used␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓support contradictory positions.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_2.␈αThe␈αcomputer␈αlinguists␈α -␈αWinograd,␈αSchank,␈αet.␈αal.␈α -␈αare␈αdenigrated␈α  as␈α hackers␈α and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓compulsive   computer  programmers  by innuendo.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_3.␈α~One␈α~would␈α≠ like␈α~to␈α~ know␈α~more␈α≠ precisely␈α~what␈α~biological␈α≠ and␈α~psychological
␈↓ ↓H␈↓experiments␈α and␈α  computer␈α applications␈α  he␈α finds␈αacceptable.␈α Reviewers␈αhave␈αalready␈αdrawn
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a variety of conclusions on this point.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_4.␈α⊂The␈α⊂terms␈α⊂"authentic",␈α∂"obscene",␈α⊂ and␈α⊂"dehumanization␈α⊂are␈α∂used␈α⊂ as␈α⊂ clubs.␈α⊂  This␈α∂is
␈↓ ↓H␈↓what  mathematicians  call  "proof by intimidation".
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ *10


␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_5.␈α
The␈αbook␈α
encourages␈α
 a␈αsnobbery␈α
that␈α
has␈αno␈α
 need␈α
to␈αargue␈α
for␈α
its␈αpoint␈α
 of␈α
view␈αbut
␈↓ ↓H␈↓merely␈α
utters␈αcode␈α
words,␈αon␈α
hearing␈αwhich␈α
the␈α
audience␈αis␈α
 supposed␈αapplaud␈α
or␈αhiss␈α
 as␈αthe␈α
case
␈↓ ↓H␈↓may be.   The ␈↓↓New  Scientist␈↓  reviewer  certainly  salivates  in  most  of  the intended places.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_6.␈αFinally,␈α when␈αmoralizing␈αis␈α both␈αvehement␈αand␈α vague,␈αit␈αinvites␈α
 authoritarian␈α abuse
␈↓ ↓H␈↓either␈α
 by␈α
existing␈α
 authority␈α
 or␈α
by␈α
new␈α
political␈α
movements.␈α
 Imagine,␈α
 if␈α
you␈α
can,␈α
 that␈α
this␈α
book
␈↓ ↓H␈↓were␈α⊂ the␈α∂bible␈α⊂of␈α⊂some␈α∂bureaucracy,␈α⊂e.g.␈α∂ an␈α⊂Office␈α⊂of␈α∂Technology␈α⊂Assessment,␈α⊂that␈α∂acquired
␈↓ ↓H␈↓power␈α⊂over␈α⊃the␈α⊂computing␈α⊃or␈α⊂scientific␈α⊃activities␈α⊂of␈α⊃a␈α⊂university,␈α⊃state,␈α⊂ or␈α⊃country.␈α⊂  Suppose
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Weizenbaum's␈α∞slogans␈α∞ were␈α∞combined␈α∞with␈α∂␈↓↓the␈α∞bureaucratic␈α∞ ethic␈↓␈α∞that␈α∞holds␈α∞that␈α∂any␈α∞problem
␈↓ ↓H␈↓can␈α∞be␈α∞solved␈α
by␈α∞ a␈α∞law␈α
forbidding␈α∞something␈α∞ and␈α
a␈α∞bureaucracy␈α∞ of␈α
eager␈α∞ young␈α∞lawyers␈α
 to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓enforce␈α∃ it.␈α∃  Postulate␈α∃ further␈α∀ a␈α∃ vague␈α∃␈↓↓Humane␈α∃ Research␈α∀Act␈↓␈α∃ and␈α∃a␈α∃ "public␈α∀interest"
␈↓ ↓H␈↓organization␈α_with␈α_more␈α_eager␈α_ young␈α_ lawyers␈α_ suing␈α_ to␈α_get␈α_ judges␈α_ to␈α_ legislate␈α_ new
␈↓ ↓H␈↓interpretations␈αof␈α the␈αAct.␈α One␈α can␈αsee␈αa␈αlaboratory␈α needing␈αmore␈αlawyers␈αthan␈αscientists␈α and
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a Humane Research  Administrator capable of forbidding or requiring almost anything.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_I␈αsee␈αno␈αevidence␈αthat␈α
Weizenbaum␈αforsees␈αhis␈αwork␈αbeing␈α
used␈αin␈αthis␈α way;␈αhe␈αdoesn't␈α
use
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the␈α∪ phrase␈α∪␈↓↓laissez␈α∪innover␈↓␈α∩which␈α∪is␈α∪the␈α∪ would-be␈α∩ science␈α∪ bureaucrat's␈α∪ analogue␈α∪ of␈α∩ the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓economist's␈α␈↓↓laissez␈αfaire␈↓,␈αand␈αhe␈αnever␈αuses␈αthe␈αindefinite␈αphrase␈α"it␈αshould␈αbe␈α decided"␈αwhich␈αis
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a␈α∂common␈α∂ expression␈α⊂of␈α∂the␈α∂bureaucratic␈α⊂ethic.␈α∂ However,␈α∂he␈α⊂ has␈α∂certainly␈α∂ given␈α⊂his␈α∂fellow
␈↓ ↓H␈↓computer scientists  at least some reason to worry about potential tyranny.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓Let␈α⊂me␈α⊃conclude␈α⊂this␈α⊂section␈α⊃with␈α⊂a␈α⊂quotation␈α⊃from␈α⊂Andrew␈α⊂D.␈α⊃White,␈α⊂the␈α⊂first␈α⊃president␈α⊂of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Cornell␈α
University,␈αthat␈α
seems␈αapplicable␈α
to␈α
the␈αpresent␈α
situation␈α-␈α
not␈αonly␈α
in␈α
computer␈αscience,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓but␈αalso␈α
in␈αbiology.␈α-␈α
"␈↓↓In␈αall␈α
modern␈αhistory,␈αinterference␈α
with␈αscience␈αin␈α
the␈αsupposed␈α
interest␈αof
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓religion,␈α∞no␈α
matter␈α∞how␈α
conscientious␈α∞such␈α
interference␈α∞may␈α
have␈α∞been,␈α
has␈α∞resulted␈α
in␈α∞the␈α
direst
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓evils␈α∂both␈α∂to␈α∂religion␈α∂and␈α∂to␈α∂science,␈α∂and␈α∂invariably;␈α∂and,␈α∂on␈α∂the␈α∂other␈α∂hand,␈α∂all␈α∂untrammelled
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓scientific␈αinvestigation,␈αno␈αmatter␈αhow␈αdangerous␈αto␈αreligion␈αsome␈αof␈αits␈αstages␈αmy␈αhave␈αseemed␈αfor
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓the␈α∪time␈α∪to␈α∪be,␈α∪has␈α∪invariably␈α∪resulted␈α∪in␈α∪the␈α∪highest␈α∪good␈α∪both␈α∪of␈α∪religion␈α∪and␈α∪of␈α∪science"␈↓.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Substitute␈α␈↓↓morality␈↓␈αfor␈α␈↓↓religion␈↓␈αand␈αthe␈αparallel␈αis␈αclear.␈α Frankly,␈αthe␈αfeebleness␈αof␈αthe␈αreaction␈αto
␈↓ ↓H␈↓attacks on scientific freedom worries me more than the strength of the attacks.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ β	WHAT WORRIES  ABOUT COMPUTERS ARE WARRANTED?

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Grumbling␈α∀about␈α∀Weizenbaum's␈α∀mistakes␈α∃and␈α∀moralizing␈α∀is␈α∀ not␈α∃ enough.␈α∀   Genuine
␈↓ ↓H␈↓worries␈α prompted␈α the␈α book,␈α and␈αmany␈αpeople␈αshare␈αthem.␈α Here␈αare␈αthe␈αgenuine␈αconcerns␈αthat
␈↓ ↓H␈↓I␈αcan␈αidentify␈α and␈αthe␈α opinions␈α of␈αone␈α computer␈α scientist␈αabout␈α their␈αresolution:␈αWhat␈αis␈αthe
␈↓ ↓H␈↓danger␈α
that␈α
the␈α
computer␈α
will␈α
lead␈α
to␈α
a␈αfalse␈α
model␈α
of␈α
man?␈α
  What␈α
is␈α
 the␈α
danger␈αthat␈α
 computers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓will␈α↔be␈α↔ misused?␈α↔ Can␈α↔ human-level␈α_artificial␈α↔intelligence␈α↔ be␈α↔achieved?␈α↔  What,␈α_if␈α↔any,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓motivational␈α
characteristics␈α
will␈αit␈α
have?␈α
 Would␈α
the␈αachievement␈α
 of␈α
artificial␈α
intelligence␈αbe␈α
good
␈↓ ↓H␈↓or bad for humanity?


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_1. Does the computer model lead to a false model of man.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Historically,␈αthe␈αmechanistic␈αmodel␈αof␈αthe␈αlife␈αand␈αthe␈αworld␈αfollowed␈α animistic␈α models␈α in
␈↓ ↓H␈↓accordance␈α↔ with␈α⊗ which,␈α↔ priests␈α⊗and␈α↔medicine␈α⊗men␈α↔tried␈α⊗to␈α↔correct␈α⊗malfunctions␈α↔of␈α⊗the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓environment␈α⊃and␈α⊃man␈α⊃by␈α⊃inducing␈α⊃spirits␈α⊂to␈α⊃behave␈α⊃ better.␈α⊃ Replacing␈α⊃them␈α⊃by␈α⊂mechanistic
␈↓ ↓H␈↓models␈α⊂replaced␈α⊂ shamanism␈α⊂by␈α⊂medicine.␈α⊂ Roszak␈α⊂explicitly␈α⊂would␈α⊂like␈α⊂to␈α⊂bring␈α⊂these␈α⊂models
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ *11


␈↓ ↓H␈↓back,␈α∞ because␈α
he␈α∞finds␈α∞them␈α
more␈α∞ "human",␈α∞but␈α
he␈α∞ignores␈α
the␈α∞sad␈α∞fact␈α
that␈α∞they␈α∞don't␈α
work,
␈↓ ↓H␈↓because␈α∂the␈α⊂world␈α∂isn't␈α∂constructed␈α⊂that␈α∂way.␈α∂  The␈α⊂ pre-computer␈α∂mechanistic␈α∂ models␈α⊂of␈α∂ the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓mind␈α⊂were,␈α∂in␈α⊂my␈α∂opinion,␈α⊂unsuccessful,but␈α∂ I␈α⊂think␈α∂the␈α⊂psychologists␈α⊂pursuing␈α∂ computational
␈↓ ↓H␈↓models of  mental  processes  may eventually develop a really beneficial psychiatry.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Philosophical␈α⊂and␈α⊂moral␈α⊂thinking␈α⊂hasn't␈α⊂yet␈α∂found␈α⊂a␈α⊂model␈α⊂of␈α⊂man␈α⊂that␈α⊂relates␈α∂human
␈↓ ↓H␈↓beliefs␈αand␈αpurposes␈αto␈αthe␈αphysical␈αworld␈αin␈αa␈αplausible␈αway.␈α Some␈αof␈αthe␈αunsuccessful␈αattempts
␈↓ ↓H␈↓have␈αbeen␈αmore␈α
mechanistic␈αthan␈αothers.␈α
 Both␈αmechanistic␈αand␈α
non-mechanistic␈αmodels␈αhave␈α
led
␈↓ ↓H␈↓to␈α⊂great␈α⊂harm␈α⊂when␈α⊂made␈α⊂the␈α⊂basis␈α⊂of␈α⊂political␈α⊂ideology,␈α⊂because␈α⊂they␈α⊂have␈α⊃allowed␈α⊂tortuous
␈↓ ↓H␈↓reasoning␈αto␈αjustify␈α
actions␈αthat␈αsimple␈α
human␈αintuition␈αregards␈αas␈α
immoral.␈α In␈αmy␈α
opinion,␈αthe
␈↓ ↓H␈↓relation␈αbetween␈αbeliefs,␈αpurposes␈αand␈αwants␈αto␈αthe␈αphysical␈αworld␈αis␈αa␈αcomplicated␈αbut␈αultimately
␈↓ ↓H␈↓solvable␈α
problem.␈α Computer␈α
models␈αcan␈α
help␈αsolve␈α
it,␈αand␈α
can␈αprovide␈α
criteria␈αthat␈α
will␈αenable␈α
us
␈↓ ↓H␈↓to␈αreject␈αfalse␈αsolutions.␈α The␈αlatter␈αis␈α
more␈αimportant␈αfor␈αnow,␈αand␈αcomputer␈αmodels␈α
are␈αalready
␈↓ ↓H␈↓hastening the decay of dialectical materialism in the Soviet Union.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_2. What is the danger that computers will be misused?

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Up␈α⊂to␈α⊃now,␈α⊂computers␈α⊂have␈α⊃been␈α⊂ just␈α⊂another␈α⊃labor-saving␈α⊂technology.␈α⊂ I␈α⊃ don't␈α⊂agree
␈↓ ↓H␈↓with␈α∞Weizenbaum's␈α∂ acceptance␈α∞of␈α∞ the␈α∂claim␈α∞ that␈α∂our␈α∞society␈α∞would␈α∂have␈α∞ been␈α∂inundated␈α∞by
␈↓ ↓H␈↓paper␈αwork␈αwithout␈α computers.␈α Without␈αcomputers,␈αpeople␈αwould␈αwork␈αa␈αlittle␈αharder␈αand␈αget␈αa
␈↓ ↓H␈↓little␈αless␈α
for␈α their␈αwork.␈α
 However,␈αwhen␈αhome␈α
terminals␈αbecome␈αavailable,␈α
social␈αchanges␈αof␈α
 the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓magnitude␈α∞of␈α∞ those␈α∞produced␈α∂by␈α∞the␈α∞ telephone␈α∞and␈α∂automobile␈α∞ will␈α∞occur.␈α∞ I␈α∂ have␈α∞discussed
␈↓ ↓H␈↓them␈α∂ elsewhere,␈α⊂and␈α∂I␈α∂think␈α⊂they␈α∂ will␈α⊂ be␈α∂good␈α∂ -␈α⊂ as␈α∂were␈α∂ the␈α⊂ changes␈α∂produced␈α⊂ by␈α∂ the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓automobile␈α⊂and␈α⊂ the␈α⊃telephone.␈α⊂  Tyranny␈α⊂ comes␈α⊃from␈α⊂ control␈α⊂of␈α⊃ the␈α⊂police␈α⊂coupled␈α⊃with␈α⊂a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓tyrannical␈α⊃ideology;␈α∩data␈α⊃banks␈α∩will␈α⊃be␈α∩a␈α⊃minor␈α∩convenience.␈α⊃ No␈α∩dictatorship␈α⊃yet␈α∩ has␈α⊃been
␈↓ ↓H␈↓overthrown for lack of  a data bank.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_One's␈αestimate␈α of␈αwhether␈αtechnology␈α will␈αwork␈αout␈α well␈αin␈αthe␈αfuture␈αis␈α
correlated␈α with
␈↓ ↓H␈↓one's␈αview␈αof␈α
how␈αit␈αworked␈α
out␈αin␈αthe␈α
past.␈α I␈αthink␈α
it␈αhas␈αworked␈α
out␈αwell␈α-␈α
e.g.␈αcars␈αwere␈αnot␈α
 a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓mistake␈α∂-␈α∂ and␈α∂am␈α⊂ optimistic␈α∂about␈α∂ the␈α∂future.␈α∂  I␈α⊂ feel␈α∂that␈α∂ much␈α∂current␈α∂ideology␈α⊂   is␈α∂  a
␈↓ ↓H␈↓combination␈α  of␈α
  older␈α  anti-scientific␈α
  and␈αanti-technological␈α
 views␈αwith␈α
 new␈α developments
␈↓ ↓H␈↓in  the  political technology of instigating and manipulating fears and guilt feelings.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_3. What motivations will artificial intelligence have?

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_It␈α
will␈α
have␈α
 what␈α
motivations␈α
we␈α
 choose␈α
to␈α
give␈α
it.␈α
  Those␈α
who␈α
 finally␈α
create␈α
it␈αshould
␈↓ ↓H␈↓start␈αby␈α
motivating␈αit␈α
 only␈αto␈α
answer␈αquestions␈α
and␈αshould␈α
have␈αthe␈α
sense␈α to␈α
ask␈αfor␈αfull␈α
pictures
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈α the␈αconsequences␈αof␈αalternate␈αactions␈αrather␈αthan␈αsimply␈αhow␈αto␈αachieve␈αa␈αfixed␈αgoal,␈αignoring
␈↓ ↓H␈↓possible␈α∞side-effects.␈α
 Giving␈α∞it␈α
human␈α∞motivational␈α∞structure␈α
with␈α∞its␈α
shifting␈α∞goals␈α∞sensitive␈α
to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓physical␈α∃state␈α⊗would␈α∃require␈α⊗a␈α∃deliberate␈α⊗effort␈α∃beyond␈α⊗that␈α∃required␈α⊗to␈α∃make␈α⊗it␈α∃behave
␈↓ ↓H␈↓intelligently.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ *12


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_4. Will artificial intelligence be good or bad?

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Here␈α
 we␈α
 are␈α
 talking␈α
  about␈α
 machines␈α
 with␈α
 the␈α
 same␈α
  range␈α
 of␈α
intellectual␈α
 abilities
␈↓ ↓H␈↓as␈αare␈α posessed␈α by␈αhumans.␈α   However,␈αthe␈αscience␈αfiction␈αvision␈αof␈αrobots␈αwith␈αalmost␈αprecisely
␈↓ ↓H␈↓the␈α⊂ability␈α⊂of␈α⊂a␈α⊂human␈α⊂is␈α⊂ quite␈α⊃unlikely,␈α⊂because␈α⊂the␈α⊂next␈α⊂ generation␈α⊂of␈α⊂computers␈α⊃or␈α⊂even
␈↓ ↓H␈↓hooking␈α
computers␈αtogether␈α
would␈αproduce␈α
an␈αintelligence␈α
that␈αmight␈α
be␈αqualitatively␈α
like␈αthat␈α
 of
␈↓ ↓H␈↓a␈αhuman,␈αbut␈αthousands␈α of␈αtimes␈αfaster.␈α  What␈αwould␈α it␈αbe␈αlike␈α to␈αbe␈αable␈α to␈αput␈αa␈α hundred
␈↓ ↓H␈↓years␈α⊂thought␈α∂into␈α⊂every␈α∂decision?␈α⊂ I␈α⊂think␈α∂it␈α⊂is␈α∂impossible␈α⊂to␈α∂say␈α⊂whether␈α⊂qualitatively␈α∂better
␈↓ ↓H␈↓answers would  be obtained; we will have  to try it and see.

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


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_5. What shouldn't computers be programmed to do.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_Obviously␈α_one␈α_shouldn't␈α↔program␈α_computers␈α_to␈α_do␈α↔things␈α_that␈α_shouldn't␈α_be␈α↔done.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Moreover,␈α∞we␈α∞shouldn't␈α∞use␈α∞programs␈α∞to␈α∞mislead␈α∞ourselves␈α∞or␈α∞other␈α∞people.␈α∞ Apart␈α∞from␈α∞that,␈α∞I
␈↓ ↓H␈↓find␈α
none␈α
of␈α
Weizenbaum's␈α
examples␈α∞convincing.␈α
 However,␈α
I␈α
doubt␈α
the␈α
advisability␈α∞of␈α
making
␈↓ ↓H␈↓robots␈αwith␈αhuman-like␈αmotivational␈αand␈α
emotional␈αstructures␈αthat␈αmight␈αhave␈αrights␈α
and␈αduties
␈↓ ↓H␈↓independently␈α⊂of␈α⊂humans.␈α⊂ Moreover,␈α⊂I␈α⊂think␈α⊂it␈α∂might␈α⊂be␈α⊂dangerous␈α⊂to␈α⊂make␈α⊂a␈α⊂machine␈α∂that
␈↓ ↓H␈↓evolved␈α
intelligence␈α
by␈α
responding␈α
to␈α
a␈α∞program␈α
of␈α
rewards␈α
and␈α
punishments␈α
unless␈α∞its␈α
trainers
␈↓ ↓H␈↓understand the intellectual and motivational structure being evolved.

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_All␈α
 these␈α
questions␈α
 merit␈α
and␈α
 have␈α∞received␈α
more␈α
 extensive␈α
discussion,␈α
but␈α
I␈α∞think␈α
the
␈↓ ↓H␈↓only␈α
rational␈α
policy␈α
now␈α
is␈α
to␈α
expect␈α
the␈α
people␈α
confronted␈α
by␈α
the␈α
 problem␈α
to␈α
understand␈α
their
␈↓ ↓H␈↓best␈α interests␈α
better␈αthan␈α
we␈α now␈α
can.␈α Even␈α
 if␈αfull␈α
AI␈αwere␈α
to␈α arrive␈α
next␈αyear,␈α
this␈α would␈α
 be
␈↓ ↓H␈↓right.␈α  Correct␈α
 decisions␈α will␈α
require␈α an␈αintense␈α
effort␈αthat␈α
cannot␈α be␈α
mobilized␈αto␈α consider␈α
an
␈↓ ↓H␈↓eventuality␈α∂that␈α∂ is␈α∞still␈α∂remote.␈α∂  Imagine␈α∞asking␈α∂the␈α∂presidential␈α∞candidates␈α∂ to␈α∂debate␈α∂on␈α∞TV
␈↓ ↓H␈↓what each of them would do about each of the forms that full AI might take.


␈↓ ↓H␈↓α␈↓ α_References:

␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ α_McCulloch,W.S.(1956)␈α∞Toward␈α
some␈α∞circuitry␈α
of␈α∞ethical␈α
robots␈α∞or␈α
an␈α∞observational␈α
science
␈↓ ↓H␈↓of␈α!the␈α!genesis␈α!of␈α!social␈α!evaluation␈α in␈α!the␈α!mind-like␈α!behavior␈α!of␈α!artifacts.␈α ␈↓↓Acta
␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓Biotheoretica␈↓,␈↓αXI␈↓↓,parts 3/4, 147-156

␈↓ ↓H␈↓↓␈↓ α_␈↓εThis␈α
review␈αis␈α
filed␈αas␈α
WEIZEN.REV[PUB,JMC]␈α
at␈αSU-AI␈α
on␈αthe␈α
ARPA␈α
net.␈α Any␈α
comments␈αsent␈α
to
␈↓ ↓H␈↓εJMC@SU-AI␈α
will␈α
be␈α
stored␈α
in␈α
the␈α
directory␈α
PUB,JMC␈α
also␈α
known␈α
as␈α
␈↓↓McCarthy's␈α
Electric␈α
Magazine␈↓ε.
␈↓ ↓H␈↓εThe comment files will be designated WEIZEN.1, WEIZEN.2, etc.␈↓
␈↓ ↓H␈↓␈↓ εH␈↓ *13



␈↓ ↓H␈↓John McCarthy
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
␈↓ ↓H␈↓Stanford, California 94305

␈↓ ↓H␈↓July 25, 1977