Author: Joe Besogn
Date: 09:14:14 11/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 2000 at 11:35:19, Fernando Villegas wrote: >This discussion has became mixed with too many things, but between them it seems >to me some people here agreed to make of me the old fashion guy that does not >understand these subtilities about how science is going on and how worlds of >values can be so different. I know it very well. I am sociologist by trainning. >I have read every antropologist book about the real or supposed wisedom of >traditional cultures. So please do not consider myself as somebody that cannot >understand what a paradigm is, do not say that I am a man of "normal science", >one that prefer nukes to arrows, etc. Too much confusion. I am sure confusion is >not just another narrowminded perspective from me. Sorry, I believe in logic and >clear thinking. So, to begin with, this was not a discussion about what we like >or not, what is wise or not, what is likeable or not. I do not like nukes, but I >believe they are a more powerfull weapon than arrows. That's a matter of fact. I >do not even say it is wise to have or use them. That kind of reasonning goes >beyond the field of material reality. The point Christophe made about nukes/arrows and which I took up was not an attack on you. I think he was using a sentence you quoted as an 'obvious' to indicate that _even_ that clear and obvious statement _could_ under specific circumstances, have a reverse meaning placed onto it. It could been any statement or any poster. And I am not saying what gambit is respect >new or old paradigms in chess programmings. Why not? Isn't your opinion good? Or are only chess programmers allowed to pass comments? My only point is: behind all the >worlds man can create with his pown values, views, parameters, etc, there is a >real one that has the last word in the realm of matter, phisics, biology and so >on. I really hope so. I don't know if I believe so, all education tells me all is relative; but I reject this on emotional grounds. You can evaluate as you want how preferable is for a hunting culture the use >of bows and arrows, I agree, but that does not change the fact of the implicit >far superior science behind the nuhke, the far superior power of it, etc. The >use of it, the fabrication of it, that's another matter. That's a matter of >culture. >fernando And your culture and social science education should place you uniquely to comment on the application of Kuhn's ideas to computer chess.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.