Author: Joe Besogn
Date: 06:58:56 11/06/00
You are, imo, running round in circles due to the usual reasons of vested interests, but also because you argue without even a basic understanding of the terminology. Try: http://cgi.student.nada.kth.se/cgi-bin/d95-aeh/get/kuhneng for a concise description of Kuhn's ideas in the "History of Scientific Revolutions". Then, perhaps, there might be some interest in reading what you have to say on the subject amongst the more enlightened. The descriptions in the article, imo, almost exactly mirror actions and progress within computer chess. That's imo. Although you are unlikely to reach agreement on new/old paradigms, existence of, or whatever, at least you'll have some new agreement on what words mean. That helps. Also useful for you will be the realisation that a paradigm is not a 'chess playing computer program', but a 'system of thought'. The fact that it is possible to take a conventional chess program and apply new ideas to it, does not mean that a paradigm shift has not taken place. The revolutionary shift is in 'ways of thinking' or in 'world view' - rather more difficult than changing code. The paradigm shift, therefore, is in you, in your own head. Some make this shift faster than others, one revolutionary starts it off, some see it soon, some see it later, some never see it at all. The ones that don't see it, deny it exists. The ones that do see it, say "you need to think different". The ones who see it late claim "it's evolutionary, I could do that". Why do I always try to help them ?!
This page took 0.02 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.