|
79
|
1 Jim's housemate is an editor - Nora
|
|
|
2 Deference Humility and Awe talk to be transcribed?
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
4 What are we aiming at?
|
|
|
5 A short more accessible book, oriented towards a public audience?
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
7 Interesting properties of the DFA talk:
|
|
|
8 Skeleton?
|
|
|
9 Talk is drenched with insightful remarks and allusions
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
11 HST: aim to a) Convince people of certain propositions
|
|
|
12 b) Excite people about the possibility of a new way to
|
|
|
13 approach our understanding of [r-s]
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
15 BCS: Contemporary ... taking on subject matters that have classically
|
|
|
16 been considered from [r-s]
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
18 These accounts do not do justice to such topics
|
|
|
19 E.g. reducing truth to syntactic consistency
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
21 Because they fail to take account of embodiment, indexicality,
|
|
|
22 non-effectiveness
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
24 How to conclude:
|
|
|
25 They none-the-less have something to contribute
|
|
|
26 They are at best a waste of time, as omitting [ein-e] renders
|
|
|
27 them useless
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
29 CR sub-title -- something like "Exploring the foundations of computing"
|
|
|
30 or, bolder, "New foundations for computing"
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
32 Elevator pitch(es) for CR:
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
34 The appropriation of concepts and vocabulary from philosophy of mind
|
|
|
35 and of language by computer science not only misuses them, that
|
|
|
36 _mis_appropriation actually undermines the adequacy of the resulting
|
|
|
37 account. [HST]
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
39 If one recognises the central, indeed essential, role of
|
|
|
40 non-effective relations, one not only hews closer to the usages of
|
|
|
41 philosphy, it does a better job of explaining. But the centraiity
|
|
|
42 it gives to non-effective relations violates long-standing canons of
|
|
|
43 what it is to be scientific.
|
