Mercurial > hg > BCS
comparison CR_preface.txt @ 20:28fdea8f3e67
Friday, done for today
| author | Henry Thompson <ht@markup.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| date | Fri, 01 Nov 2024 13:32:43 -0400 |
| parents | eef16a307071 |
| children | 7688b405c09f |
comparison
equal
deleted
inserted
replaced
| 19:eef16a307071 | 20:28fdea8f3e67 |
|---|---|
| 113 about ... this stuff. Not interested in applications, AI as such, | 113 about ... this stuff. Not interested in applications, AI as such, |
| 114 etc. | 114 etc. |
| 115 | 115 |
| 116 Still wanted to know what computing was., remains true up to what's in | 116 Still wanted to know what computing was., remains true up to what's in |
| 117 this book, CR. | 117 this book, CR. |
| 118 | |
| 119 Something else that makes me feel uncomfortable about CS from the | |
| 120 outset: Conversation with MM: for you MM science is a form of worship, | |
| 121 whereas science is a form of theology for me (BCS), so I look to CS | |
| 122 not just to manifest the glory of God, but also to explain it. | |
| 123 | |
| 124 Science should do justice to that. | |
| 125 | |
| 126 Being shy around Peter and Butler, something else made me skittish, | |
| 127 something I needed in order to be at peace: a warmth / humility. Why | |
| 128 I was at peace with [John] Haugeland. [HST: JH wasn't a | |
| 129 programmer. BCS: Yes, but he programmed [in] Postscript. BCS: We | |
| 130 disagreed about typography]. | |
| 131 | |
| 132 Had a sense with JH that even though he knew a lot more philosophy | |
| 133 than I did, that we were looking together at relative | |
| 134 clauses/propositional claims, not that he was scrutinising | |
| 135 me. [ref. Andee Rubin] | |
| 136 | |
| 137 In the book I claim that deferential semantics is the heart of | |
| 138 intentionality. "There is more in heaven and on earth than is drempt | |
| 139 of in your philosophy". CS is fundamentally an intentional subject | |
| 140 matter, and that its intentional character has been hidden, and that | |
| 141 its use of semantics has usurped it for mechanistic purposes. | |
| 142 | |
| 143 All semantical vocabulary has been redefined in mechanistic terms: | |
| 144 "the semantics of X" == "what will happen if X is processed" | |
| 145 | |
| 146 Thereby all humility and deference is lost. | |
| 147 | |
| 148 [What about Phi vs. Psi, 'full [?] procedural consequence'] | |
| 149 | |
| 150 If you are interested in _real_ semantics, ... what's a poor boy to | |
| 151 do? | |
| 152 | |
| 153 | |
| 154 | |
| 118 ------------ | 155 ------------ |
| 119 Foundations of/Philosophy of Computation | 156 Foundations of/Philosophy of Computation |
| 120 | 157 |
| 121 Lisp was 'broken', 2-Lisp was a flawed attempt to fix it, 3-Lisp takes | 158 Lisp was 'broken', 2-Lisp was a flawed attempt to fix it, 3-Lisp takes |
| 122 us in to new territory. | 159 us in to new territory. |