The Pragmatist in Context of a National Science Foundation Supported Grant Program Evaluation: Guidelines and Paradigms

Background:  The philosophical underpinnings of evaluation guidelines set forth by a funding agency can sometimes seem inconsistent with that of the intervention. Purpose: Our purpose is to introduce questions pertaining to the contrast between the instructional program’s underlying philosophical beliefs and assumptions and those underlying our evaluation approach. Drawing heavily on Scriven, we discuss these from a pragmatist evaluation stance in light of issues defined by Lincoln and Guba (2000). The discussion is couched in the evaluation of an innovative approach to teaching computer science. Setting: Auburn University, Auburn, AL Intervention: The evaluation is designed to investigate the effects of a studio-based teaching approach in computer science education. The evaluation framework employs a rigorous design that seeks to provide evidence to support or refute some assumed truth about the object (or construct) investigated. The program evaluated is steeped in a constructivist framework which assumes that no universal truth or reality exists, but rather, is constructed by the individual. Research Design: Our evaluation design, to a good extent, reflects a post-positivist, quasi-experimental position. We also include a qualitative component using student interviews. Data Collection and Analysis: Evidence of the effectiveness of the instructional approach for learning is assessed quantitatively using pre- and post-test and pre- and post-survey data group comparisons (mixed design ANOVA). Interviews provide the basis for qualitative theme analysis. Findings: Quantitative results were somewhat weak but consistent in support of the studio-based teaching. Interview data suggest that most students did find working in groups enjoyable and a valuable experience

The development of an Automated Residential Expert System (A.R.E.S.)

Due to the character of the original source materials and the nature of batch digitization, quality control issues may be present in this document. Please report any quality issues you encounter to [email protected], referencing the URI of the item.Includes bibliographical references: p. 15.Since the pioneering endeavors of Warren McCullock and Walter Pitts (involving computer learning) in 1943, artificial intelligence has fascinated experts and has aroused the interest of the general public. Currently, computer science researchers are employing this vibrant technology to the following areas: expert systems, fuzzy logic, neural networks, robotics, vision, natural language, speech recognition, and genetic algorithms. As a society, artificial intelligence has prompted intense philosophical discussions involving logic versus emotion, computer predictability versus human spontaneity, and the characteristics of true intelligence. Our project involves expert systems. Expert systems owe their popularity to the following features: their capacity to mass produce knowledge, their reduced cost of information decimation, their ability to work in environments deemed as hazardous to people, their permanence of expertise, their increased reliability (especially when humans would fail due to stress or fatigue), and their capability to explicitly explain every logical step from hypothesis to conclusion. At present, research efforts are working to resolve some of the disadvantages involving expert systems--mostly dealing with a computer s inherent inability to adapt to new situations and to detect incomplete orerroneous data. The overall goal of our research project is to develop A.R.E.S., an expert system that will solve a problem within on-campus residence hall affairs

L’IA e la semantica

The development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has led to many controversies of philosophical interest involving issues of logic, computer science, software engeneering. The paper goes through the main steps of this development, deals with their philosophical relevance and sketches the unsolved problems, with special emphasis on the AI models of semantic competence. Some criticisms raised to such models in AI, either in its “classical” or “neural networks” format, are examined. On the ground of the discussion of these criticisms, a view is proposed which avoids the inherited gap between the project of AI and naturalistic philosophy and suggests that filling the gap also provides a filter in order to select a definite form of naturalism

A précis of philosophy of computing and information technology

The authors recently finished a comprehensive chapter on “Philosophy of Computing and Information Technology” for the forthcoming (fall 2009) Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences (Ed.: A. Meijers), Volume IX in the Elsevier series Handbook of the Philosophy of Science (Eds.: D. Gabbay, P. Thagard and J. Woods). The purpose of the chapter is to review and discuss the main developments, concepts, topics, and contributors in the intersection between philosophy and computing, as well as provide some suggestions on how to structure the many subcategories within what is loosely referred to as philosophy of computing. In this short synopsis, we will give an outline of the kinds of issues raised in this chapter

Philosophy of Computer Science: An Introductory Course

There are many branches of philosophy called “the philosophy of X,” where X = disciplines ranging from history to physics. The philosophy of artificial intelligence has a long history, and there are many courses and texts with that title. Surprisingly, the philosophy of computer science is not nearly as well-developed. This article proposes topics that might constitute the philosophy of computer science and describes a course covering those topics, along with suggested readings and assignments

What Do Paraconsistent, Undecidable, Random, Computable and Incomplete mean? A Review of Godel's Way: Exploits into an undecidable world by Gregory Chaitin, Francisco A Doria, Newton C.A. da Costa 160p (2012) (review revised 2019)

In ‘Godel’s Way’ three eminent scientists discuss issues such as undecidability, incompleteness, randomness, computability and paraconsistency. I approach these issues from the Wittgensteinian viewpoint that there are two basic issues which have completely different solutions. There are the scientific or empirical issues, which are facts about the world that need to be investigated observationally and philosophical issues as to how language can be used intelligibly (which include certain questions in mathematics and logic), which need to be decided by looking at how we actually use words in particular contexts. When we get clear about which language game we are playing, these topics are seen to be ordinary scientific and mathematical questions like any others. Wittgenstein’s insights have seldom been equaled and never surpassed and are as pertinent today as they were 80 years ago when he dictated the Blue and Brown Books. In spite of its failings—really a series of notes rather than a finished book—this is a unique source of the work of these three famous scholars who have been working at the bleeding edges of physics, math and philosophy for over half a century. Da Costa and Doria are cited by Wolpert (see below or my articles on Wolpert and my review of Yanofsky’s ‘The Outer Limits of Reason’) since they wrote on universal computation, and among his many accomplishments, Da Costa is a pioneer in paraconsistency. Those wishing a comprehensive up to date framework for human behavior from the modern two systems view may consult my book ‘The Logical Structure of Philosophy, Psychology, Mind and Language in Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Searle’ 2nd ed (2019). Those interested in more of my writings may see ‘Talking Monkeys--Philosophy, Psychology, Science, Religion and Politics on a Doomed Planet--Articles and Reviews 2006-2019 3rd ed (2019), The Logical Structure of Human Behavior (2019), and Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century 4th ed (2019

Review of 'The Outer Limits of Reason' by Noson Yanofsky 403p (2013) (review revised 2019)

I give a detailed review of 'The Outer Limits of Reason' by Noson Yanofsky from a unified perspective of Wittgenstein and evolutionary psychology. I indicate that the difficulty with such issues as paradox in language and math, incompleteness, undecidability, computability, the brain and the universe as computers etc., all arise from the failure to look carefully at our use of language in the appropriate context and hence the failure to separate issues of scientific fact from issues of how language works. I discuss Wittgenstein's views on incompleteness, paraconsistency and undecidability and the work of Wolpert on the limits to computation. To sum it up: The Universe According to Brooklyn---Good Science, Not So Good Philosophy. Those wishing a comprehensive up to date framework for human behavior from the modern two systems view may consult my book ‘The Logical Structure of Philosophy, Psychology, Mind and Language in Ludwig Wittgenstein and John Searle’ 2nd ed (2019). Those interested in more of my writings may see ‘Talking Monkeys--Philosophy, Psychology, Science, Religion and Politics on a Doomed Planet--Articles and Reviews 2006-2019 3rd ed (2019) and Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century 4th ed (2019