Traditionally the natural sciences, particularly physics, have been regarded as the Gatekeepers of Truth. As such the legitimacy of others forms of knowledge have been called into question, particularly those methods that characterize the 'softer' sciences, and even the arts.
From Xerox, IBM and Sun to Intel and Microsoft, the nuts-and-bolts computer industry is embracing the social sciences. Engineers who cut their teeth on calculus and quantum physics are turning to practitioners of the softer sciences, people who know more about Maslow's hierarchy of needs than about Moore's Law on processor speed.
Why? The answer is in the need for software that can approximate the way our brains actually work. If we are ever going to reach the lofty goal of real “artificial intelligence” than we will have to admit contemporary reductionistic approaches have failed. We can’t reduce the beauty and complexity of our wonderful minds to Newtonian atomism. Instead the poets and the artists will show us the way. Are we ready?
From Xerox, IBM and Sun to Intel and Microsoft, the nuts-and-bolts computer industry is embracing the social sciences. Engineers who cut their teeth on calculus and quantum physics are turning to practitioners of the softer sciences, people who know more about Maslow's hierarchy of needs than about Moore's Law on processor speed.
Why? The answer is in the need for software that can approximate the way our brains actually work. If we are ever going to reach the lofty goal of real “artificial intelligence” than we will have to admit contemporary reductionistic approaches have failed. We can’t reduce the beauty and complexity of our wonderful minds to Newtonian atomism. Instead the poets and the artists will show us the way. Are we ready?
Interesting. I have had some of the same thoughts. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteGood post.
ReplyDelete