Home · Science · Aug 28 archive
Computer Science's Philosophical Dilemma
Developing
In Short: Quanta Magazine explores the debate over whether computer science should study natural phenomena or focus on artificial systems designed by humans.
In 1969, Allen Newell, Alexander Perlis, and Herbert Simon penned a letter to critics who argued that computer science, to be considered a true science, must study natural phenomena. Their response highlighted the unique focus of computer science on intentionally designed artificial systems.
Simon, in his book The Sciences of the Artificial, further emphasized this distinction, asserting that the study of these systems was what made computer science special. He stated, 'Computer science has two parents.
Dijkstra's perspective, encountered by the author of this piece nearly four years ago, suggests a hint of exasperation towards those who questioned the scientific validity of computer science without considering its unique subject matter.
What's confirmed
What's still developing
- I first encountered Dijkstra’s hot takes nearly four years ago, not long after I joined Quanta as a staff writer covering computer science.
- “Wherever there are phenomena, there can be a science to describe and explain those phenomena,” they wrote, with perhaps a hint of exasperation.
- Newell, Perlis, and Simon addressed their letter in part to critics who argued that any science worth the name must study natural phenomena.
- In his 1969 book The Sciences of the Artificial, Simon went further and embraced the distinction: A focus on intentionally designed artificial systems, he argued, was precisely what made computer science special.
- “Computer science has two parents,” he told me.
Sources
- Quanta Magazinelink