Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.012498461 = product of:
  0.024996921 = sum of:
    0.024996921 = product of:
      0.049993843 = sum of:
        0.049993843 = weight(_text_:i in 2635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049993843 = score(doc=2635,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045439374 = queryNorm
            0.29170483 = fieldWeight in 2635, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2635)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The philosophy of information (PI) is a new area of research with its own field of investigation and methodology. This article, based an the Herbert A. Simon Lecture of Computing and Philosophy I gave at Carnegie Mellon University in 2001, analyses the eighteen principal open problems in PI. Section 1 introduces the analysis by outlining Herbert Simon's approach to PI. Section 2 discusses some methodological considerations about what counts as a good philosophical problem. The discussion centers an Hilbert's famous analysis of the central problems in mathematics. The rest of the article is devoted to the eighteen problems. These are organized into five sections: problems in the analysis of the concept of information, in semantics, in the study of intelligence, in the relation between information and nature, and in the investigation of values.

0.008927471 = product of:
  0.017854942 = sum of:
    0.017854942 = product of:
      0.035709884 = sum of:
        0.035709884 = weight(_text_:i in 3394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035709884 = score(doc=3394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17138503 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045439374 = queryNorm
            0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 3394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3394)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

To oversimplify, science has two fundamental ways of changing our understanding. One may be called extrovert, or about the world, and the other introvert, or about ourselves. Three scientific revolutions in the past had great impact both extrovertly and introvertly. In changing our understanding of the external world, they also modified our conception of who we are, that is, our self-understanding. The story is well known, so I shall recount it rather quickly. We used to think that we were at the centre of the universe, nicely placed there by a creator God. It was a most comfortable and reassuring position to hold. In 1543, Nicolaus Copernicus published his treatise on the movements of planets around the sun. It was entitled On the Revolutions of Celestial Bodies (De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium). Copernicus probably did not mean to start a 'revolution' in our self-understanding as well. Nonetheless, his heliocentric cosmology forever displaced the earth from the centre of the universe and made us reconsider, quite literally, our own place and role in it. It caused such a profound change in our views of the universe that the word 'revolution' begun to be associated with radical scientific transformation. We have been dealing with the consequences of the Copernican revolution since its occurrence. Indeed, it is often remarked that one of the significant achievements of our space explorations has been a matter of external and comprehensive reflection on our human condition.