Configuring a Dynabook

Alan Kay alank at wdi.disney.com
Sun Dec 13 02:55:18 UTC 1998


Bruce --

At 1:29 AM -0000 12/13/98, Bruce Cohen wrote:
>Alan,
>
>You wrote:
>>> Good thoughts. I would say "most of the above" (er, below). A big influence
>>> on my way of thinking about this was (and is) Jerome Bruner (via many books
>>> including his 1965 "Towards a Theory of Instruction", a book that I still
>>> read once a year). Instead of trying to summarize it I will simply
>>> recommend it.
>
>I just looked for that in the Portland library catalog; that title
>wasn't there, but there are a half-a-dozen others by Bruner.  While I'm
>looking for that one, is there another book of his that would get me
>started?

Try Powell's. Anything of Bruner's that he wrote before (say) 1975 will be
on topic. Here's a few:

On Knowing
The Relevance of Education

>>> I actually don't think this way about it. I used to be professional
>>> musicial (and even earned a few bucks as an illustrator). I don't think of
>>> the "nonsymbolic modes of human sensory-motor I/O" as mainly for dealing
>>> with symbolic information. They are worthwhile on their own merits alone.
>>> But they also provide a context and precursor to symbolic thought ...
>
>Oh, good, I'm glad you don't think that way.  I guess I'm oversensitive
>to people who think of computers as useful *only* for symbol
>manipulation, not realizing just how vast a realm that is (and many of
>those are *proponents* of computer use!).

I think you are a bit "oversensitive" in the sense that I haven't been
talking about "symbol manipulation" in the computer sense at all, but what
symbolic representation -- and, especially, improvements, inventions, and
increased understanding of symbolic representation -- has meant to human
progress and civilization.

>And you also wrote (to Stefano):
>>>      Also, I believe that we don't yet have a programming medium worthy of
>>> humanity (and especially of children). We have to create something much
>>> better -- *above threshold* for "the new literacy" -- before we can start
>>> complaining about society. I think this is possible in the next few years,
>>> and I really want us to make it happen!
>
>Hear, hear!  Although I suspect your use of the word "programming" is
>part of my misunderstanding before.  I think we need a much broader
>definition of the word, or maybe another word altogether.  Too many
>people, hearing that word, fixate on the kind of thing I'm doing today,
>typing in Java code to a bunch of editing windows on my Sparc, and not,
>for instance, building a simulation by demonstrating example behavior,
>or even writing a symphony.

Well, I think that those who program in Smalltalk in addition to other
languages have some sense that the scope of "programming" is very broad and
can be very deep. As for "writing", we use it for the whole gig, even
though most people don't use writing for much of consequence. I think that
what is lacking (as I think I mentioned before) is any real "new
literature" that can be pointed to that gives a sense of how grand and
beautiful programming can be. In writing, it doesn't matter how many bad
examples are around (to the first order at least), as long as it is easy to
find and contemplate great examples. We need to get some great examples out
there!

Cheers,

Alan





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list