Ken --

At 11:37 AM -0700 10/11/01, Ken Kahn wrote:
>Philosophy intersects programming languages at least in two places:
>
>1. A language designer is designing a world with an ontology and
>episptomology. I think this is what Alan mean by Smalltalk being too
>Platonic. Think about the different world views inherent in a class based
>OOPL than in a prototype based one.

This was exactly the sense of my remark.

>
>2. As Justin Walsh pointed out in his message, philosophers have something
>to say about the process of designing languages or software in general. E.g.
>
>>  Kant stresses the urgency of getting the System right before you start. =
>>  Don't enter a tunnel unless you can see the light: know exactly how you =
>>  can get out. Does that sound a little like the early Stack Computing =
>>  Technology, (forerunners of RISC and CISC) which made contextual muddles =
>>  practically impossible?
>
>My reaction to this is that there probably are some very good insights in
>Kant and others but there is also a danger. The danger is in excluding other
>ways of thinking. The best paper I know of on this topic is "Epistemological
>Pluralism and the Revaluation of the Concrete" by Sherry Turkle and Seymour
>Papert ( http://www.papert.com/articles/EpistemologicalPluralism.html ).
>They categorize hard (Kantian?) and soft approaches to building software and
>to doing science. Here's short sample:
>
>"Observation of the soft approach to programming calls into question deeply
>entrenched assumptions about the classification and value of different ways
>of knowing. It provides examples of the validity and power of concrete
>thinking in situations that are traditionally assumed to demand the
>abstract. It supports a perspective that encourages looking for
>psychological and intellectual development within, rather than beyond, the
>concrete and suggests the need for closer investigation of the diversity of
>ways in which the mind can use objects rather than the rules of logic to
>think with. "
>
>Epistemological pluralism is an argument that software, teaching materials,
>courses, etc. should support and value multiple ways of thinking.
>
>Best,
>
>-ken kahn ( www.toontalk.com )


--