Last Update: 23 March 2010
Note: or material is highlighted |
For this position paper, I would like you to evaluate the following argument:
|
To help you evaluate this argument (which we'll look at in more detail in lecture later this semester), here are some extracts from some relevant websites:
"These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer programs and most ‘compilations’ may be registered as ‘literary works’; maps and architectural plans may be registered as ‘pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works.’
"WHAT IS NOT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT?
"Several categories of material are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection. These include among others:
To evaluate this argument, you must state whether the argument is
valid and you must state whether and why you agree or
disagree with each premise.
Remember:
For our purposes, it's enough to say
that a statement is true (or false) if you agree (or disagree) with it,
because I'm not asking you to convince me that a statement really is true
(or false);
I'm only asking you to convince me that you have a good
reason for agreeing (or disagreeing) with it.
An argument is valid if it's impossible for all of its premises to be true while its conclusion is false (and it's invalid otherwise).
For our purposes, to determine whether an argument is valid,
you must suppose (or make believe) "for the sake of the
argument" that all the premises are true
(i.e., that you agree
with all of them),
and then consider
whether you would
have to logically agree with the conclusion.
To determine whether an
argument is invalid,
try to imagine
some way the world might be so that the premises are true but the conclusion
is false.
An argument is sound
if it's valid and all of its premises are true
(in which case, its
conclusion will also have to be true).
For our purposes, we'll say that
an argument is sound if it's valid and you really do agree with all of its
premises
(in which case, you really have to agree with the conclusion).
So, if you ever come across an argument that you think is sound,
but whose
conclusion
you don't believe,
then either one (or more) of the
premises is false,
or it is invalid (i.e., there is some way for the premises to
be true yet for the conclusion to be false),
or both.
This means, of course, that you have to evaluate each premise and each (sub-)argument, and, as usual, I also want you to evaluate the conclusion independently of whether you think that it follows validly or doesn't follow validly from its premises.
Instead of writing a first draft of your paper, I simply want you to fill in the attached "thinksheet", which will be an outline of your argument analysis.
You will write the paper after peer-editing the thinksheets.
5 copies |
DUE AT THE BEGINNING OF LECTURE, MONDAY, MARCH 29 |
PhilCS 4/584, Spring 2010 NAME: ======================================================================== Thinksheet for Position Paper #4: What Is a Computer Program? ======================================================================== Statement |Agree?| Why? (abbreviated versions of|(T?F?)| (use additional sheets if needed) prems & conc of arg't) | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. A special-purpose | | computer is | | essentially a hard- | | wired computer prog. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2. Such a hardwired | | comp.prog. is a | | physical machine | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3. Physical machines | | can be patented | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4. Such a hardwired | | comp.prog. can be | | patented | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1,2,3/.'.4 is valid | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5. The printed text of | | a comp.prog. is a | | "lit.work" in the | | sense of the (c) law | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6. Lit.works can be (c) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 7. The printed text of | | a comprog can be (c) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5,6/.'.7 is valid | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8. Nothing can be both | | patented & (c) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9. There's no comp'n'l | | or other diff. betw. | | the hardwired comp. | | prog. & its textual | | counterpart... | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10. Comprogs can be both| | patented & (c) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | 4,7,9/.'.10 is valid | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Additional comments: